• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Bogus speeding ticket

Driving fast and driving unsafely are not necessarily the same thing.

The violation named in the letter is "Speed Greater Than Reasonable and Prudent / Failure to Control Speed to Avoid Collision." I don't think it's a big leap from there to "driving unsafely."
 
According to him, the officer felt it was reasonable and prudent to be doing 65 to 70 at that point. Falling snow had eased up and the freeway was dry and had cinders down to combat icy conditions.

never said I agreed with the officer. I'd have been doing about the same speed my coworker was.
 
Driving fast and driving unsafely are not necessarily the same thing.

The violation named in the letter is "Speed Greater Than Reasonable and Prudent / Failure to Control Speed to Avoid Collision." I don't think it's a big leap from there to "driving unsafely."

What are the elements of the offense? If they only have to prove the former and not the latter, then the latter is irrelevant to the discussion. Hell, if the former is a per se rule that doesn't actually take into account what is actually reasonable and prudent (meaning, taking context into account), I'd argue the title of the statute is entirely irrelevant.
 
Driving fast and driving unsafely are not necessarily the same thing.

The violation named in the letter is "Speed Greater Than Reasonable and Prudent / Failure to Control Speed to Avoid Collision." I don't think it's a big leap from there to "driving unsafely."

What are the elements of the offense? If they only have to prove the former and not the latter, then the latter is irrelevant to the discussion. Hell, if the former is a per se rule that doesn't actually take into account what is actually reasonable and prudent (meaning, taking context into account), I'd argue the title of the statute is entirely irrelevant.

I haven't looked it up, and the letter doesn't give details such as speed. Just the photos and the offense named as "SPEED > REAS & PRUD/FTC SPEED TO AVOID A COLLISION"

Is it so much to ask that someone not drive my car in such a manner, especially when I know she damn sure isn't going to pay for any damage she causes?
 
It's your car, so you're absolutely right to demand what you want. I'm just pointing out it doesn't mean the car was driven unsafely.

It's really a side point so we can drop it and you don't have to answer this question, but is there a statute listed on the letter?
 
Yep. I knew a guy who was stopped for doing 51 in a 65 zone in a snowstorm one night. His truck also did not have a working defroster.

Any chance that the guy's windshield was all fogged up and that's why he got pulled over (and could the officer have suspected he was going slow because he couldn't see properly)?
 
I don't think so, since he had no trouble allowing me to remove the truck, even though there was ice covering the inside of the window at that point.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top