Subject: f--king MA cops

From: [email-masked]
Date: 28 Apr 1995 23:37:16 GMT

here's a slight update.
about a few months back, I pissed and moaned about how I was traveling
a bit above 40 in a 30 at 2am when a cop pulled me over.  She then referred
to my status as an out-of-state student at Brandeis U in a disdainful tone
of voice and told me I was going _65_!!!!!!!!!!  This is no less than
absolute fucking bullshit.  I lost my cool and said "I was _not_ going
65!"  and she said take it to court.  Well, I did.
Waltham Police, btw.  Waltham court hourse.
My court date was like a few months after the citation (this week, and the
citation was February, I responded on the 19th day after recieving it)
well, guess what?  At least five or six cops were there, including her. 
There was also some suit who represented any cops who weren't there.  The
clerk dismissed a few cases of close-call red-lights, and reduced a bunch
of speeding fines.  He reduced mine from 300 to 200, but since my battle is
of points and principal (especially points), I took full advantage of my 
oppty to appeal it again.  From what I understand, a judge is invovled.
grr, grr.....
I admit I sort of froze up and all I could say on the mike was that her
claim was highly, highly inaccurrate.  next time I'll chill, prepare, and
go all out.  Any tips on how to approach His Honor?
-Ben

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 2 May 1995 10:02:07 MST

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] writes:
>From: [email-masked]
>Subject: f--king MA cops
>Date: 28 Apr 1995 23:37:16 GMT

>go all out.  Any tips on how to approach His Honor?

Here are some thoughts.  What was the road like?  Was it the kind of road that 
one could easily go 65 on?  If not, take some pictures showing why it's very 
unlikely you or anyone would be going 65 on it. Also, what kind of car were 
you driving?  Can that car handle well enough to go 65 on the road in 
question?  Also bring up the question of how the cop estimated your speed.  
Was it radar or what?  Could the cop have easily been going 65 in order to 
catch up to you and pace you (if that's her claim).  And remember, if she 
testified that she did catch up and pace you going 65, then she had to be 
going quite a bit faster to catch up.  Find out where she was when she first 
saw you and decided to chase you and then where she stopped you.  Depending on 
the distance, you might be able to make a case that for her to catch up to a 
person going 65 in the distance she claims, she would have had to go 105 or 
whatever.  Show, if you can, that such a speed would have been extremely 
unlikely for this road that has a limit of 30 mph.  Remember, she has to 
follow the laws of physics too.  Essentially, you want to make a case that her 
claim of YOU going 65 is simply not reasonable or feasible given the total 
circumstances of the stop.  You'll probably have a better chance in the appeal 
then you did in the first trial since the appeal takes place in a REAL court, 
not a kangaroo traffice court.  Don't attack the parentage of the officer or 
judge, just make a calm and rational defense that shows that she just couldn't 
be correct  You might even suggest that perhaps she is mistaking the higher 
speed she had to go to catch you with the speed you were actually going.  That 
maybe the only 65mph speed was her pursuit speed.