Move over law ticket????

[Pilgrim9283]

no, that is not what i said. we use visual estimation of speed and then confirm the speed with the laser(during training you must estimate with a variance of +/-2mph).


in a move over law case an officer can use his knowledge training and experience to testify.


Again, i will reiterate, i could not write a ticket for 40-6-181 based just on visual estimation, i could however write one for 40-6-180 using visual estimation. I would have to articulate it....either way visual estimation is used to determine speed and confirmed with the laser.

 

[jcountry]

no, that is not what i said. we use visual estimation of speed and then confirm the speed with the laser(during training you must estimate with a variance of +/-2mph).


in a move over law case an officer can use his knowledge training and experience to testify.

Again my point.

If he was outside chatting with the wrecker dude, he was not running radar. And since the car blocking the lane next to me slowed down at the same rate (hence the reason I could not get over) he has no evidence that I didn't slow down. He only has opinion.

Opinion=I think I just crapped out a 3 stringer.
Fact=Look in that bowl, and clearly 4 separate turds.

It means diddly doodles to me if he can accuse me of not slowing down when I did-and he can't prove otherwise.

 

[Ken Ford]

Woah Woah in georgia, that is not legal. It must be radar or laser, and if requested they have to show it to you, and the calibration date.

There is not one factual statement here.
Yes you can use visual estimation for a too fast for conditions ticket. If requested the calibration certificatio and test log will be provided IN THE COURT ROOM. Not on the side of the road.

 

[Ken Ford]

That doesn't make sense.

Why can't they stand there and say "I bet he was doing 150" every time they see a car go by?

Visual estimate is not evidence.

Cause they are trained to do the visual estimate. And must use the estimate BEORE activating the radar or laser.

 

[Bulldog Man]

Cause they are trained to do the visual estimate. And must use the estimate BEORE activating the radar or laser.

That sounds like BS to me

 

[jcountry]

I called judge Judy..... And even she said "shenanigans."

 

[Pilgrim9283]

That sounds like BS to me

Call it what you want its not.

 

[Pilgrim9283]

Again my point.

If he was outside chatting with the wrecker dude, he was not running radar. And since the car blocking the lane next to me slowed down at the same rate (hence the reason I could not get over) he has no evidence that I didn't slow down. He only has opinion.

Opinion=I think I just crapped out a 3 stringer.
Fact=Look in that bowl, and clearly 4 separate turds.

It means diddly doodles to me if he can accuse me of not slowing down when I did-and he can't prove otherwise.

Whether or not you like it agree with it or hate it altogether the officer can use his knowledge training and experience to make his case. Speed estimation falls into that realm.

 

[jcountry]

Whether or not you like it agree with it or hate it altogether the officer can use his knowledge training and experience to make his case. Speed estimation falls into that realm.

I will definitely fight that stupid bull****.

Weak. Very weak

 

[Pilgrim9283]

I never said the officer will get an automatic conviction. He still must be able to make his case. I encourage you to. Fight it. Make the officer make a good case. It is part of the responibility that comes with writing tickets.