View Poll Results: Are visual estimates a good way to give speeding tickets
Yes they are trained
1
3.85%
Hell no
23
88.46%
In my country, cops ride Goats
2
7.69%
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled police officers can issue tickets based on visual
06-03-10, 07:37 AM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled police officers can issue tickets based on visual
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content...d.html?sid=101
ShareThis
OHIO SUPREME COURT
Police officer's estimate good enough for speeding ticket
Justices uphold citation against Akron-area driver
Wednesday, June 2, 2010 11:23 AM
By James Nash
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
To learn more
Attention lead foots: Police don't need radar to cite you for speeding.
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled this morning that an officer trained to estimate speed by sight doesn't need an electronic gauge to catch speeders.
The 5-1 ruling was a defeat for 27-year-old Akron-area motorist Mark W. Jenney and speeders across the state. Jenney had challenged a visual speed estimate by a Copley police officer, but a trial court and the 9th District Court of Appeals upheld his conviction.
The 8th District Court of Appeals, based in Cleveland, has ruled that police need more than sight alone to meet the standard needed to convict someone of speeding.
"The Eighth District stands alone in holding that an officer's visual estimation of the speed of a vehicle is insufficient to support a finding of guilt, and we agree with the courts that have found the opposite," Supreme Court Justice Maureen O'Connor wrote for the majority. "Rational triers of fact could find a police officer's testimony regarding his unaided visual estimation of a vehicle's speed, when supported by evidence that the officer is trained, certified by (the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy) or a similar organization, and experienced in making such estimations, sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant's speed. Independent verification of the vehicle's speed is not necessary to support a conviction for speeding."
Justice Terrence O'Donnell dissented, saying that courts should have more discretion to determine the credibility of an officer's visual speed estimate. Chief Justice Eric Brown, who joined the court after the case was heard, did not participate in the ruling.
During arguments in the case, lawyers for the state and for Barberton -- the venue where Jenney's case was heard -- argued that police can cite drivers for other infractions such as following too closely based on their visual judgments alone.
Jenney's lawyer responded that there should be more than just a visual impression, but he could not say whether a radar or laser speed measurement would be necessary.
OHIO SUPREME COURT
Police officer's estimate good enough for speeding ticket
Justices uphold citation against Akron-area driver
Wednesday, June 2, 2010 11:23 AM
By James Nash
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
To learn more
Attention lead foots: Police don't need radar to cite you for speeding.
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled this morning that an officer trained to estimate speed by sight doesn't need an electronic gauge to catch speeders.
The 5-1 ruling was a defeat for 27-year-old Akron-area motorist Mark W. Jenney and speeders across the state. Jenney had challenged a visual speed estimate by a Copley police officer, but a trial court and the 9th District Court of Appeals upheld his conviction.
The 8th District Court of Appeals, based in Cleveland, has ruled that police need more than sight alone to meet the standard needed to convict someone of speeding.
"The Eighth District stands alone in holding that an officer's visual estimation of the speed of a vehicle is insufficient to support a finding of guilt, and we agree with the courts that have found the opposite," Supreme Court Justice Maureen O'Connor wrote for the majority. "Rational triers of fact could find a police officer's testimony regarding his unaided visual estimation of a vehicle's speed, when supported by evidence that the officer is trained, certified by (the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy) or a similar organization, and experienced in making such estimations, sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant's speed. Independent verification of the vehicle's speed is not necessary to support a conviction for speeding."
Justice Terrence O'Donnell dissented, saying that courts should have more discretion to determine the credibility of an officer's visual speed estimate. Chief Justice Eric Brown, who joined the court after the case was heard, did not participate in the ruling.
During arguments in the case, lawyers for the state and for Barberton -- the venue where Jenney's case was heard -- argued that police can cite drivers for other infractions such as following too closely based on their visual judgments alone.
Jenney's lawyer responded that there should be more than just a visual impression, but he could not say whether a radar or laser speed measurement would be necessary.
06-03-10, 07:54 AM
#2
Depends on how fast they were going.
Yes, I can tell if a car is going 90mph. Anyone knows when a car is hellaciously speeding.
But if they're trying to contest that a car was going only 10-15 mph over the limit visually, it would be a tough sell. Too many variables can make the "guess" incorrect.
Yes, I can tell if a car is going 90mph. Anyone knows when a car is hellaciously speeding.
But if they're trying to contest that a car was going only 10-15 mph over the limit visually, it would be a tough sell. Too many variables can make the "guess" incorrect.
06-03-10, 08:21 AM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled this morning that an officer trained to estimate speed by sight doesn't need an electronic gauge to catch speeders.
Obviously, speeders are more likely to pass an unmarked police car than a marked one.
Trending Topics
06-03-10, 02:12 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Cops are now allowed to guess your speed when issuing citations in Ohio
This seems like a crock of crap. I would be pissed......but then again I live in a state where they had speed cameras on the freeway
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/03/g...ckets-in-ohio/
Bad news, Buckeyes. The Ohio Supreme Court just ruled that a police officer needs nothing more than his or her informed guess on how fast a vehicle is traveling in order to issue a traffic citation. Yep. You can forget the radar gun, LIDAR or even the archaic pacing method. As of right now, officers can merely say that you're exceeding the posted speed limit and you'll be stuck with points on your license and a hefty fine to deal with. If that sounds more crooked than a Jersey car salesman, it gets better.
Turns out, officers have to go through very little training in order to properly gauge a vehicle's speed by eye. According to The Plain Dealer, visual assessment is only a portion of the five-hour course on traffic enforcement. Instructors bring recruits to various traffic situations and have them guess speeds. The instructor then checks the guesses against what the radar gun says and calculates the difference.
So let that be a fair warning to natives and passer-bys alike. Leave the cruise control on and don't bother trying to argue if you should happen to get cozy with one of Ohio's finest. It's their word against yours.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/03/g...ckets-in-ohio/
Bad news, Buckeyes. The Ohio Supreme Court just ruled that a police officer needs nothing more than his or her informed guess on how fast a vehicle is traveling in order to issue a traffic citation. Yep. You can forget the radar gun, LIDAR or even the archaic pacing method. As of right now, officers can merely say that you're exceeding the posted speed limit and you'll be stuck with points on your license and a hefty fine to deal with. If that sounds more crooked than a Jersey car salesman, it gets better.
Turns out, officers have to go through very little training in order to properly gauge a vehicle's speed by eye. According to The Plain Dealer, visual assessment is only a portion of the five-hour course on traffic enforcement. Instructors bring recruits to various traffic situations and have them guess speeds. The instructor then checks the guesses against what the radar gun says and calculates the difference.
So let that be a fair warning to natives and passer-bys alike. Leave the cruise control on and don't bother trying to argue if you should happen to get cozy with one of Ohio's finest. It's their word against yours.
06-03-10, 02:39 PM
#9
Pole Position
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: LA
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
alright folks not only can you not speed, you cant even look like you are.
who will be the first to be arrested for imitating a speeder. be sure to take off your flight goggles and scarf especially if your windows are down.
speed is relative. if you're living in an area with a bunch of old people similar to where i live, going the 35 mph posted speed limit looks like I am driving on the freaking autobahn.
less government please. was this really the idea of what "we the people" hired cops for when hired "to serve and protect". not even close. its all become such a mockery of our initial ideals its quite nauseating.
who will be the first to be arrested for imitating a speeder. be sure to take off your flight goggles and scarf especially if your windows are down.
speed is relative. if you're living in an area with a bunch of old people similar to where i live, going the 35 mph posted speed limit looks like I am driving on the freaking autobahn.
less government please. was this really the idea of what "we the people" hired cops for when hired "to serve and protect". not even close. its all become such a mockery of our initial ideals its quite nauseating.
Last edited by magneti; 06-03-10 at 02:43 PM.
06-03-10, 02:54 PM
#11
Pole Position
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: LA
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a decent lawyer will cost you but clearly can get you out of this. just like with most things.
this is of course 100% correct.
06-03-10, 03:18 PM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
That is an oft-argued point, but I don't see where money alone is the issue. If that were the case, the state would not suspend or revoke licenses....the more you speed, the more tickets you pay, and the more you money you hand over to Big Brother. The state would WANT you to keep speeding, so you could keep paying fines.
But that's not now it works. Speed enough times, get enough tickets (and points) and your license can be suspended. The state gets zero income from speeding tickets if your license is suspended (unless, of course, you drive anyway, which some people do, and get caught).
But that's not now it works. Speed enough times, get enough tickets (and points) and your license can be suspended. The state gets zero income from speeding tickets if your license is suspended (unless, of course, you drive anyway, which some people do, and get caught).
06-03-10, 04:19 PM
#13
Pole Position
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: LA
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is an oft-argued point, but I don't see where money alone is the issue. If that were the case, the state would not suspend or revoke licenses....the more you speed, the more tickets you pay, and the more you money you hand over to Big Brother. The state would WANT you to keep speeding, so you could keep paying fines.
But that's not now it works. Speed enough times, get enough tickets (and points) and your license can be suspended. The state gets zero income from speeding tickets if your license is suspended (unless, of course, you drive anyway, which some people do, and get caught).
But that's not now it works. Speed enough times, get enough tickets (and points) and your license can be suspended. The state gets zero income from speeding tickets if your license is suspended (unless, of course, you drive anyway, which some people do, and get caught).
then if that same idiot kills someone there will be hell to pay from officials in charge because the press gets ahold of such stories and force their hand.
but make no mistake, these laws erode your basic freedoms in the name of reaching even deeper into your pocket.
06-03-10, 10:09 PM
#15
That is an oft-argued point, but I don't see where money alone is the issue. If that were the case, the state would not suspend or revoke licenses....the more you speed, the more tickets you pay, and the more you money you hand over to Big Brother. The state would WANT you to keep speeding, so you could keep paying fines.
But that's not now it works. Speed enough times, get enough tickets (and points) and your license can be suspended. The state gets zero income from speeding tickets if your license is suspended (unless, of course, you drive anyway, which some people do, and get caught).
But that's not now it works. Speed enough times, get enough tickets (and points) and your license can be suspended. The state gets zero income from speeding tickets if your license is suspended (unless, of course, you drive anyway, which some people do, and get caught).
and let me also remind you, here in CA, it's been done a FEW times already, where cops / chp pretty much claims they have to tighten up on all the patrol and ticket issuing because of budget crisis. how are you going to argue that one?