# Bad Day: Help me fight a false ticket; tire issue



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

Today was a bad auto day:
At 12:30PM, as I took a left turn in my Z4 from a stop sign, a cop sitting 225 ft from the intersection claimed that I hit 40 mph in a 30 mile zone. In the evening the left front tire of the 525 went flat.

First the ticket:
I was taking a left turn from road A to road B after stopping. There was a cop on road B, facing me, on the wrong side about 225 ft from the intersection. According to the cop his radar caught me doing 40 mph in a 30 mph zone within the 225 ft between the stop sign I took the left turn at and his location on the other side of the road. I know that there was no way I could have hit 40 mph in 200ft on that road.

According the the cop they have received many complaints from local residents about students from the local high school racing on road B so he was there to slow them down. According to him he had already cut a few tickets at the same spot that day. He also asked me when I had my last ticket and told me that I could go to traffic school. I asked him if I could see the radar reading and he said that he has already reset it!!

I would love to fight the ticket as long as I can go to traffic school if I lose. However according to the court clerk, if I go to trial I can not go to traffic school if I lose. That translates to about $200-300 per year on extra insurance costs for the next 5 years. Hence I want to check my chances of success before I fight it.

Since the cop was about 40 ft from my lane, I know that there is a minimum distance required for him to take a valid reading at 40 mph (called cosine acceleration limitation due to the time needed by the gun to process the return). If the distance is 50 ft, then reaching 40mph in 175 ft would result in a 0-60 time of less than 9 sec assuming constant acceleration. There was no way I would have been able to do 60 mph in 9sec with the kind of neighbourhood driving I was doing.

I want the following:
1. A way to calculate the minimum distance at which the gun is accurate if the car is 40 ft from my line if I was doing 40 mph.
2. The minimum amount of time needed to get a reliable reading on a car accelerating from a stop and reaching 40 mph.

I have asked the city's public works department to tell me whether a traffic survey has been performed on that stretch of the road to make the use of the radar valid.

I think I am a victim of Z4 envy.

Regarding the tire on the ZSP 525:
The sidewall has sepearated from the tread. It happened all of a sudden and there is a tear 1 inch wide. It is a clean tear not caused by something external. Is this covered by tire warranty? Is a tear like this fixable? If it is not I am thinking of getting another new tire to match the existing new spare. So the front tires will be new while I still roll the rear ones. The tires have done 23K miles and still have some time left on them. The car has ZSP. Would be OK to have 2 new tires in the front and two old at the back? I could also bring the rears (with the power) to the front.


----------



## SoCal Scott (Mar 2, 2005)

Sorry to hear about your bad day. Getting a ticket sucks no matter what.

A reliable reading of your speed is virtually instantaneous. And you could try that cosine accleration defense, but I've *never* seen it work on a surface street. It's much more applicable at highway speeds when the officer is 30 yards or greater off line. That kind of radar is used everyday in the way that you describe.

If you can exactly measure where the intersection is and where the officer was, and it really is 225 ft, you could probably make a pretty good argument that it would be hard to get up to 40 mph without putting the pedal to the metal (which you say didn't happen) in that short a distance.

If the $25 plus fine or whatever for traffic school is really too much for you to pay, then go ahead and fight it. But honestly, traffic school is a SWEET deal and I strongly suggest that anyone eligible take it without blinking, unless you've got a watertight defense.


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

SoCal Scott said:


> Sorry to hear about your bad day. Getting a ticket sucks no matter what.
> 
> A reliable reading of your speed is virtually instantaneous. And you could try that cosine accleration defense, but I've *never* seen it work on a surface street. It's much more applicable at highway speeds when the officer is 30 yards or greater off line. That kind of radar is used everyday in the way that you describe.
> 
> ...


I am tempted to take traffic school. But I really feel upset at this method of law enforcement. The cop expected a high-school student in the Z4 (in his own words).

I live on street A. Today evening, my wife and I actually went and measured the distance from the beginning of the curb on Street B and the point where the car was parked. It was 225 ft +-15 ft. There are 3 houses and the typical frontage here is about 80 ft. The police car had least a 10 yard offset from my lane. I was reading that the beam width of the police radar (80% of the power conentrated) is between (9 degrees for Ka band and 18 degrees for X band). The beam widens as it spreads. Even assuming a conservative offset of 20 feet from the edge of my car to the police car, this would require that the minimum distance between the police car and my car be 125 ft for the widest X band. This would give me about 100ft to go from 0 to 40.

At this rate of acceleration, I would reach 60 mph in 5.11 sec which is about a second lower than BMWs published 0-60 rates (5.90).

The question is: Can the width of the main lobe be used as an argument. What if the cop had a laser gun?

Did he have enough time (assuming 40 mph) he had about 8 seconds from the point he saw me and by the time I passed his car.

I am actually hoping that the street has not been surveyed for speed so the use of radar may not stand in court.


----------



## exBMWannabe (Dec 31, 2001)

I don't have any experience in the ticket side of your question but for the tire, I don't think that sidewall damage is fixable.

From what I've read, it seems that it will be hard to prove that the tire blew due to a manufacturer defect which is the only way to get warranty coverage. Even then, I think the amount would be prorated on the expected life of the tire. If you have one of those "cover all, road hazard" warranties like those from Costco, then you should have no problem getting a replacement.


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

I heard back from the city.
The street had a survey done in 2001 so the radar is valid


----------



## v2rocket (Apr 7, 2005)

man dont worry

http://www.ticketassassin.com/

yeah! do it the fun way and u know whats better? at the end of your trial if your guilty request a trial de novo REPEATEDLY until you get your way imagine how much work that is for a judge to do and eventually hell let you off scot free!

yeha man its the way =] have fun readin up :thumbup:


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

v2rocket:

I had read it up last night. I do not understand how I can request a trial de novo REPEATEDLY? I can definitely keep postponing the trial date but is that all?

I want to be confident that I have a fool proof case before I jump in.

A fool proof case can only be made by technical arguments.

The risk is losing the right to go to traffic school after all the pain.


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

Damn just pay the ticket... is a 10 over ticket it worth all this. :dunno:


----------



## Uncle Fester (Feb 18, 2005)

Artslinger said:


> Damn just pay the ticket... is a 10 over ticket it worth all this. :dunno:


 :stupid: 
Just take traffic school and admit that it was possible the cop was right?


----------



## The HACK (Dec 19, 2001)

Artslinger said:


> Damn just pay the ticket... is a 10 over ticket it worth all this. :dunno:


Hell yes. I got busted for going 5 over the speed limit (50 in a 45). Do you want to know how much it's cost me?

$75 for the ticket
$2,400 in increased insurance premium for the last 2 years, with another $1,200 more before the ticket goes off my record.

For a nice grand total of $3,675. That's how much his ticket can potentially cost him, if not more.

Now, I know you're going to say, hey he can just take traffic school! Big deal!

Well, I had gotten a ticket for an 80mph in a 65mph zone just 6 months prior and was deemed ineligible for traffic school for the 5 over ticket, and it's stuck with me until 3 year has passed (or whatever the period it is for tickets). You never know when you're going to get your next ticket. I hadn't gotten a ticket for over 10 years before this last rash of two tickets in a row. :thumbdwn:

If I knew what I know now, I would've fought tooth and nails to get out of those two tickets with some help.


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

The HACK said:


> Hell yes. I got busted for going 5 over the speed limit (50 in a 45). Do you want to know how much it's cost me?
> 
> $75 for the ticket
> $2,400 in increased insurance premium for the last 2 years, with another $1,200 more before the ticket goes off my record.
> ...


You are saying what?

That one ten over will give you a $3,500 in increased insurance premium hit. I don't believe. I have only ONE speeding ticket on my record a couple of times and my premium never went up.


----------



## SoCal Scott (Mar 2, 2005)

Assuming he doesn't have a recent ticket, traffic school will ensure that his insurance company never hears about this. Why take the risk?

And not saying anything about this case in particular, but usually, the cop is right. There are so many people breaking the law that they have no incentive to lie. And while people occasionally make mistakes, usually they don't. They do this every day.

Anyway, good luck and let us know what happens!


----------



## Uncle Fester (Feb 18, 2005)

Of course, you could also hire Beewang to get you off !!!

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83380


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

SoCal Scott said:


> Assuming he doesn't have a recent ticket, traffic school will ensure that his insurance company never hears about this. Why take the risk?
> 
> And not saying anything about this case in particular, but usually, the cop is right. There are so many people breaking the law that they have no incentive to lie. And while people occasionally make mistakes, usually they don't. They do this every day.
> 
> Anyway, good luck and let us know what happens!


SoCalScott: I do not mind going to traffic school. However, if I get busted again I am in trouble. This is what the HACK wrote and what I want to avoid. I want to be able to enjoy the $550/month I pay for my Z4 without worrying about being 2 miles over the limit when I am driving.

I called the PD here and they told me that they use a K band hand held radar gun. The typically have a beam width of 11 degrees. Assuming the beam width is 15 degrees, the minimum distance for me to be in the main lobe assuming just a 20 feet offset is 150 ft. This gives me 75 ft to go from 0 to 40 in 3 seconds! At the same rate of acceleration I would have reached 0 to 60 seconds in 4.5 seconds :dunno:

I finally figured out the formula for cosine acceleration issue. At 20 ft offset it gives a minimum range of 72 ft before the error crosses 1 mph assuming a 300 ms reaction time. This translates to a 0 to 60 time of 8.5 seconds. This is typically the time taken by a normal driver in a regular car to get to freeway speeds from a dead start. And I clearly was not aiming to do that.

As I had said, I had just left my home and was not exactly pushing it.

Another technique which the officer uses is visual confirmation. The problem with a small car like the Z4 is that it appears to go much faster than it is. An F-16 has a minimum landing speed of 210Km/hr and a 777 has a minimum landing speed of 240-280Km/Hr. However an F-16 jet fighter landing always seems so much faster than the 777. That is the way human brain perceives motion.


----------



## The HACK (Dec 19, 2001)

SoCal Scott said:


> Assuming he doesn't have a recent ticket, traffic school will ensure that his insurance company never hears about this. Why take the risk?
> 
> And not saying anything about this case in particular, but usually, the cop is right. There are so many people breaking the law that they have no incentive to lie. And while people occasionally make mistakes, usually they don't. They do this every day.
> 
> Anyway, good luck and let us know what happens!


Yeah but in So. Cal you can not take another traffic school for another 18 mo. If you get a ticket between now and 1.5 years later, you can not take the "school" route to remove the point. 

It is always BEST to beat the ticket at all cost. And yes, the insurance goes up about $100 a month for my speeding indescretion.


----------



## SoCal Scott (Mar 2, 2005)

Personally, I think a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Last ticket I got, I took traffic school and made it just fine (though a bit more cautious) through the next 1.5 years.

But as always, if you really are innocent and can prove it, of course you should go for it.

Good luck!


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

BayAreaBMWFan said:


> SoCalScott: I do not mind going to traffic school. However, if I get busted again I am in trouble. This is what the HACK wrote and what I want to avoid. I want to be able to enjoy the $550/month I pay for my Z4 without worrying about being 2 miles over the limit when I am driving.
> 
> I called the PD here and they told me that they use a K band hand held radar gun. The typically have a beam width of 11 degrees. Assuming the beam width is 15 degrees, the minimum distance for me to be in the main lobe assuming just a 20 feet offset is 150 ft. This gives me 75 ft to go from 0 to 40 in 3 seconds! At the same rate of acceleration I would have reached 0 to 60 seconds in 4.5 seconds :dunno:
> 
> ...


Having just successfully fought a ticket yesterday, and fought many tickets some 12~14 years ago when I was young and stupid. Here are my thoughts:

Get the book by NoLo Publishing It will help you on the issue of radar tickets.

Unless you are a certified EE or have access to a Radar expert. Don't waste your time on that cosine limitation stuff. You are gonna step all over yourself on that. To win, You need to find ways to discredit the officer's testimony and provide concuslive supporting evidence. Or at the minimun it has to create a "Reasonable Doubt".

Frankly, I think this ticket is bull$hit at 10MPH over limit and it should never be written. However, I don't see a way you can dicredit the officer's testimony on front of the judge. Writting out the a complex physics calculation may dis-interest the judge (and believe me... they have no patient, they are NOT interested in an OJ case). You need to get to the point quick before the judge pulls the plug on you.

I would goto traffic school, pick my battles elsewhere.

cheers,

beewang


----------



## Moderato (Nov 24, 2003)

BayAreaBMWFan said:


> Today was a bad auto day:
> At 12:30PM, as I took a left turn in my Z4 from a stop sign, a cop sitting 225 ft from the intersection claimed that I hit 40 mph in a 30 mile zone. In the evening the left front tire of the 525 went flat.
> 
> First the ticket:
> ...


Basically what happened, IMO is the chief of police told all the officers to bust anyone who even remotely speeds on that road for 2 reasons. 1) There is a legitamte problem with people speeding on that road and 2) to "get the word out." A bunch of people get tickets and they tell everyone they know, etc... the word gets out not to speed on that road. I don't think you're a dangerous driver based on what you said, I just think you were in the wrong place at the wrong time, it happens. Look into the situation at the police department, court house and perhaps with an attorney to find out what your best solution is. True story - My great grandfather of 75 years (this was a LONG time ago) got a ticket for speeding in NYC. He told the cop "I've never gotten a speeding ticket in my life!" (this was true), the cop says "Well, you got one now."


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

I got it!!

Here is how I would fight it (if you must).

Can you proof that it would be physically impossible for you to accelerate from left turn stop sign to the point of you were at gunned at?? :dunno: You will need to measure the apprx. distance traveled and cite numbersgiven by professional drivers employeed by Var Magazines. 

If you can come up w/ a maximum speed calculation by a professional driver to reach say 34 MPH. I would argue that is within the tolerable margin of error by your speedometer (that is, your speedo says your are doing 30 MPH by in reality you are traveling at 34 MPH) and the judge will very likely to dismiss your ticket for "reasonable Doubt"

good luck,

bee


----------



## BTMaximus (Jan 13, 2004)

I have a friend who tried what Beewang suggested in court. If you decide to go that route, make sure you have an affadavit from a mechanic stating that your car was not modified in any way such that you could exceed stock acceleration times. That is what he ultimately lost his case on.


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

BTW, the second issue (burst tire on 525) got lost in the excitement. I have started a new thread in the Tires Board.

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94047

Your thoughts are welcome there.


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

*Talked To The Officer !!!*

I talked to the officer on the phone!

He said that he caught me doing 41 after I had passed him! He said that he had a hand-held radar and he pointed it to my rear. He said he got the tone and everything. Now all calculations I had earlier are no longer valid.

Now is it possible for the cop to twist around and aim the hand held gun through the car at the back of my vehicle? He also said that he did a visual estimate of my speed.

What is indeed questionable is whether an officer can aim a gun at a car going in an opposite direction and still get an accurate reading!

He can either twist to the right and aim it down the road through his rear window or twist to the left and aim it through the driver's side window.

Due to the cosine effect, my car has to be at least 20-30 ft away for the actual reading to be any way close. So he has to aim the gun at an angle of at least 45 degree negative. Further he does not know what he is aiming at.

I think he never got a radar reading

Now I really need a copy of his reports.


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

Sounds like its game over for you. Unless you can proof him wrong scientifically. Its his "expert opinion against your" You will lose. He "estimated" your speed and further confirmed w/ the radar and that is good enough for the court.

You got anything else in the bag of tricks?? :eeps: 

cheers,

beewang :bigpimp:


----------



## SoCal Scott (Mar 2, 2005)

There isn't any formal report to a speeding ticket. He may have notes on the back of his copy, but they could be whatever he decided to notate, and he's not required to write anything at all!

I think Bee's right on this one. You're gonna have a hard time convincing the judge that the cop isn't right. An estimate is all you need in California. The radar is just gravy.

Besides, if he said he got the radar reading, got tone, etc -- he probably did. I still don't see any reason to believe he lied.



BayAreaBMWFan said:


> I talked to the officer on the phone!
> 
> He said that he caught me doing 41 after I had passed him! He said that he had a hand-held radar and he pointed it to my rear. He said he got the tone and everything. Now all calculations I had earlier are no longer valid.
> 
> ...


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

I slowed down when I took the turn and saw him. My attention was focussed on him so I am not sure why I would speed once I passed him. Earlier on I still thought that I could have crossed 30 when I got close to him but not soon enough for him to catch me. He said that even he was surprised that I got to 40 after passing him. Now I am even more sure that I would not have been doing 40 when he says he nailed me. I can be stupid at times but not that dumb to speed up after seeing a cop.

The road widens at the spot where the car was parked and where the farm ends. There is a hedge which marks the edge of the farm where it meets the road.

Though it is possible for the officer to twist around and aim his gun through the rear window, there is a lot of interference from the hedge. Further most police cars have the separator between the front and the rear seats so the officer has very little space to position the gun and then aim it at an angle greater than 180degrees (to aim on my side of the road).

This leaves the possibility that he would have aimed through the side window. This also means that he would have to twist his body around in the limited space he has. To get a reading close to his visual estimate, he would have to fire the gun at atleast a -60 degree angle. (cos (-60) = cos(30) = 0.87). 

The radar guns are a few inches wide and at least a few inches deep. For example the basic stalker hand held gun has the following dimensions:
Height – 7.6 inches
Length – 8.6 inches
Width – 2.8 inches

Though it may not be impossible, it is incredibly difficult to take an object of that dimension and aim it backwards at extreme angles and be able to see the readings on the gun at the same time. Try it in your car. A crown vic is definitely bigger. 

Further in order to get a valid reading the officer will have to caliberate the location in the direction he was aiming his gun at. This is to ensure that there are no other objects which can return a signal (a metallic fan) Though he could have, I very much doubt that he would have caliberated the gun aiming backwards. His position (behind the hedge at the point where the road widens) was designed to ambush people going on the other side of the road; folks who could not see him till they passed him on their right.

Given all the facts:
- me slowing down after seeing him.
- then angle at which he would have to shoot.
- And more importantly, his claim of having reset the gun when I asked to have a look at it. He said he reset it when he went to pick up his pad AFTER stopping me.

I do not believe he got a valid reading.

Of course proving it in court is a different matter all together.


----------



## SoCal Scott (Mar 2, 2005)

If I ever need a lawyer, I'm just going to hire you. 

I truly hope you win this one, just for the hours that you've put into this already. You definitely make a lot of good points.

Now like you said, proving it is a whole other thing.


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

SoCal Scott said:


> If I ever need a lawyer, I'm just going to hire you.
> 
> I truly hope you win this one, just for the hours that you've put into this already. You definitely make a lot of good points.


Do you plan to stand for judicial election in Santa Clara County? I will try and delay my trial till you win.


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

BayAreaBMWFan said:


> ...I do not believe he got a valid reading......


Yes... You must know by now that we are on your side, but how are you going to PROVE your innocence?? :dunno:



> ........Of course proving it in court is a different matter all together.....


  So I read all the stuff for nuthing.... Geez... Thnx 



beewang


----------



## Jimmy101 (Apr 9, 2005)

I say fight it,
What kind of insurance do you have???
****, my wife recently totaled her car, now
our insurance has gone up $80 for the year,
and it will be for the next 3 years that
the accident is reportable. 
I have unitrin direct, they are nationwide, out of chicago...


----------



## Goetta (Oct 7, 2004)

1) Admitting speeding by even 1 mph will result in a guilty finding. Maybe not as many points will be assessed against your license, but a guilty finding nonetheless.

2) Chances are the judge isn't going to give much credence to your scientific argument. No offense, just my experience.

3) Don't know about CA, but in Ohio unless the court has had expert testimony establishing the reliability of the radar or laser unit, the reading is inadmissible under Evid. Rule 702 (Most states rules of evidence mirror the federal rules). The court can take judicial notice of the reliability of the radar/laser gun if in a prior case a decision has been published recognizing its reliably. A well placed objection when the officer attempts to testify as to the reading on the radar unit may be all you need. Also, failing to state the basis of you objection (in this case lack of foundation, the testimony calls for scientific knowledge outside the scope of understanding of the average person) will result in the objection being for relevancy only... Certainly the reading of the radar gun is relevant - the question is is it admissible...

-the theory being that the operation, reliability, and correlation between the numbers on the radar screen, the increasing audible tone, and your speed are outside the knowledge of the average person, thereby requiring foundational testimony from an expert. The expert is usually in the form of a representative from the radar/laser gun manufacturer.

4) Approach the prosecutor prior to court and ask him/her to amend the charge to a non-moving violation. All they really want is the money anyway.  

DISCLAIMER: This information is NOT legal advice. Do not rely on it. Consult your attorney.

Good luck and shake those pillars of Justice!


----------



## Goetta (Oct 7, 2004)

Oh, one more thing - probably 75% of traffic tickets are dismissed because the officer fails to show at the court appearance. Again, I don't know about CA, but in OH you have 30 days to bring a minor misdemeanor case to trial - statutory speedy trial time limit. If not, then the case has to be dismissed. The tactic there is to plead not guilty at the arraignment, set the case for trial on day 30, and hope the cop doesn't show. The prosecutor can jump up and down asking for a continuance, but chances are, unless you agree to waive time, the case will have to be dismissed. :thumbup: 

I saw somebody post something about a trial de novo. Here is how that works here. If the case is heard in a "mayor's court" you can go all the way through trial and then if you are found guilty, file an objection to the magistrate's decision...the case is then transferred to "municipal court" where the trial begins "over again" (the literal translation of de novo). This happens once. 

Good luck.

Oh, and the DISCLAIMER: This information is NOT legal advice. Do not rely on it. Consult your attorney.


----------



## BayAreaBMWFan (Aug 8, 2004)

FWIW:
I wrote to the engineer behind copradar.com. He, a fellow Illini, responded to my email and pretty much validated my claims with his own calculations. So the speeding in the 240 ft case is now pretty much fool-proof.

My Radar Expert's Resume :thumbup:

I would love to hear from some LEO/Lawyer whether aiming gun backwards at a receding target is standard practise. I had written to the PD over the weekend with a list of questions. I hope they write back to me. Till then I am just sitting on it.


----------



## ang (Nov 5, 2005)

*any tips on reducing cost of a first and ONLY speeding ticket?*

anyone in portland oregon have any tips on how to get a photo radar speeding ticket reduced? this is my FIRST ticket ever, at age 39! i really was going with the flow of traffic, i remember all the flashes, because it must have gotten at least 10 people at once...it clocked me at 48 in a 35...3 miles over what would have been a much cheaper ticket...it was on 99E just before the limit goes to 45! it just didn't feel like i was speeding...regardless, i am wondering, do i just pay up, or is the old rumor true, that if you show up for a court date, it can be reduced? also, will insurance increase on your first ticket? 1st month in the new bimmer and a speeding ticket...i am bummed!
any helpful tips out there?
thanks
angie


----------

