apex188 should get the discovery and see what facts are presented. apex's strategy seems sound
apex188 should get the discovery and see what facts are presented. apex's strategy seems sound
That strategy is possible. And done quite a lot.
very good, thanks. I will return the ticket to contest and then post up the discovery when I get it.
http://img213.imageshack.us/i/discov...estnegdriv.jpg
Finally got my discovery request for the above violation. (see above link).the officer's statement looks pretty solid though, I can't see any cracks in it as there really isnt' much written and they have the radar gun seemingly covered off.
The courts must be busy as the infraction was in August and my court date isn't till early Dec.
any suggestions or comments on how I can fight this ticket?
IS it better to write a letter or show up in person?
I don't see a filing date. Did you call the Clerk and ask when the NOI was filed? If not, please do so.
Personally, I don't see where the officer has presented ANY evidence of "negligent" driving. Remember, in the statute, "negligent" is defined as:
Plus, the statute says, "AND endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property". The officer did NOT indicate, describe or even imply HOW you were endangering anything. Is he saying that a "reasonably careful person" NEVER exceeds the speed limit? If so, why is there a provision in RCW 46.61.425 that:Quoting RCW 46.61.525 (2)
That means that, since the legislature has condoned "speeding" in this instance, "exceeding the speed limit" -- ALONE -- is NOT evidence of "negligence".Quoting RCW 46.61.425 (1)
Furthermore, the officer SPECIFICALLY states that you were in ONE lane -- not "weaving" in and out. So, IMHO, while a "speeding" ticket MIGHT have been supported by the officer's sworn statement, NEG-2 is NOT.
But, I do not want to mislead you. This will be VERY hard to beat. Your "presentation" will determine whether the judge listens to your arguments -- as a pro se. It is an unfortunate fact that the same argument, presented by a pro se will fail, but when presented by an attorney, will be successful. It's just a fact of life.
Good luck,
Barry
Thanks for the response. I think it's just a case of writing up the maximum fine because the officer can, like you said, it's a tough one to fight I understand.
what if the reason was because I was accelerating in the outside L3 lane to over take a car in the middle lane? is it true that in the midst of overtaking you are allowed to increase speed to complete the pass, and since it was medium to heavy traffic, this would be possible?
I will call the clerk to find out when the NOI was filed and post answer I get. thanks agai.
Sorry, I didn't mean to mislead you. I should have provided a link to RCW 46.61.425 so you could read it in its entirety. It states:
I was simply using this as an example to show that speed alone cannot be considered "negligent". But, no, you cannot use your passing as an excuse for speeding. But, you must remember, you're NOT being accused of "speeding". You are being accused of "negligent" driving, per RCW 46.61.525. THAT'S what the evidence must show.Quoting RCW 46.61.425
Sorry,
Barry
Thanks, no need to apologize, any info for me right now is good to know.
I"m just not sure how I would be able to fight this in court as I would have to prove my case to the courts that I was not negligent in my driving, which seems to be based on the courts interpretation of the officers statement.
In your opinion, (i won't hold you to it) would I have a better chance of limiting the financial daage in changing the hearing to a mitigation instead of a challenge?
Does anyone know the process to request mitigation hearing if I've already requestedand have been assigned a date for contested hearing?
It seems that without legal representation it would be difficult to be succesful in contesting the Neg.Driving violation, so I may opt to go for a mitigation.
thanks!