Let me start by saying that forum etiquette dictates that you NOT start a new thread for a matter related to a thread that you had already started. The reason for that being, it is easier for us and better for you if ALL of your information is in one thread instead of having the volunteers go hunting for what you claimed months ago!
So yes, I made an error quoting you about crosswalks... Do I need to apologize? Nope! Deal with it. In fact, if you take that line away, my last post is still factual, accurate, and descriptive of the main issue here, that being that “all of reasons you claimed would justify you slowing down, were already accounted for when the 25mph speed limit was set”. And I challenge anyone who knows anything about setting speed limits in California to come on and post otherwise. Deny it if you want, I don't care.
Second, I have wondered if English is your first language or if it is a second language that you learned later in life simply because your use of some terms is clearly way off... You claim I base my comments on “assumptions” and yet you only refer to an “error” I made about crosswalks. Not sure how that is an assumption.
But before that, you come here all butt hurt because the judge simply explained to you why your defense was not viable to overcome the presumption that you did violate 22400, and yet to dramatize the situation and victimize yourself, you start off with a title “Clear Case Of Abuse Of Power”... Which part of a judge explaining the law to you is “abuse of power”??? I don't know! And in the slight chance that your title was in reference to the officer citing you, well, the fact that you were convicted means he was correct in his allegation that you violated the law. Again, no “abuse of power”.
But wait... Speaking of “assumptions”.... You are NOT one to point that particular finger simply because you based your entire defense on what?
An actual erratic pedestrian that jumped the curb in front of you so you freaked out and drove like you're the grand marshal in a parade?
You saw someone get creamed before you and decided “that ain't happening to me, I'm slowing down”?
None of the above!
You ASSUMED people are stupid, and ASSUMED that they simply will jump the curb in front of you so you decided you would hold up traffic and cruise your way through art your leisure!
You went to court ,making assumptions, and to your disadvantage,m the wrong ones, unfortunately!
So say you... But I'll address that in a bit! *
I addressed the obstructions as being roadway features that are “readily apparent to the driver”, meaning they were accounted for when the speed limit was set, and your using them as an excuse is simply not a valid defense. The results clearly show that!
But lets go back and look at your description of “the obstructions”...
First, you claim there is a “90 degree turn”. Exaggerate much? That description, again, is way off... While your direction will eventually be 90 degrees off from where you started before the turn, the turn CURVES around and that should allow you to negotiate it at a higher speed.
Second, ”the taxi zone”: whether it is taxis or privately owned vehicles, it simply translates into roadside parking. If every time you come across a street where cars are parked in the parking lane and that will cause you to drive 10mph, then please, don't get behind the wheel.
Third, ”too many huge pillars”... Do you drive on freeways? And have you come across a freeway bridge, which obviously some of them will have pillars? Does that cause you to slow down to 10mph on a freeway? If so, please refrain from driving!
Forth, ”erratic passengers hiding behind those pillars”... I think this part was sufficiently addressed by the judge. But even then, I too also addressed it through the fact that clearly there will be pedestrians and when the speed limit was set, that was taken into effect.
And AGAIN, in a subsequent post, you stated *:
Funny how you post that bit about every 100 feet along with a video! Interestingly enough, your video shows approximately 300 foot stretch of that loop... And yet NOT EVEN A SINGLE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING... OOOPS!!!!
You know, as soon as I saw the hood of the van, I knew something was up with it...
For all we know:
(1) You were driving the van and someone else had the camera...Or,
(2) Maybe you handed the guy $5 and told him “drive at 10mph, just until you are out of sight!”
A repeat of the issues I addressed in my last post... And no, I did not overlook those! You can call it “slower moving traffic” but if it was indeed “slower enough where you can justify driving at 10mph, then you would not have been cited and you would not have been convicted!”
And again, if the speed limit was lower than 25mph, and since this roadway does not fit the criteria for a statutory 15mph speed limit, the speed limit (if it were different than 25mph) it MUST be posted to be in effect, otherwise it defaults to the 25mph limit!
Since you were unable to establish that any other speed limit was posted, we are looking at a 25mph speed limit zone, whether you like it or NOT!
This does not cover airport per se, but it is as close as you will get to a reduction past the 25mph limit. And the point is, the limit MUST be posted to be in effect!
22358.3. Whenever a local authority determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour in a business or residence district or in a public park on any street having a roadway not exceeding 25 feet in width, other than a state highway, is more than is reasonable or safe, the local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, determine and declare a prima facie speed limit of 20 or 15 miles per hour, whichever is found most appropriate and is reasonable and safe. The declared prima facie limit shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the street.[i]
ONLY according to you... And we already know where that claim left you... GUILLTY OF IMPEDING TRAFFIC!
Actually, that was YOU:
And you have not offered another alternative!
Keep singing that... You're the only one convinced of it!
And the only proof of anyone getting pulled over here is YOU.. Care to repeart what you were pulled over for?
The only citation we have here is one where YOU were cited for driving at 10mph... Now to say that the officer cited you for impeding at 10, and will cite me for speeding at 15, that is a very narrow margin, that not even you can buy into!
Although it might seem like you stopped making sense st this point in time.. Fact is very little of what you've stated here is factual or sensible...
Let “them” worry about that... As for you, I suggest you start making plans for how you will handle getting through LAX without violating the law again...
Good luck dealing with this going forward. That you gotta do on your own though...
I'm done here!