Speeding Ticket on I-5 Kings County

1. Junior Member
Join Date
Jul 2011
Posts
1

Speeding Ticket on I-5 Kings County

My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of: California

I was recently given a speeding ticket for going 90mph on a 70mph Max portion of kings county on I-5 going to Los Angeles. Here is the story and I was wondering if there is any chance that I can fight this ticket.

I was driving south next to two other cars near Avenal on I-5. I was in first of the cars going a bit faster than them. The police car was going north against my direction much faster than the other cars. Once I saw him, I slow down and so did the other two cars. He then U-turn across the middle interception and followed me. I notice him so I exited I-5 to the gas station 1/4 mile down and thats where he pull me over.

Here is my theories.

If he is going against my direction faster than me, can his radar be accurate?

The passing time from my car and his car was about 3-4 sec, can he get a read off that fast?

The middle grassy interception is around 250-400 feet in between the lanes. This puts him at a angle of about 90 degrees and at least 600-700 feet coming closer but never closer than 300 feet which is parallel. Can he get a accurate radar reading at that far of a distance while moving at 80-90 mph?

If there was cars around me, can he mistakenly had his radar on the other cars?

When he u-turn into my lanes. Around 20 sec. I was going 60 below speed limit because I remember checking my speedometer. So the radar reading should be 60 mph going my direction. So how can he be sure I was speeding while going opposite direction but when he travel the same direction I was below speed limit?

He mention I slowed down but how can he be sure I notice him to suddenly change my speed to below speed limit? Maybe the speedometer was incorrect on the first measurement.

I read about cosine error which is the inaccurate of the radar while at an angle.

Help me fight off this ticket please. I am a college student that can't afford a ticket.

2. Senior Member
Join Date
Sep 2005
Location
Behind a Desk
Posts
98,846

Re: Speeding Ticket on I-5 Kings County

Yes, apparently so, apparently so, you're free to argue that (but I expect he'll agree with you that you were the fastest car, such that any error would be to your advantage), you did slow and the reason why doesn't change the validity of the ticket, good for you.

Traffic school?

3. Senior Member
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
616

Re: Speeding Ticket on I-5 Kings County

His speed has nothing to do with the radar accuracy... the electronics continuously track his speed and the oncoming radar signal and measure your true speed.

The separation angle actually makes your measured speed LOWER than your actual speed.

He can read your speed over 1/2 mile away... if his radar is set on "measure the closest target" he is seeing your speed when the car is still a dot. (He will, of course, testify that he first observed your car, estimate the speed at 91, then used radar and got 90.)

He may even say that he got behind you and tailed you at 90 for 2 miles! You'll disagree, and I can guarantee the judge will side with the officer.

You must realize that WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED does not matter, WHAT YOU CAN PROVE IN COURT will be what counts.

You can make the state PROVE their case against you- take it to trial, hope there is a mistake, maybe the calibration certs are wrong, maybe he doesn't show...but there doesn't seem to be a good affirmative defense here.

4. Senior Member
Join Date
Mar 2009
Location
LA LA Land
Posts
9,170

Re: Speeding Ticket on I-5 Kings County

Quoting Firstticket999
He mention I slowed down but how can he be sure I notice him to suddenly change my speed to below speed limit? Maybe the speedometer was incorrect on the first measurement.
All of these arguments about "how can he know" and "other cars around me"... and "opposite direction then a u-turn"...etc, can be easily overcome by the officer obtaining and keeping a tracking history of your speed, meaning a comparison between what Radar is telling him and what he is visually estimating your speed as being.

Typically with Radar range being as high as 1 mile, he is likely to see you and know your speed long before you see him and check your speedometer. If at some point in time (probably before you saw him), he was able to establish that you were the fastest vehicle in his range (as in you were passing other cars around you), all while he has his Radar set to measure the FASTEST vehicle, then he's already established that you were the target vehicle being measured by Radar.

So he measured your speed at 90 from a distance, the alleged violation, as far as he's concerned, has already been committed. From that point on, it is a matter of him tracking what speed you are going. So regardless of whether you pass him at 60 or 100, he's seen your speed fluctuate through the radar measurement as well as though his visual estimate.

Quoting Firstticket999
I read about cosine error which is the inaccurate of the radar while at an angle.
Yeah, well it won't help you much especially considering the fact that the "error" part of the "cosine effect" is indicative of the radar unit showing a lower speed than your actual speed.

Quoting Firstticket999
The middle grassy interception is around 250-400 feet in between the lanes. This puts him at a angle of about 90 degrees and at least 600-700 feet coming closer but never closer than 300 feet which is parallel. Can he get a accurate radar reading at that far of a distance while moving at 80-90 mph?
But see, you're assuming that he measured your speed as you passed him going the opposite direction. And more often than not, that is not even close to being the case.

I don't see how you're coming up with the 90 degree angle... In fact, I don't see how he could have been at a 90 degree angle if both of you were travelling in opposite directions. He couldn't even get a reading if he were at a 90 degree angle to you (cosine error would result in a speed reading of ZERO)!

Quoting Mr. Knowitall
Traffic school?
I second that!

1.