Can an Officer Assigned to Desk Duty Still Testify in Traffic Court

[That Guy]

I'm still waiting for you to show....

OK,. so that's what you're after... You expect ME to provide YOU with proof...

Get over yourself, LOSER... I am not under any obligation to prove anything to you. My knowledge and experience speak for themselves. You, on the other hand, have shown EVERYONE what a demented and stupid idiot you are.

[BrianGC]

Just as I expect…you have NONE.

Advise on old wise one.

[PandorasBox]

So Cal...if you don't like any advise given here, go away, start your own law site.....

[summer_s06]

HEllo

They sent me only 2 pages.
First they sent me the survey and the dates where passed the 5 years (survey was done on 2005). But then they sent me another email saying that the first survey they had sent me was wrong and they sent me an updated survey with an extension (this one).

<a href="http://s1033.photobucket.com/user/summer_s06/media/speedsurvey-1_zps256a96e1.png.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1033.photobucket.com/albums/a416/summer_s06/speedsurvey-1_zps256a96e1.png" border="0" alt=" photo speedsurvey-1_zps256a96e1.png"/></a>

<a href="http://s1033.photobucket.com/user/summer_s06/media/speedsurvey-2_zpsb951e70d.png.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1033.photobucket.com/albums/a416/summer_s06/speedsurvey-2_zpsb951e70d.png" border="0" alt=" photo speedsurvey-2_zpsb951e70d.png"/></a>

[cbg]

Here's a novel idea.

Accept responsibility for your actions and pay the ticket.

.....?

No, I didn't think that would go over. Heaven forbid we should actually acknowledge fault.

[cdwjava]

A road survey determines the average traveled speed of a roadway.

Yes, but it is not the "average" that is of import in a speed survey - it's the 85th percentile and any adjustments that can legally be made for other factors.

This is why road survey trailers have a large sign/readout above them that reads "YOUR SPEED IS"… This is to slow down the traffic to get an artificially low average traffic speed. This allows officers to write for a lower speed on that street. An Officer once told me "that's how we get back at motorists."

I have never seen any of these trailers set out during road surveys and from what I have been told by traffic engineers is that you invalidate the survey if you do anything unusual to try and impede the traffic in an area of a survey.

And I have NEVER heard any officer in my nearly quarter century at this ever express such an opinion as "that's how we get back at motorists." I would be all over an officer who expressed that opinion and that would be someone I would not want doing traffic enforcement.

The purpose of radar is to slow down traffic that is traveling over the average traveled speed of that road. Not for citing motorists for gong 31mph in a 30mph zone on a clear, lightly traveled day.

To clarify, the purpose of radar is to confirm the visual estimation of an officer when evaluating the speed of a motor vehicle.

- - - Updated - - -

HEllo

They sent me only 2 pages.
First they sent me the survey and the dates where passed the 5 years (survey was done on 2005). But then they sent me another email saying that the first survey they had sent me was wrong and they sent me an updated survey with an extension (this one).

It seems that the survey supports the posted speed limit. s such, the burden will fall to you to prove through a preponderance of the evidence that your speed of 44 MPH was safe and prudent under the conditions. Being nearly 50% over the posted limit means that this will be a difficult thing to do, but, depending on the judge or commissioner, possible ... even if remotely so.

But, consider that losing at trial may prevent you from attending traffic school as the judge does NOT have to permit TS if you are found guilty. The law says he must consider it, not that he has to provide it. And he does not have to offer any reason for his decision.

So, if you wish to avoid a hit on your insurance you might want to consider the TS option that might come with a guilty plea.

[BrianGC]

Yes, but it is not the "average" that is of import in a speed survey - it's the 85th percentile and any adjustments that can legally be made for other factors.

Very true. Radar cannot be used to cite motorists that travel the speed that 85% of the traffic travels at on that street, irrespective of the speed limit. And quite possibly no speeding citations can be issued for speed within the 85 percentile range. That could be why around here speeding tickets are rarely written for less than ten miles over the limit. They allow for this.

I have never seen any of these trailers set out during road surveys and from what I have been told by traffic engineers is that you invalidate the survey if you do anything unusual to try and impede the traffic in an area of a survey.

Road surveys are done around here with trailers equipped with radar, a large digital screen that displays your speed and lettering that says "your speed is". You see the trailer there for a few days and a few weeks later you a motor cop shooting radar. It's like clockwork. They obviously need that data before using radar.

And I have NEVER heard any officer in my nearly quarter century at this ever express such an opinion as "that's how we get back at motorists." I would be all over an officer who expressed that opinion and that would be someone I would not want doing traffic enforcement.

I asked a teacher of traffic school who was an active Police Officer to tell me about road surveys. I asked if the big, bold speed readout that is displayed to the passing motorists was to slow them down to get a lower traveled speed. He agreed and asked how I knew that. He also said something to the effect 'that's how we get back", "that's how we level the field" or" that our own little trick on lowering the speed".

As for you never hearing a fellow Officer saying something like that, well, subordinates often say things that are out of place when the boss isn't around.

To clarify, the purpose of radar is to confirm the visual estimation of an officer when evaluating the speed of a motor vehicle.

That may be your spoken policy but I disagree with you because:
1) I see motor cops using radar by looking through a small telescope type lens on the radar unit. They do not take the radar unit down to do a visual between cars. They simply jump from car to car checking for speeders.
2) If an officer visually estimated a car doing 45 and his radar read 48, which speed has precedence on the ticket? It's the 48, right.
3) We all know which is more accurate between visual estimates and a radar unit.
4) When issued a radar "confirmed" citation, what is written on the citation to validate the speed? Radar or visual observation? It's 'radar', not 'visual estimate', right?
5) I think what you meant was that a visual observation is required as probably cause to allow the use of radar, similar to performing a FST before issuing a breathalyzer test. It's to establish probably cause.
6) Officers do not use visual estimating when using radar on cars appearing around a blind corner. They often shoot you as soon as you appear to them. Where is the visual estimate in a situation like that?

It seems that the survey supports the posted speed limit. s such, the burden will fall to you to prove through a preponderance of the evidence that your speed of 44 MPH was safe and prudent under the conditions. Being nearly 50% over the posted limit means that this will be a difficult thing to do, but, depending on the judge or commissioner, possible … even if remotely so.

I agree. 44mph in a 30 zone would likely be above the 85th percentile.

[cdwjava]

Road surveys are done around here with trailers equipped with radar, a large digital screen that displays your speed and lettering that says "your speed is". You see the trailer there for a few days and a few weeks later you a motor cop shooting radar. It's like clockwork. They obviously need that data before using radar.

What makes you think they are running the speed survey at that time?

What you describe is not a speed survey but a targeted enforcement strategy. We conduct a similar activity for informal traffic surveys, but not for a SPEED survey. In some programs funded by STOP grants and other NHTSA or DOJ grants an agency will conduct a survey using plain clothes officers or volunteers doing an informal speed survey followed by a sign, an additional survey, followed by enforcement. But, I have never known an agency to increase enforcement or use trailers when conducting a formal SPEED survey. As I mentioned, I have been informed by traffic engineers that such actions could invalidate the survey. If that is happening in your neck of the woods, then I suspect the defense bar might like to know.

I asked a teacher of traffic school who was an active Police Officer to tell me about road surveys. I asked if the big, bold speed readout that is displayed to the passing motorists was to slow them down to get a lower traveled speed. He agreed and asked how I knew that. He also said something to the effect 'that's how we get back", "that's how we level the field" or" that our own little trick on lowering the speed".

A ROAD survey ... what's that? The SPEED survey is what is used to support the posted speed limit.

And if some yutz teaching traffic school said that, then he's a ... well, a yutz. And, he may be full of it.

And, if they are artificially lowering the speed in such a manner, shame on them.

As for you never hearing a fellow Officer saying something like that, well, subordinates often say things that are out of place when the boss isn't around.

Psst ... I wasn't always a "boss" ...

That may be your spoken policy but I disagree with you because:

Actually, that's how they are trained.

1) I see motor cops using radar by looking through a small telescope type lens on the radar unit. They do not take the radar unit down to do a visual between cars. They simply jump from car to car checking for speeders.

That's a Lidar, not a radar.

2) If an officer visually estimated a car doing 45 and his radar read 48, which speed has precedence on the ticket? It's the 48, right.

The officer is free to cite that which he chooses. His estimates must only be +/- 5 MPH of the radar if memory serves.

3) We all know which is more accurate between visual estimates and a radar unit.

He doesn't need to be exact. Even I can estimate speed and have it upheld in court without a radar.

4) When issued a radar "confirmed" citation, what is written on the citation to validate the speed? Radar or visual observation? It's 'radar', not 'visual estimate', right?

Listen to the testimony ... if the officer is testifying as he was trained, of course.

5) I think what you meant was that a visual observation is required as probably cause to allow the use of radar, similar to performing a FST before issuing a breathalyzer test. It's to establish probably cause.

No, the visual observation and estimate is confirmed by the radar reading. And one does not need probable cause to conduct a stop for speed, one need only reasonable suspicion.

6) Officers do not use visual estimating when using radar on cars appearing around a blind corner. They often shoot you as soon as you appear to them. Where is the visual estimate in a situation like that?

Visual estimation isn't a pace - it's looking and estimating. I can estimate speed in a second or two - it doesn't take much.

I agree. 44mph in a 30 zone would likely be above the 85th percentile.

WELL above. And since the OP's images show the 85th to be at 33 MPH, it would seem that 30 was a good posting.

[BrianGC]

What makes you think they are running the speed survey at that time?

There has been one set up a few miles from my house for about a week or so. If it is still there this morning I'll take a picture of it and post it to get your opinion of what it is. Then in a week or two I'll take a picture of the motor cop shooting radar there. It's a great place for tickets. It's at the end of a long straight section of road that enters a business section where speeds should be reduced from a posted 35 to 30mph. Traffic flows through there at 45mph average… a field day for radar.

What you describe is not a speed survey but a targeted enforcement strategy. We conduct a similar activity for informal traffic surveys, but not for a SPEED survey. In some programs funded by STOP grants and other NHTSA or DOJ grants an agency will conduct a survey using plain clothes officers or volunteers doing an informal speed survey followed by a sign, an additional survey, followed by enforcement. But, I have never known an agency to increase enforcement or use trailers when conducting a formal SPEED survey. As I mentioned, I have been informed by traffic engineers that such actions could invalidate the survey. If that is happening in your neck of the woods, then I suspect the defense bar might like to know.

A ROAD survey ... what's that? The SPEED survey is what is used to support the posted speed limit.

Sorry. I get my terminology mixed up not being in that business. When people misspeak terms in my business they also stand out but thanks for not criticizing as some here would do. As you know, its no indication that I, or my clientele, are out to lunch.

And if some yutz teaching traffic school said that, then he's a ... well, a yutz. And, he may be full of it.

I still wonder why he confirmed it. In his experience he picked it up somewhere. I guess it depends on what that 'trailer' is. So you are saying that you've never seen a speed survey done with a large screen that show the passing motorist's speed?

And, if they are artificially lowering the speed in such a manner, shame on them.

I agree. But more than shame on them. If so, they are boldly manipulating data.

Actually, that's how they are trained.

How someone is trained and how they conduct themselves in the real world often differ.

That's a Lidar, not a radar.

Don't they both have the same polices of use and enforcement? So jumping from car to car through that scope is technically forbidden because an observed estimate is not being done first?

The officer is free to cite that which he chooses. His estimates must only be +/- 5 MPH of the radar if memory serves.

But his estimated speed can be made up later. Are you saying an officer cannot shoot radar at a car for the purpose of citing him for speed unless he first does a visual estimate to determine probable cause for the use of radar? If so, then training a radar unit on a blind turn, as I've seen many times, would invalidate those citations.

He doesn't need to be exact. Even I can estimate speed and have it upheld in court without a radar.

Listen to the testimony … if the officer is testifying as he was trained, of course.

If an officer is using Lidar on a pack of cars, which is very common, are they trained to visually estimate 5 - 10 cars simultaneously? I somehow doubt it.

No, the visual observation and estimate is confirmed by the radar reading. And one does not need probable cause to conduct a stop for speed, one need only reasonable suspicion.

But he is not "stopping for speed" or issuing a citation for visually estimating. He is stoping for the purpose of issuing a radar citation. Again, is probable cause required to use radar, similar to the use of a breathalyzer?

Visual estimation isn't a pace - it's looking and estimating. I can estimate speed in a second or two - it doesn't take much.

Radar is also used over the crest of a hill with the patrol car facing the same direction as the motorist. The officer must use his rear view mirror to observe the approaching car. Are officers trained to do observed estimates in the rear view mirror at night from hundreds of yards away? Again, if they are, I'd like to see their accuracy of it.

WELL above. And since the OP's images show the 85th to be at 33 MPH, it would seem that 30 was a good posting.

What is the highest 85th percentile speed above the posted speed limit you've have ever seen?

Thank you for your time, patience and professionalism here. You are an asset to this forum.

[cdwjava]

There has been one set up a few miles from my house for about a week or so.

The SPEED survey shouldn't be done for more than a week.

We set those signs up here, too - but not for Speed surveys as those are done VERY infrequently.

I still wonder why he confirmed it. In his experience he picked it up somewhere. I guess it depends on what that 'trailer' is. So you are saying that you've never seen a speed survey done with a large screen that show the passing motorist's speed?

Never have.

Don't they both have the same polices of use and enforcement? So jumping from car to car through that scope is technically forbidden because an observed estimate is not being done first?

If they can do both, great. But, the nature of lidar is that it is target specific - unlike radar. So, as I understand it (and I have never used lidar) they have to do both - eyeball the estimate and use lidar. or, it might be that they are not trained to do the estimate with lidar. I honestly cannot say for certain as I have no experience with using lidar outside of traffic reconstruction.

But his estimated speed can be made up later. Are you saying an officer cannot shoot radar at a car for the purpose of citing him for speed unless he first does a visual estimate to determine probable cause for the use of radar?

Essentially, yes. But, they can do that at the same time. It's not like you have to do an impression of the Great Karnak: Guess, close your eyes and then push the button.

If so, then training a radar unit on a blind turn, as I've seen many times, would invalidate those citations.

The courts may not be concerned about the visual observation followed by the confirmation, but that is how the training is done.

We are often trained in a manner that exceeds the legal expectations.

If an officer is using Lidar on a pack of cars, which is very common, are they trained to visually estimate 5 - 10 cars simultaneously? I somehow doubt it.

No need. If they are all traveling roughly the same speed and he tags one of them, it's no huge step to estimate the speed of any one of them. Or, if he hits one of the pack and then stops the car that is passing the pack, he can extrapolate from there. It's not rocket science and is largely common sense.

But he is not "stopping for speed" or issuing a citation for visually estimating. He is stoping for the purpose of issuing a radar citation. Again, is probable cause required to use radar, similar to the use of a breathalyzer?

No, he's conducting a detention based upon reasonable suspicion that a violation of the CVC has taken place - in this case, a violation of some speed statute (22350, 22348, 22349, etc.). After the stop, if the officer feels he has probable cause to "arrest" (i.e. cite) for a violation of the CVC, then he can issue the citation.

Comparing radar to a breathalyzer are different animals. Assuming you speak of the mandated test when referring to the breathalyzer, THAT test can only occur AFTER an arrest has been made based upon probable cause. A radar is used PRIOR to the arrest. They are not the same.

Radar is also used over the crest of a hill with the patrol car facing the same direction as the motorist. The officer must use his rear view mirror to observe the approaching car. Are officers trained to do observed estimates in the rear view mirror at night from hundreds of yards away? Again, if they are, I'd like to see their accuracy of it.

As I have been informed they have been trained in the visual estimation of speed under a variety of conditions. Whether a specific officer has been trained to use his rearview mirror might depend on the officer. But, most often when my officer run the rear antenna it's around a corner or off the path so that the radar might alert them to a speeder, they then make the observation as the vehicle passes and go from there. I can't say that's how everyone does that, however.

What is the highest 85th percentile speed above the posted speed limit you've have ever seen?

Posted 35, 85th percentile at 48 ... happened in my city and we stopped radar enforcement. Engineering adjustments permit it to be posted at 40, but not 45. But, it's also a state highway so Cal-Trans posts it and we can't make them change it.

Thank you for your time, patience and professionalism here. You are an asset to this forum.

Thank you.

And, I have to say, while you and That Guy may have some sort of thing going on, understand that he is probably the most technically knowledgeable person on CA traffic matters on these forums (there are two others that also come to mind, but one has been particularly scarce recently). he knows a great deal more than I when it comes to the legalities involved and the statutes. It is disappointing to see both of you going back and forth like this, but, he is a stickler for correct information, and even I have been corrected by him from time to time. I tend to post off the cuff without spending the time to look up statutes and case law (usually, if I have to put more than 5 minutes into a post, I don't), he dedicates a great deal of time to providing detailed responses and the forum is better for it. So, hopefully, the two of you can relax it a bit.