Let me explain this situation and see if y'all think it is hopeless....

First let me say this though... my hubby is one of those dear people that though youlove them should NOT be left alone and unsupervised. He really needs to learn to read things more carefully, and to stand up for himself at times!

He was ticketed for 63mph, in CA, in a 55 zone. (As is all of CA.) He was trying to make it to a truckstop just a mile or 2 down the road. He had eaten something the night before that didn't agree, and had to take Imodium before he left Lodi, just a few hours earlier. I'm NOT going to deny he was speeding. But it wasn't speeding for the sake of speeding. KWIM?

The other part of the ticket was even worse! Hubby somehow tore out that days log page along with the previous days, and it was in the trip pac when he was pulled over, so he was "missing" that days log page. He didn't even notice it missing until the officer handed him the ticket! We found it the next day, in the trip pack.

Now how do we explain all this nonsense to a judge? (Told you he shouldn't be left alone!)

Bonnie

Good question, GuysLady. First, speaking only of speed limits other than school zones and special interest areas, you should understand that any traffic citation, 12 mph or less over the speed limit, is completely contestable and winnable. This is why most law enforcement officers set their respective radar/laser guns to sound the alarm at 13 mph over the posted speed limit, because those are not contestable. Moreover, drivers issued citations for less than 12 mph over the speed limit almost always lose their case in court, because they admit to speeding. I know it sounds incredulous, but it’s a fact.

For example, driver John Doe is issued a citation for 63 in a 55. After the Officer testifies, John Doe is questioned by the Judge or prosecutor. When John Doe denies speeding 63 in a 55, the Judge or prosecutor asks him, "well, if you weren't doing 63 then how fast were you traveling?" John Does replies, "I wasn't doing anywhere near 63 mph, I was only doing about 57 or 58 at most." Bingo, that was an admission or confession of guilt. The speed limit is 55, not 57 or 58, so your guilty of speeding over the posted limit and you admitted that fact.

The answer John Doe should have given was, "I looked at my speedometer the moment the Officer signaled me to pull over and I was doing 54 mph (or, I had my cruse control set at 54 mph)." John Doe continues by saying, "Now I'm not saying the officer is lying, he is just mistaken in this case. There was another truck/car/etc close to me that had just passed me and I think the officer's speed measuring device measured the other cars speed, not mine. I don't speed. Ever!" (This last statement depends on your past driving record of course)

Regarding the grounds that 12 mph or less is contestable, consider the following: The law permits a plus or minus error in speedometer calibrations. For example, that law would consider it to be reasonable that although John Doe's speedometer read 55, he was in fact traveling 56. It would also be reasonable that John Doe would not realize he was traveling 56 mph if his speedometer indicated 55. Now, at what point does the law consider John Doe would know, or reasonably should know, he was speeding if his speedometer indicated 55. Would it be 56, 60, 70, 90? The answer is, if John Doe was traveling 13 miles over the posted speed limit, he should reasonably know something was wrong with his speedometer, which to him was indicating he was traveling 55 mph. Thus, anyone traveling 12 mph or less over the posted speed limit could expect to have a Judge believe that he had a reasonable belief that the 55 mph indication on his speedometer was correct, even though the officer paced him traveling 67 mph. You might be found guilty of an "improper equipment" violation (un-calibrated speedometer, which is a non-moving violation) but you have a reasonable chance that you will not be found guilty of speeding, because you are entitled to the presumption that you reasonably believed you were traveling 55 mph and could not have been expected to have known that your speedometer was not properly calibrated.

Simply put, John Doe is legally entitled to the excuse that "Gee, my speedometer only read 55", even if he was going 67. However, he is not legally entitled to expect the Judge or prosecutor to believe "Gee, my speedometer only read 55" if he was going 68 or more. As an extreme example, say your traveling 98 mph in a 55 zone. Would you believe John Doe’s "Gee, my speedometer only read 55"? Not a chance. The window between reasonable and unreasonable is 12 mph over the posted limit. Hope this helps.

__________________
The content on this post is intended only to provide a summary and general overview on matters of interest and is based upon the authors own experience(s). It is not intended to be comprehensive, nor does it constitute legal advice. You should seek legal, or other professional advice before acting or relying on any of the content within this post.

Okay, I follow you there! No problem! Thank you!

But how does he explain the log page?

Bonnie

He can't! Plain and simple, he could try but it will not do him any good. The old exscuse is I can't find it or I lost it at the last truck stop or someone stole my log book. The point is if you are keeping your log current to the last duty status your log book is readily available. I would not push this issue as it is a waste of hubbie's time and money. Lesson learned on hubby is to keep that log current. I am sure he didn't have it current.

Does he have a personal computer on the truck?

__________________
"Sometimes I wonder if men and women really suit each other. Perhaps they should live next door and just visit now and then."

Actually, I believe it was pretty close to current. He brought it current just before he left Lodi, and that was his last change of duty status until he was pulled over.

The officer that pulled him over walked up and did the "license, registration, and log book..." so hubby handed it all over, thinking the page was there.... "knowing" it was up to current... and it wasn't there. There was no conversation between them at all.

And then he did not notice the log violation on the ticket until the officer was gone.

Personally, I think he is fried on this one. This is why I say he should not be alone and unsupervised. LOL!

And yes, he does have a laptop.

Bonnie

OH I see, hmmm the officer should have told him what he was written up for. It sounds (don't be mad at me) like the hubby told you a fib to be honest. I bet hubby didn't have it current and hubbies (trust me, they tell me how they are scared the wife will beat them over log book violatios) telling you he is innocent. Not saying he is a dishonest person, but he doesn't want you to think he can't do his job good enough. I could be wrong.

Well if he has a computer on the truck maybe he might be happier using a log program to where he can do his logs on the computer instead of filling out a log sheet, he still must keep track of what logs he has printed and all that.
But it is great it helps keep track of their 11,14 & 70 and total hours every day and you print it and it's nice and neat. DOT loves them logs . He told me today # least I will be able to read it. I can pm you the information if you think hubby would be interested.

Yeah take the log book ticket hard to fight and get on the truck with him and keep him from being a bad boy! He needs the wife with him to control him YOu know these men if we aren't making sure they do the right thing, they will do the wrong thing

__________________
"Sometimes I wonder if men and women really suit each other. Perhaps they should live next door and just visit now and then."

I'm not offended in the least!! You're talking to a Lady who has dealt with all sorts of these little "cover-ups" since he started in this!! And did a butt chewing in Safety Officers office so thoroughly that the WORST, most vicious threat that the Safety Officer could make, to ANY driver was "would you like to speak to Bonnie about this?" That bad ain't it?

Yes, please, please PM me the info on that program! I've been dealing with log errors for 5 years now and it gives me nightmares!!! (Like literally drowning in a sea of log pages and tickets! LOL)

I will be out there with him as soon as I get the rest of this crazy clan moved out of this screwy state!

Bonnie

We got the "courtesy" notice today, and I nearly DIED! $718!!! I'm still shaking my head in disbelief! I think I will just cry now.

Bonnie

Wow, the government really has quite a racket going. With fines like that they out to pay off the national debt soon enough.

Suzi

Can you talk to a legal advisor and see if they could get it lowered?

DOT is not messing around anymore! If you are guilty they will fine you now.
Doesn't mean they are out to get you, but they are taking things a little more serious.

I keep trying to warn you drivers but they won't listen until it eats their pocket.
Heck I had a driver put out of service for log not current, he comes to my desk and is 2 days behind on his logs. I was ticked. He could care less about prison so he said, it doesn't scare him etc. I just don't get handing my money over to the state (especially one you don't live it) Over just keeping it current, if you keep it current at least you have 1/2 a chance of no fines!

Ok I am over the grip time

Can any of you drivers help her out on if she can get the fine lowered?

__________________
"Sometimes I wonder if men and women really suit each other. Perhaps they should live next door and just visit now and then."