If this is correct, you better get your community involved, and take control.

That is completely unacceptable, and nothing but a money game in the making.

They are here for protection, and to enforce, not to victimize, and that is what will happen. COPS are humans, and humans are not perfect, and don't always try to be.

 

My understanding in New York Anyway is that Officers are trained in the Police Acadamy how to judge the speed of a fast moving vehicle. So in reality you can get a speeding ticket by the officers judgement call. Of course a good lawer will get you off the hook. This is what I was told by Police officers I work with as a civilian in a large department here in N.Y.

 

GD, this pissses me off.
What's next?

You looked/acted drunk...instant DUI
This pisses me off. I have MS, I've had the cops called on me at LEAST 15 times because I don't walk "normal." Leaving a store, I get pulled over, asked if I've been drinking. Officer states citizens called in. I've resorted to carrying a card stating I have MS explaining the "outward" appearances of this disease. I've been asked to "walk" the sobriety test time after time, which is funny, cause I don't walk well and FAIL everytime.

I've been arrested, thrown in Jail, car impounded ONLY because I walk like I'm drunk.
Thank God, most, and if not, the supervisor, now have the instant "blow test" available.
Green, you're good, Red, off you go.

Google MS and you'll all understand.

So, "looks like" you're speeding, by a (Insert your own description here) ( edited cause I went a little overboard on my drescription of patrol officers) gets to add points to your record, raising your insurance rates and adding to the local coffer baised on his/her OPINION?

BS BS BS BS BS BS

How about.
No trails
No Judge
No Jury
No evidense
No Constitutional rights
No Cival rights

How about just Cops out there and thier "Opinions" based on thier 2 yr bach. degree and 16 or so weeks of "Training" providing no evidence whatsoever in whatver "crime" they decide to send you to Jail for.
Again......
BS BS BS BS BS

 

I hereby apologize for the "state" of Ohio. It's getting so right-wing around here I'm starting to think of retiring somewhere else.

As I understand this ruling, any officer who was "trained" and passed through the Ohio peace officers training acadamy is "legally" capable of visually determining a vehicles speed. So say 5 of the 7 political hacks who masquerade as the supreme court in OH.

I read that this case was of a guy who was being passed by a truck when the cop hit him with radar (much more likely it read the trucks speed) so he took it to court. He won some, lost some and it ended up at the "supreme" court. One fairly sharp, right-wing guy at work told me he read that the ruling came because OH law makes it a crime (that's a criminal not a civil offense, by the way) to exceed the posted speed limit but it doesn't say anything about how the "crime" is to be proven (typical half-assed politicians).

Over the years, many technlogical methods have been devised to remotely measure vehicle speed, all with various inherent errors, and the courts have granted "judicial license" to most of them and use these to judge guilt or innocence. If you want to understand how stacked the deck is against the driver in speeding cases, research the meaning and effect of "judicial license" as it is applied to radar speed measurment. Start in Florida about 40 years ago.

Evidently, since the radar "evidence" was obviously suspect, and they, in their "right" minded thinking, couldn't bear to bring themselves to side with common sense, they dredged up this idiot ruling, studiously based on careful legal ponderance no doubt. Again, I apologize for the policestate of OH. Remember, it took over 30 years to get rid of New Rome, OH, one of the most blatant speed traps in the entire US.

Currently, two state senators and one state rep are supposed to be drafting bills to specify that an officers visiual guesstimate of speed is not sufficient proof for a guilty judgement in a speeding case. And, that additional technological evidence, that can be tested to ascertain it's accuracy must be introduced. I hope they get their collective butts in gear so I won't have to keep apologizing for OH.

By the way, the "judge" who wrote the majority ruling, Maureen O'Conner was nailed for speeding, in excess of 80 mph I believe, northbound on I71 a few years ago, before a bunch of "right" minded idiots voted her into the supreme court gig. She squealed like a stuck hog trying to get out of that ticket but I don't remember if she did or not. After all, speeding tickets are for the "great unwashed", not privileged persons like our judiciary. Hopefully she'll get sacked this election cycle, along with the other 4.