I was pulled over for speeding 65 in a 40 zone. I do not believe that I was speeding, or certainly not by that much.

I think that the cop might have tagged some previous driver doing 65 and he just flashed the gun in my face showing 65; I think the cop just wanted to end his shift and used the same reading twice, not resetting the gun between tickets, so he could go home. I passed the same location 10 mins later and they were gone.

Can they actually prove it was my car going that fast and not some other car?

The cop dropped the speed to 55 from 65 on the ticket and said that if I went to court, she would reset the speed I was travelling back to 65. I did not ask her to drop the speed; she did this on her own accord. I think she was feeling guilty for pulling me over for some other driver's offence.

I have requested an early resolution; I have not had a driving violation on over 25 years and I cannot afford the 25% bump in my insurance for 5 years. Do they ever show leniency/mercy in court? This was over a bridge and no pedestrians ever cross over.

You are alleging that a police officer with a really good job and pension would risk it all just to get you on a ticket. Possible ? Yes. Likely ? No. They cannot prove that it was your car they got in the beam but they will testify to that effect and, absent any evidence the contrary, the judge will accept it.

An officer giving a reduced speed is commonplace and nothing to do with feeling guilty about issuing the ticket.

There is no leniency for the fact that there are no pedestrians.

The good news is that if this is your first ticket it likely will have no bearing on your insurance.

Plus your report is unclear. Was it a male or female officer ?

As Argyll said, speeding tickets are regularly reduced and in no way evidence of your speed having been fabricated. In fact, the officer doesnt even need to show you the reading, so if they really wanted to make up a speed they wouldnt have had to shown you a "fake" reading. Realistically, you probably were speeding (you admit to not knowing your actual speed) with a slim chance of an erroneous reading and nil chance of evidence fabrication.

In terms of disputing the charge, the police certainly DO need to demonstrate that it was your car they caught speeding, and there will have to be some evidence in the officers notes regarding this. You can plead not guilty for the time being and request disclosure and see the evidence (typically the officers notes). Take some time to read through the forums regarding how to obtain disclosure and fighting speeding tickets. Its a pretty common question so youll find lots of information.

empea wrote:

I have requested an early resolution; I have not had a driving violation on over 25 years and I cannot afford the 25% bump in my insurance for 5 years. Do they ever show leniency/mercy in court? This was over a bridge and no pedestrians ever cross over.

Have you actually verified these numbers with your insurance provider? In no way should your rates be going up 25% on a first offence if youre an experienced driver. The industry norm is typically 10%-15% after your second conviction within 3 years. Any increase should also only last for 3 years, the length of time the conviction stays on your record.

I'd agree with the other posters.

There's no requirement for an officer to show you the device. Suggesting they kept the number on there to charge you would be ignoring the fact that they could just write down any number they want anyways. Officers don't have to prove their case at the side of the road. That's what your trial is for.

Receiving a roadside reduction for your speed is the norm. It has nothing to do with the officer feeling guilty. It has everything to do with keeping people out of court so they aren't backlogged and wasting more money than they need to. You don't have to accept it. You don't get it keep the reduced speed if you complete a trial because it was incentive to not have a trial in the first place.

If you want to challenge the officers reading, you'd have to read their notes. Otherwise, it's just speculating.

Speeding is an absolute liability charge and you've already admitted you were probably speeding. If you did that at a trial, you'd be guilty. You were either speeding or you weren't. There's no gray area.

I'd highly doubt your insurance is going to go up 25% on a first minor offense. If they even issue you a surcharge on a first minor offense, it would probably be closer to 5%. The next conviction would then move up to something like 10%.

I had this happen to me. It took 5 Court appearances and an appeal before the crown withdrew the charge rather than go before the judge with an Officer that changed his story. You need to have a plausible story. You need to look at the radar manual and the notes. Go back to scene and take pics from the officers POV.