Is all speeding equal?

Hi,

I received a speeding ticket* about an hour ago, but only now realized the unusual situation and don't know if the below is usable in court.

The road I was driving on was a 40 km/h hour 4-lane road (speeding ticket shows 57), and I was on the right lane, the police officer was hiding behind a bush on the right side.

Ahead of me the right lane was blocked off for a section with traffic cones. There was a car behind me going fairly fast, as well as a car in the left lane, but behind a bit as well.

I figured i had 3 options, brake and cause a dangerous situation with the car behind, change lanes at my current speed and risk cutting off the driver in the left, or speeding up and changing lanes. I chose option 3.

My question is, is speeding speeding regardless of the situation, or can it be acceptable to speed up to avoid a potentially dangerous situation, and can this be used in traffic violation court?

If so, i plan on driving out there and taking a picture of the pyloned-off right lane.

*my first speeding ticket ever

**the police officer stopped me in the left lane.

***i forgot to mention the pylons or situation to the officer because i was so flustered/stressed out by the whole situation given it's the first time i've ever been pulled over

You would have to pretty much prove the car behind you was basically tail gating you for this defense to work (like literally on your bumper almost AND that your life was in danger). This is probably next to impossible to do unless you had dashcam footage or a witness in your vehicle with you.

You would also have to be willing to testify under oath that you were only going 40km/h before you sped up. If you testify that you were already going more than 40 (but maybe not 57) then your defense fails as you were already speeding anyways.

So in my opinion this defense probably would not work.

However you should always look at the discloasure/officers notes before you decide how to proceed to make sure there isn't something important they missed, so I recommend you plead not guilty and request a trial and once you get your notice of trial you can request disclosure (officers notes, copy of speed measuring device manual).

Speeding is an absolute liability offense. Short of travelling to an emergency room or escaping some sort of violent situation, there's no excuse for it.

No, "proving the car behind you was basically tail gating you" is not a defense. You can't argue safety by making the situation more deadly by engaging in a speeding duel.

The driver behind you is responsible for keeping a safe distance. It's not your responsibility to keep that distance by exceeding the speed limits. Not that it matters, but the fact this situation was never brought up during the stop only makes it seem less critical than it was.

mmak42 wrote:

Hi,

I received a speeding ticket* about an hour ago, but only now realized the unusual situation and don't know if the below is usable in court.

The road I was driving on was a 40 km/h hour 4-lane road (speeding ticket shows 57), and I was on the right lane, the police officer was hiding behind a bush on the right side.

Ahead of me the right lane was blocked off for a section with traffic cones. There was a car behind me going fairly fast, as well as a car in the left lane, but behind a bit as well.

I figured i had 3 options, brake and cause a dangerous situation with the car behind, change lanes at my current speed and risk cutting off the driver in the left, or speeding up and changing lanes. I chose option 3.

My question is, is speeding speeding regardless of the situation, or can it be acceptable to speed up to avoid a potentially dangerous situation, and can this be used in traffic violation court?

If so, i plan on driving out there and taking a picture of the pyloned-off right lane.

*my first speeding ticket ever

**the police officer stopped me in the left lane.

***i forgot to mention the pylons or situation to the officer because i was so flustered/stressed out by the whole situation given it's the first time i've ever been pulled over

you have option 4, wait until safe to change lane, this is on the book.

essentially everyone is correct here, especially Bend,

if your doing 41 in a 40 that is speeding.

To be honest, if someone is on your bumper, brake, it's there fault there problem.

If your in the 1st lane and not a passing lane and keeping to the speed limit you are 100% in the right.

I have found this pleasant land to be full of douchebag drivers, who will tailgate you, cut you up and speed.

YOU do what is right and you will be fine, if you are NOT speeding and someone is on your tail they will go round

IF you are speeding and someone is on your tail then YOU BRAKE, but you WHERE speeding.

mmak42 wrote:

Hi,

I received a speeding ticket* about an hour ago, but only now realized the unusual situation and don't know if the below is usable in court.

The road I was driving on was a 40 km/h hour 4-lane road (speeding ticket shows 57), and I was on the right lane, the police officer was hiding behind a bush on the right side.

Ahead of me the right lane was blocked off for a section with traffic cones. There was a car behind me going fairly fast, as well as a car in the left lane, but behind a bit as well.

I figured i had 3 options, brake and cause a dangerous situation with the car behind, change lanes at my current speed and risk cutting off the driver in the left, or speeding up and changing lanes. I chose option 3.

My question is, is speeding speeding regardless of the situation, or can it be acceptable to speed up to avoid a potentially dangerous situation, and can this be used in traffic violation court?

If so, i plan on driving out there and taking a picture of the pyloned-off right lane.

*my first speeding ticket ever

**the police officer stopped me in the left lane.

***i forgot to mention the pylons or situation to the officer because i was so flustered/stressed out by the whole situation given it's the first time i've ever been pulled over

bobajob wrote:

To be honest, if someone is on your bumper, brake, it's there fault there problem.

That's against the law and becomes your problem, not theirs.

"IF you are speeding and someone is on your tail then YOU BRAKE" ... Really? So you take a chance of getting rear ended, or the guy slams on his brakes, loses control, and a big accident happens...Not good advice there...

bend wrote:

Speeding is an absolute liability offense. Short of travelling to an emergency room or escaping some sort of violent situation, there's no excuse for it.

No, "proving the car behind you was basically tail gating you" is not a defense. You can't argue safety by making the situation more deadly by engaging in a speeding duel.

The driver behind you is responsible for keeping a safe distance. It's not your responsibility to keep that distance by exceeding the speed limits. Not that it matters, but the fact this situation was never brought up during the stop only makes it seem less critical than it was.

bend sounds like a Traffic Cop i've learnt a lot from you. Ya happened once to my friend, cop told him he should have slowed down no matter what, if the tailgater rear end she/he will get Big Ticket if the Police is there present and witnessing.

My wife's friend rear end hard someone at construction zone the Police saw it in front of him, Police give her -6 demerit points ticket 500-800$ fined, PLus texting while driving 300$+ i believe at that time no demerit point, her insurance premium jumped from 200$ to 700$ per month Ouch !

Well i still see people talk/text while driving or stop light.....

Let me clarify,

IF I'm keeping to the speed limit, and keeping a relevant distance behind the driver in front of me and he brakes or another driver cuts in front of me "Forces" me to brake

then I AM GOING to brake, if your behind me good luck to you. I am not there to worry who is behind me and worry if there going to ram me, you hit me from behind that is totally your look out and your fault.

I am NOT, I repeat NOT talking about brake checking.

I am only concerned about NOT hitting the guy in front of me and of course my peripheral (left/right sides of traffic)

People drive at stupid speeds and even more don't leave enough space (both of which are offences) that's not my problem

NOR my fault, IF I have to hang on anchors to avoid hitting someone in front of me, you can be dang sure I will.

And when I get my dashcam to prove the fact, good luck trying to charge me in that event.

And as far as insurance determination goes, you hit someone from behind, it's your fault, you get plowed into someone from behind, it's your fault.

so the happy moral of this story is, don't speed, if you do speed don't tailgate, the outcome won't be pleasant for you

bend wrote:

bobajob wrote:

To be honest, if someone is on your bumper, brake, it's there fault there problem.

That's against the law and becomes your problem, not theirs.

It sounds to me like the OP is talking about a defense of necessity? Good luck with that. With regard to accelerating from 40 to 57 maybe the tracking history (if the re is any will corroborate the story, but he'd still be relying on defense of necessity.

Defence of necessity will not fly on this...there were other available options...