Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel_Dave
Now that I've thought about it some more the written warning may actually help me ( the one for low speed vehicle. The officer verbally told me I was in violation of the minimum speed law. At this point, I don't know that law to exist. He then gave me a written warning for operating a low speed vehicle on a road with a >35 mph speed limit. I don't have a low speed vehicle, hence, I obviously didn't commit the infraction he gave me a written warning for--nor could I have.
So I can point out:
1) The officer verbally told me I was in violation of a law that did not exist.
2) The officer issued me a warning for an infraction I did not commit, and was incapable of committing.
Given those to things, I think it might be much easier to call into question the officer's judgement on whether my slow down was "reasonably safe".
|
I still think you will need some traffic flow infomation to present at trial so that your claim is backed by evidence. without this traffic flow evidence it is your word against to officers and the judge can go eather way. you will also need to prepare some probing questions for the officer when he takes the stand. as you are not likly to take the stand yourself you will need to enter evidence that suports your case. See if you can find a rules of the court document that gives you a clear understanding of the order of events in the trial and when to say what...
