Prev: California State Route 154 video (NEW!)
Next: Three more questions added to WWTL Trivia
From: T.J. Higgins on 2 Jun 2010 14:36
"The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual
estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer
is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in
watching for speeders.

"The court's 5-1 decision said independent verification of a driver's
speed is not necessary."

<http://www.wlwt.com/news/23767184/detail.html>

No chance for any abuse there, nosireebob...

--
TJH

tjhiggin.at.hiwaay.dot.net
From: N8N on 2 Jun 2010 16:17
On Jun 2, 2:36 pm, ernest.p.worr...(a)vernal.equinox.edu (T.J. Higgins)
wrote:
> "The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual
> estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer
> is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in
> watching for speeders.
>
> "The court's 5-1 decision said independent verification of a driver's
> speed is not necessary."
>
> <http://www.wlwt.com/news/23767184/detail.html>
>
> No chance for any abuse there, nosireebob...

Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot. Over.

Not that I was planning on visiting Ohio any time soon, but if I do, I
will make sure to gas up and eat in Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Michigan...

I can tell you from personal experience that an officer's "visual
estimation of speed" and "pacing" can be off by >10 MPH... (never
works in the motorist's favor, either)

nate

From: N8N on 2 Jun 2010 16:18
On Jun 2, 4:17 pm, N8N <njna...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2:36 pm, ernest.p.worr...(a)vernal.equinox.edu (T.J. Higgins)
> wrote:
>
> > "The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual
> > estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer
> > is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in
> > watching for speeders.
>
> > "The court's 5-1 decision said independent verification of a driver's
> > speed is not necessary."
>
> > <http://www.wlwt.com/news/23767184/detail.html>
>
> > No chance for any abuse there, nosireebob...
>
> Whiskey.  Tango.  Foxtrot.  Over.
>
> Not that I was planning on visiting Ohio any time soon, but if I do, I
> will make sure to gas up and eat in Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Michigan...
>
> I can tell you from personal experience that an officer's "visual
> estimation of speed" and "pacing" can be off by >10 MPH... (never
> works in the motorist's favor, either)
>
> nate

Gah. that should be "Pennsylvania, *Indiana* or Michigan. You know
what I meant.

nate
From: Brent on 2 Jun 2010 16:20
On 2010-06-02, N8N <njnagel(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2:36�pm, ernest.p.worr...(a)vernal.equinox.edu (T.J. Higgins)
> wrote:
>> "The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual
>> estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer
>> is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in
>> watching for speeders.
>>
>> "The court's 5-1 decision said independent verification of a driver's
>> speed is not necessary."
>>
>> <http://www.wlwt.com/news/23767184/detail.html>
>>
>> No chance for any abuse there, nosireebob...
>
> Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot. Over.
>
> Not that I was planning on visiting Ohio any time soon, but if I do, I
> will make sure to gas up and eat in Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Michigan...
>
> I can tell you from personal experience that an officer's "visual
> estimation of speed" and "pacing" can be off by >10 MPH... (never
> works in the motorist's favor, either)

Neither does their math (especially on the value of siezed goods like
drugs) or their judgement of distance. (A cop called my following
distance best measured in city blocks or fractions of a mile "drafting"
and the cops who call me riding well right of center of the right lane
"the middle of the road").




From: Speeders & Drunk Drivers are DEADLY PSYCHOPATHS on 2 Jun 2010 21:31
On Jun 2, 12:36 pm, ernest.p.worr...(a)vernal.equinox.edu (T.J. Higgins)
wrote:
> "The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual
> estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer
> is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in
> watching for speeders.
>
> "The court's 5-1 decision said independent verification of a driver's
> speed is not necessary."
>
> <http://www.wlwt.com/news/23767184/detail.html>
>
> No chance for any abuse there, nosireebob...
>

Sure, there's a chance for abuse but that applies to everything. It's
easy to tell when a nut like you is doing 60 in a school zone.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: California State Route 154 video (NEW!)
Next: Three more questions added to WWTL Trivia