DAVID C. MASON
(425) 646-2926
Fax (425) 952-7409
SPEEDING TICKET DEFENSE  WASHINGTON STATEWIDE COVERAGE
CALL US FOR A FREE CONSULTATION 
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
ATTORNEY AT LAW
ATTORNEY AT LAW
WASHINGTON STATE  SPEEDING TICKET 
(425) 462-1100
wbakerjd@comcast.net
dcmlawfirm@hotmail.com
FIGHT YOUR SPEEDING TICKET BY RADAR, LAZER, AIRCRAFT, SPEEDOMETER AND ESTIMATES
2200 112TH AVE NE

SUITE 120

BELLEVUE, WA 98004
THE GOOD NEWS
Is that even though they're a big source of government cash, compared to a criminal traffic case like DUI, the government does relatively little to prepare for a contested ticket hearing. As a result, the success rate for a competent & experienced attorney is astronomically higher than the same attorney facing a serious criminal charge.    
A WASHINGTON SPEEDING TICKET 

Is a lot like letters you get in the mail. Only a few make a lasting impression. But as you might have guessed, traffic tickets still make up a large chunk of income for many cities and states. Unfortunately, most drivers pay these ever increasing fines without ever raising a challenge.

WE ALSO DEFEND DUI AND CRIMINAL TRAFFIC CHARGES
POLICE MEASURE AN AUTOMOBILE'S SPEED
Five basic ways in ascending order of precision: (1) rough estimate, (2) aircraft pace, (3) speedometer lag pace, (4) radar, and (5) lazer. Each of these methods requires specific training and certification, a particular protocol, and some form of proof that any equipment the officer used was in proper working order. Each method also has its own unique pitfalls.    
RAW ESTIMATE
A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF SPEED
Washington case law allows any person who observes a motor vehicle to estimate its speed. A mere observation however should never hold up in court at least not where the final issue is the exact speed like in a contested ticket hearing. Police officers make rough speed estimates all the time but this is usually a preliminary step to using a measuring device or used solely for probable cause to stop a car for further investigation. Even so, a rough estimate should still fail as probable cause unless the officer can demonstrate training, experience and some method in which he has checked the accuracy of his estimation skill. An experienced prosecutor will usually demonstrate this by asking the officer about his experience and whether or not he has checked his estimates against his speedometer or other measuring device.          
AIRCRAFT PACE
Is done more often than you think. It is regularly performed along the I-90 corridor. This method, by its very nature, requires more than one officer. One officer flies above the roadway and looks for vehicles that appear to be speeding. They then spot premarked hash marks along the roadway and clock the car between the two marks. A simple consultation with a math chart then calculates the speed. If the vehicle is speeding, the officer communicates to a car on the ground and the driver is contacted. More often than not, the government fails to provide the required affidavits from the observing officer and without that, the evidence lacks foundation.           
If a driver does not request that a speed measuring device expert appear in court, the government can proceed with a certificate form. This document however, must follow a very specific format and include a number of items.  IRLJ 6.6 
THIS SITE IS CURRRENTLY UNDER CONTRUCTION

PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE FOR A FREE CONSULTATION
We have made this site and provided these materials for informational purposes only. This is not a legal opinion. It is not intended to create nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. No one should act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.
SPEEDOMETER LAG PACE
Is a relatively simple procedure. The officer maintains a constant lag distance behind the car and simply paces the vehicle for a quarter of a mile or so. They then consult their own speedometer and compare that to the posted speed limit. If the officer is travelling at or above the posted limit and the suspect car is pulling ahead, the officer will cite the driver for speeding. This method raises three basic issues. The government must prove the officer's speedometer is accurate. Current regulation requires the speedometer to be certified accurate on a regular basis If properly demanded, the government must produce and deliver this certification in advance to the defense. Next, this method limits the ability to determine the driver's exact speed. The most fail safe method is for the officer to pace with his own vehicle at a fixed number above the speed limit and to simply cite the driver at that speed. Otherwise, even if the vehicle is pulling away, the excess rate is again, nothing more than a rough estimate. Finally, the officer must demonstrate training and experience in this lag pace method.
"Speedometers, like other machines, may get out of order, but where they are tested regularly, they may be relied upon with reasonable certainty. Spokane v. Knight, 96 Wash 403 (1913) 
Josip Belusic, a Croatian, invented the modern speedometer in 1888. Speedometers were originally designed with a bendable cable attached to little gears that were located in the transmission tail shaft. While federal standards allow a maximum error rate of five percent Most law enforcement    standards are lower. 
Police began using radar to monitor traffic speed after significant leaps in the technology developed duing WWII. It was again emphasized when the government began developing the interstate highway system in the fifties and once again during the mid sevenites oil crunch and the implementation of the 55 mph limit
RADAR

Used to be the most common speed detection method but lazer devices are starting to catch up. Radar systems emit and receive electromagnetic waves to measure the speed, distance, or altitude of moving and still objects. Many inventors helped develop the technology that lead to modern radar detection systems incuding Christin Hulsmeyer and Nikola Tesla in the early twentieth century. The modern radar guns are based upon the Doppler principle. In the 1840s, an Austrian physicist named Johann Christian Doppler first developed the hypothesis that the frequency and wavelength of any wave, including sound, will perceive to change when any observer detects that wave as its source is moving toward or away from them. 

Today, the government uses two basic types of radar detections systems, (1) Frequency Modulation and (2) Pulse. Frequency modulation is used in most aircraft, shipping  and military applications and is significantly more accurate. This is because the radar unit is usually in a continuous mode. It also changes the frequency of the returned signal and compares it to the signal it originally transmitted. Pulse technology is used in most traffic applications. It simply transmits a quick radio pulse and calculates the time it takes to bounce off the object and return to the device. Speed is then calculated by emitting a number of signals and calculating the relative change in measurements.             

RADAR GUNS

Are not without their limitations. While a radio wave is fast (186,000 mph), unlike a lazer beam, it is not a single line of energy. The greater distance it travels, the larger the signal spreads and with it, so does its accuracy and power. If a police officer is targetting a busy I-5 corridor, these problems mulitply. For example, at one to two hundred feet, a radar gun beam width will spread over two lanes of traffic. At one-thousand feet, the width approaches three lanes. Because the unit captures everything in its path, larger objects, like semi trucks, are more likely to come up on detection even if a smaller vehicle is closer than that target. Like every other police equipment procedure, the test results are only as accurate as the officer's, training, experience, and operation on that day. Although this is not an exhaustive list, there are a great number of factors and errors that can effect radar results. These include panning, radio or microwave interference, shadowing, mechanical interference, moving cosine error, stationary cosine error, reflection, batching and arm-swing.  

The National Bureau of Standards compiles model performance specifications for all police traffic radar devices. These were developed in conjunction with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. A typical police certification process or "quality assurance test" includes a number of specific procedures including a signal generator test which tests the machine's accuracy against a known speed and an internal calibration check. In addition to following national standards, law enforcement must also perform certifications and maintenance as required by the specific manufacturer.     

EXPERIENCED WASHINGTON SPEEDING TICKET DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND TRAFFIC TICKET COUNSEL 
undefined
undefined
undefined
AND TRAFFIC TICKET DEFENSE ATTORNEY
WILLIAM R. BAKER
The issue
IT'S IRONIC
That even though the succes rate is higher, the legal fees, compared to a criminal charge, are exteremely low. When you consider your court time, insurance rates, and the effect on your driving record, a few hundred dollars is one of the best legal values around.  
THAT ALONE DOESN'T MEAN
That every Tom, Dick and Harry counsel can get you off your ticket. Like everything else, success comes with hard work, talent, and the relevant experience. In most contests, it's good to know a little bit of how the other side thinks. Often times, one of the best ways to understand your opponent is having been them. Years of training with speed measuring devices, spedometer pacing, traffic duty patrols and prosecuting the charge can bring about invaluable perspective.  
The issue here is not the reliability of a scientific principle, but whether the particular machine employing the principle is so designed and constructed that the results produced by the proper operation are reliable. Bellevue v. Lightfoot, 75 Wn. App 214 (1994)
PATROL OFFICER BOB BAKER 1975