You are on page 1of 12

7 Simple Steps from a Cop on How to Fight Every Speeding Ticket

and Win
Do you want to discover the secrets on how to beat your speeding ticket in court?

25% of all Speeding Tickets Are Issued in Error!

It is estimated that in 2014 that there were over 41,000,000 speeding tickets issued in the USA
and that over 25% of these were issued in error.

The most common errors include shadowing, RFI inference, cosine angle error, mechanical
interference and devices that are out of calibration.

But out of these 41,000,000 speeding tickets only 5% challenged their citation in court.

And out of this 5% less than .05% beat their ticket or have it dismissed.

Why? Because they were not prepared!

The radar gun or lidar gun the police officer used to issue you your speeding ticket is a scientific
instrument and because of this the officer must be certified and by law, must follow certain

So if youre planning on fighting your ticket in court, we put together this guide to help
disqualify the officers testimony and his/her equipment, so you have a better chance of winning
your case.

Prepare Yourself Before You Ever Get Stopped

Before, during, and right after the stop are the most critical times to prepare your defense if you
plan on fighting your speeding ticket.


Because of this, its CRITICAL that you remember EVERYTHING that is happening around you
and document it:

What was the traffic flow like

What signs are on the roadway

The condition of the roadway

Other witnesses

What is the weather like

As youre doing this, look for a safe place to pull over for you and the police officer.

If youre on the highway in busy traffic, put your flashers on, pull over to the right and consider
exiting at the first exit.

The Approach

Once youre pulled over and stopped STAY IN YOUR CAR!

Many police officer shootings occur as the officer is approaching a violator. Because of this,
his/her stress levels are high, and he/she is watching everything you and the occupants of the car
are doing.


Reach into the glove box

Reach under your seat


Keep your hands in plain sight

Your only job at this point is to reduce the officers stress level as much as possible.

The California Stop

One strategy to reduce the officers stress level is called the California Stop.

As the officer is exiting his car, roll down the drivers side window.

If it is at night, turn on your interior lights

Then place your hands on the top of your steering wheel palms up, facing your face.

Doing this, the officer can immediately see that youre not an immediate threat, and his stress
level is reduced.

License, Registration, Insurance Card, any Weapons?

Now that the officer is standing next to your car one of the first things he is going to ask you is
for your license, registration, insurance card and if you have any weapons in your possession.

If you do have any weapons, tell him where they are and follow his/her instructions and
hopefully youre properly licensed to possess them.

Do You Know Why I Stopped You?

Remember, everything you say or do will be documented by the officer so dont admit
anything, especially that you were not paying attention.

Just say no officer, can you explain to me why you stopped me?

Obey the Officers Requests

After the officer obtains the required documentation he may ask you to step out of your car or to
remain in your car, just follow his commands.

Can I See Your Radar/Laser Gun?

If the officer says that he used a radar or laser gun, seem curious and ask the officer if you can
see it and if he would be willing to explain to you how it works.

If the officer does allow you to see it, take a mental picture of the device, getting the
manufacturers name and model number.

If he refuses to show you the gun, then just ask him if he could explain to you how it works.

The Citation

As some point, the officer is going to either have you sign the citation or just hand you a copy.

While he is still with you, review the citation to see if he documented the type of device he used
to measure your speed.

If he didnt ask him/her to put on the citation the type of device he/she used.


Remember everything you do or say is being documented and possibly even being recorded
by the officer.

Its your job to do the same!

After the Stop

After the stop, find a safe place to pull over and write down EVERYTHING that happened. Then
return to the area and snap photos of the area with a camera or your smartphone.

Get Ready for Your Case

Next its your job to get ready for your trial.

Step #1 Know What the Officer Shot You With

To properly prepare your case, you first need to know what type of device the officer used to
clock your speed.


Police radar guns transmit microwave radio signals, and it this type of enforcement that accounts
for most speeding citations.

Police lidar guns transmit a narrow beam of light in the near inferred light spectrum and they
account for 20% of all traffic citations.

Other ways an officer can clock your speed are using a timing device such as a stopwatch or
VASCAR, or following behind you clocking your speed using their speedometer.

Because of this, you need to know EXACTLY what the officer used to measure your speed.

Many jurisdictions will note on the citation what type of device was used and even the devices
serial number.

If this is not documented on your citation, then you may need to follow-up with a friendly
telephone call to the agency or officer that issued you the citation and inquire.

Step #2 Start by Downloading These Free NHTSA Guides

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is responsible for developing training
programs responsive to the Uniform National Standards established by the Highway Safety Act
of 1996.

Because of this, the NHTSA has published guidelines both police agencies and officers MUST
follow when operating radar or laser.

As we will be referencing several portions of each of these guides in this article to help you build
your case, we would recommend googling these titles and download these free PDFs now:
Speed-Measuring Device Performance Specification: Across-the-Road Radar Module

Lidar Speed Measuring Device Performance Specifications

Police Radar Instructor Training Course

Basic Training Program in Radar Speed Measurement

Step #3 Have an Understanding of Case Law

Case Law Regarding the Use of Police Radar

If you were cited by an officer who used a police radar gun, your next step is to have a
understanding of these most significant case laws pertaining to the use of radar in speed

State of Florida v. Aquilera (1979)

This infamous case is known widely as the Miami Radar Trial. After a local television reporter
showed a house clocked at 28 mph and a palm tree clocked at 86 mph, the story broke
nationwide and radar was quickly shown to be less than accurate. In this case the Dade County
Court sustained a motion to suppress the results of radar units in 80 speeding ticket cases.

The courts opinion stated that the reliability of radar speed measuring devices as used in their
present modes and particularly in some cases, has not been established beyond and to the
exclusion of every reasonable doubt, nor has it met the test of reasonable scientific certainty.
United States v. Fields (1982)

District Court in Ohio ruled that it was not possible to establish from the radar results whether
the defendant was traveling at 43 mph or whether the Speedgun 8 radar unit was measuring the
rotation of the ventilation fan at the sewage pumping station next to the officers car.

The court also found that the officer was not qualified to operate the radar unit since he did not
know the requirements for correct operation of the unit. In addition, the officer did not calibrate
it before use, on that occasion.

Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Honeycutt (1966)

This case is a very common prosecution weapon against the 24 hours of classroom and 16 hours
of field training requirement. In this case the court ruled that an officer should not be required to
know the scientific principles of radar.

The court also ruled that the officer only needs to know how to properly set up, test and read the
radar unit. As such, a few hours of instruction should be enough to qualify an officer to operate
the radar unit.
State of Connecticut v. Tomanelli (1966)

In the case, which is the same year as the Honeycutt case, the Supreme Court of Connecticut
ruled that outside influences may affect the accuracy of the recording by a police radar set
sufficient to raise a doubt as to the reliability of the speed recorded.

The court also stated that tuning forks must be proved to be accurate to be accepted as valid tests
of a radar unit. In order to establish the accuracy of the radar unit the operator must testify to the

1. That he made tuning fork tests before and after the defendants speed was recorded.

2. That the tests were made by activating 40, 60 and 80 mph tuning forks and by observing
that the unit responded correctly in each case.

State of Minnesota v. Gerdes (1971)

The Supreme Court of Minnesota ruled that where the only means of testing the accuracy of a
radar unit is an internal mechanism within the unit, and there is no other evidence of the
motorists speed other than the radar reading, the conviction cannot be sustained.

The court also established the following conditions for proving the accuracy of the radar unit:

1. The officer must have adequate training and experience in the operation of the radar unit.

2. The officer must testify as to how the unit was set up and the conditions the unit was
operated under.

3. it must be proven that the unit was operated with a minimum possibility of distortion
from external interference.

4. The unit has to be tested with an external source, such as a tuning fork or an actual test
run with another vehicle with an accurately calibrated speedometer.

People of New York v. Perlman (1977)

The Suffolk County District Court ruled that the radar device was not proved to be accurate since
no external test had been performed before or after the arrest. This case is significant since it
established the criteria of testing before and after a citation is issued.

State of Wisconsin v. Hanson (1978)

In this landmark case, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin set minimum conditions for the use of
radar as evidence. Sufficient evidence to support a speeding conviction with moving radar will
require testimony by a competent operating officer that:
1. He had adequate training and experience in radar operation

2. The radar unit was in proper working condition at the time of the arrest

3. The radar unit was used in an area where there was a minimum possibility of distortion

4. The input speed of the officers car was verified; the cars speedometer was expertly
tested within a reasonable period after the citation was issued

5. All testing was done without the radar units own internal calibration device being used

State of Florida v. Allweiss (1980)

The Pinellas County Court ruled that the testing methods for radar equipment are legally
insufficient. The use of such a tuning fork furnished by the manufacturer in this courts opinion
is tantamount to allowing the machine to test itself.

A tuning fork furnished by the manufacturer is merely an extension and part of the total speed
measuring apparatus.

Case Law Regarding the Use of Police Lidar

If an officer used a police lidar gun to cite you, then your next step is to have a basic
understanding of these most significant case laws that pertain to the use of lidar in speed

Admissibility of Motor Vehicle Speed Readings

714 A.2d 381, 391-92 (New Jersey Superior Court 1998)

The Superior Court of New Jersey ordered that admissibility to lidar is subject to the following

1. Expert testimony is not required.

2. Officers must be properly trained in the use of lidar and that training must be

3. The lidar must be tested according to procedures recommended by the manufacturer.

4. The court further ordered that the lidar be tested against a known speed.

5. Speed reading obtained by lidar are not affected by temperature, the degree of ambient
light, or light to moderate rain. Readings shall not be accepted during heavy rainfall or
while snow is falling.
6. Speed reading made at distances up to 1,000 feet are admissible. Readings obtained in
excess of 1,000 feet shall be admitted only with supporting evidence and expert

State of Hawaii v Abiye Assay

Once an officer has completed a course of instruction and certified to operate lidar training is
not done. Officers must understand (memorize) 11.2 Principles of Operation.

For example, during the known-distance test officers must testify that the lidar uses proven time-
distance formulas (pulse principle) and the speed of light (universal constant) to determine the
known distance. Since the lidar utilizes one microprocessor to calculate time-of-flight and thus
confirms the correct pulse repetition frequency, the lidar can accurately determine speed.

Then officers must obtain, read, and understand the manufacturers operators manual (10.7
Certification) for the particular lidar used and follow the manufacturer-recommended procedures
for testing. Officers must further test the lidar as outlined in 11.16 Testing the LIDAR:

Known Speed Test. All lidars must include a Technician Certification (10.7 & 11.16) every 3
years in accordance with manufactures specifications and NHTSA standards. (Note: New lidars
come with a Technician Certification from the factory.)

Officers must successfully complete Visual Speed Estimations, Enclosure 13.2 and be prepared
to present this information in a court of law. During operation officers must understand and
follow a proper tracking history (11.4 Lidar Tracking History) and be prepared to testify as to
visual observations and speed estimates prior to clocking with lidar.

Officers must understand all lidar effects (11.5Lidar Effects), including proper operation to avoid
any of these effects. Officer must be currently certified (10.7 Certification) to operate radar/lidar.
Finally, the officer must prepare all court cases as outlined in this manual. (10.8 Court
Testimony, 10.9 Traffic Evidence Kit)

Step #4 Get the Manufactures Manuals

Next you will want to obtain the manuals from the manufacturer for the speed measurement
device used by the officer.


Sometimes a simple search on Google can locate these.

If not, you then may have to contact the manufacturer to purchase a copy and/or subpoena the
manual through the courts from the police agency.

Take special note what the manufacturers recommendations are as far as:


Use and Care of

Any training and certification that may be required

Recommended record keeping

Tuning fork care of the device and recommendations

Step #5 Subpoena Records


Next, you will want to contact the court to find out the procedures in obtaining the following
records from the police agency through a subpoena:

Officers training records

Officers disciplinary reports

Radar/Laser device maintenance records

Tuning fork calibration records (radar)

Officers certification records for the device

Annual calibration records for the device

Daily calibration records for the device

Step #6 POST Records

All states have what is called Police Officer Standard Training (POST) regarding the certification
and use of speed measurement devices.

Contact your state agency and request copies of these.

Step #7 Preparing Your Defense

Now that you have all the information you need, its time to go through all these manuals,
training records, and training guides to discredit the officer and the equipment he/she used to
issue you your citation.

Here are some examples:

Was the Officer Properly Trained/Certified to Use the Equipment?

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and case law requires that the officer issuing
you the citation be properly trained and certified for the device he/she used to issue you your

Once you receive his training records, check this, along with the operator manual for that
particular radar/lidar gun to see if any updated training was required.

Was the Radar/Lidar Device Operated Properly?

One example we assisted in preparing a defense on was regarding an officer who targeted
vehicles with his laser gun, aiming at their reflection in his side view mirror.

During the questioning of the officer, the defendant asked in what training guide and/or manual
could the officer reference that this type of targeting was approved.

Because the officer could not provide this information, the case was dismissed.

When Was the Radar/Laser Gun Last Certified?

In 2004, a reporter from the Hartford Courant newspaper contacted us regarding a speeding
ticket she received and asked for some tips.

The first thing I asked her to do was to check the calibration certification records on the radar
gun the officer used to issue her the citation.

A few days later she called us back and related that the last certification was done over 4 years

Did the Officer Properly Calibrate the Radar/Lidar Gun?

It is required that the officer perform a calibration check prior to and after issuing any citations
during his/her shift as outlined in the manual for that particular make/model.

However, we have found that even if the officer may have performed this calibration test, they
never documented it. This is how you can impeach an officer regarding his/her test.

One of the first things a police recruit is ever taught in training is to document EVERYTHING.
Thus, this calibration test should be documented by the officer either on the citation that was
issued, in his personal notebook, on the logbook, or on the units calibration records.

Did the Officer Use the Correct Tuning Fork(s)?

Each tuning fork used for calibration is designed for a particular make/model of radar and/or
laser gun and is serialized.
Check this serial number against the calibration records for that particular unit while also noting
the last date of the calibration of the tuning fork(s).

Are There Any Cracks or Chips in the Tuning Fork?

A strategy we have shared with clients is to subpoena the tuning fork(s) used during the
calibration and check them prior to the trial.

Because tuning forks are made from a light aluminum alloy, if dropped, small chips and/or
cracks may form, which will impact the accuracy of the tuning fork.

If these chips and/or cracks are observed, then while the officer is on the stand, introduce these
tuning forks into evidence asking if these were the ones used to calibrate the gun.

Once he/she does confirm this you can then introduce into evidence the facts on how this could
impact the officers calibration test.

Was There a Shadow Error?

A Shadow Error occurs when the moving radars Low Doppler incorrectly locks onto a large
metal object like an 18 wheeler in front of the patrol car and adds the speed differential to the
opposite lane target vehicles speed.

Was There a VSS Error?

Low Doppler is used to determine the patrol vehicles speed. Shadowing has and is being
eliminated by interfacing the police radar gun into the vehicles speed sensor. This is known as
VSS or Vehicle Speed Sensor interface.

Now that the patrol cars speed is obtained by the vehicles own speed sensor, the low Doppler
signal from the police radar gun can be compared and accuracy is increased.

Was There a Cosine Error?

Cosine error is standard with both radar and laser guns. The greater the transmission angles of
the gun to the target vehicle, the greater the error.

Who does the error favor?

Well if it was a stationary radar gun or a laser gun, the error is in YOUR FAVOR!

An example would be a stationary speed radar/lidar gun transmitting at a 10 degree angle from
the approaching target vehicle. The target vehicles actual speed is 60 mph, but the radar gun
shows 59 mph.

However, if it is a moving radar, the consign angle could put you at a disadvantage.

Moving radar was developed so an officer could measure your speed while he is driving.

To do this, the moving radar has to capture the speed of his vehicle and the speed of your vehicle
and then the internal computer displays both his speed and your speed on the display.

The speeds are computed accurately as long as the officer is within a ten-degree angle as you

However, if your vehicle is at a greater angle than this, its anyones guess who has the edge.

Was the Officers Heater or Air Conditioner On?

In 2004, the Pennsylvania State Police purchased hundreds of new radar guns.

They were clocking rocks at 70 mph.

This is an example of mechanical interference as the police cars heater/air conditioner fan was
producing the erroneous speed-reading.

The fact remains; radar and laser guns still make mistakes.

If you successfully apply all the information in this article, you should have a very good chance
of beating your next speeding ticket.

Need More Help and/or Advice From Radar Roy?

Since 1997 Radar Roy has helped thousands of people just like you beat their speeding tickets in
court through his helpful guides and resources found on his website

In 1995, Radar Roy retired at the rank of Lieutenant from the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office
and then went on to teach you how to fight the system.