Just got this from a buddy in Cleveland. Be careful driving through Ohio.
Feff
By: Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
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 says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
Feff
Officer Estimates Enough For Speeding Convictions
By: Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
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 says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
Evolving Member
Quote:
Feff
By: Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
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 says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
Originally Posted by Feffman
Just got this from a buddy in Cleveland. Be careful driving through Ohio.Feff
Officer Estimates Enough For Speeding Convictions
By: Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
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 says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
All I can say is WoW...... THis state is a trip... Always wanting more money buy putting levy's on the ballet every 6 months. Over taxing people but still always "falling short" on their budgets and adding more levy's. Have a lottery with megamillions and powerball but still alway broke. Tax you if your a few days late paying your registration, and now this???? TIME TO MOVE....
Evolving Member
Quote:
Feff
By: Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
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 says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
Originally Posted by Feffman
Just got this from a buddy in Cleveland. Be careful driving through Ohio.Feff
Officer Estimates Enough For Speeding Convictions
By: Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
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 says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? So I'm never going to Ohio again now. Yall aint getting my money!
Evolved Member
Your guilty once the cop sees you. Judge, jury and executioner all in one small power hungry package.
Evolved Member
Oh wow! I hate to hear this because they (cops) Will be sure to abuse this power inorder to generate revenue
WTF??????
WTF??????
Newbie
i drove through ohio and was scared ****less of the amounts of police on there highway systems.. so this doesnt surprise me one bit..
Newbie
This is unconstitutional. There needs to be some kind of measurement. Even if its something besides a radar gun, the naked eye cannot just make these conclusions.
Like someone said "innocent until proven guilty" well, there is no proof... so, um, yeah.
Like someone said "innocent until proven guilty" well, there is no proof... so, um, yeah.