# Clocking a cars Speed



## Guest

I have a few questions on clocking a cars speed. This si in reference to a citation that has only Estimated, and clocked checked. NO radar was in use.

What is the procedure that must be followed when clocking a cars speed:
* What is the minimum distance that the car must be followed?
* I assume that this must be a steady/constant speed over this distance, correct?

Are there any other considerations when this is being done, such as other vehicles between the officers car, and the car being clocked?

Is there a specific MGL that defines this procedure?

Thanks


----------



## USMCTrooper

Estimated is a form of speed detrmination.
Clocked is a form of speed determination.
Therefore your speed was determined twice.

Under what Ch & Sec you were cited?


----------



## Clouseau

There are probably a few web sites that give advice on beating speeding tickets.
This is not one of them.


----------



## Guest

Clouseau said:


> There are probably a few web sites that give advice on beating speeding tickets.
> This is not one of them.


I am not looking at beating the ticket (already found responsible), but better understaning the procedure behind the clocking.

cited under 90/17.

My main question is to understand what distance is required for Clocked speed?

thanks


----------



## Guest

It is a simple question that I have asked.. What is the distance?

It has nothing to do with "not worrying about it". Its to better understand things.


----------



## Officer Dunngeon

Do you need to understand it better in order to not make the same mistake again? If you don't get the answer to your question, might your defense be next time that because you don't know the allocated distance from your vehicle to the officer's that you couldn't possibly be held responsible for speeding because you don't understand how it "works"?

Why didn't you seek out your answers in court while you were there (I'm assuming that you appealed the citation because you said you were "found" responsible)?


----------



## Guest

Most of the better radar systems (especially lidar) can clock a vehicle as far as the eye can basically see. I have used my lidar well over a mile out.


----------



## CJIS

I don't belive there has to be a set distance. Clocking works like this: I clock you by using fixed objects on the side of the road such as telephone poles. (usually 100ft apart) In theory when I am behind you in my cruiser I count the amount of time it takes me to pass a poll you had just passed. My goal it to make my passing time of poles consistent so that I can match your speed. Once this is done All I have to do is look down at my speedometer and I got ya.

Clocking is simular to the rule you are supposed to use when distaining yourself from another vehicle so you do not tailgate and you have enough stopping distance.
Confused?


----------



## Guest

Unregistered said:


> Most of the better radar systems (especially lidar) can clock a vehicle as far as the eye can basically see. I have used my lidar well over a mile out.


This was not radar that was used, but ths officer following behind me. I realized that I was not well prepaired, and the hole I had was in this area.

Situation:

He entered the highway as I passed going with traffic, I seen him enter. After about 2 miles caught up to me, and and was 3 cars behind me. Medium traffic.

Clocked me on a section of road that is .28 miles long, including the off ramp where ths citation was issued. He was 3 cars behind me while he was doing this, then pulled in the right lane with me as I exited the highway.

I do not see how he could have gotten an accurate speed in less than .25 mies given these conditions. What is worst is, I seen him enter the highway.

So again, my question is, how long does a car need to be followed as far as procedure?


----------



## Guest

[Nope not confused at all.. That makes complete sense. The key is to count enough polls to ensure that you are accurate... and take care of any errors.
so there is a distance, or number of polls that must be counted??


----------



## CJIS

Unregistered said:


> This was not radar that was used, but ths officer following behind me. I realized that I was not well prepaired, and the hole I had was in this area.
> 
> Situation:
> 
> He entered the highway as I passed going with traffic, I seen him enter. After about 2 miles caught up to me, and and was 3 cars behind me. Medium traffic.
> 
> Clocked me on a section of road that is .28 miles long, including the off ramp where ths citation was issued. He was 3 cars behind me while he was doing this, then pulled in the right lane with me as I exited the highway.
> 
> I do not see how he could have gotten an accurate speed in less than .25 mies given these conditions. What is worst is, I seen him enter the highway.
> 
> So again, my question is, how long does a car need to be followed as far as procedure?


Like I said before I don't belive there is a distance, there is no "how long does a car need to be followed" When If I am the officer and I feel that I have successfully clocked you thats it. It could take me 1 mile to do it, it could take me .25 of a mile. It's really not that hard to do if you do it right.


----------



## Guest

Forget about poles, trees, distance etc.

If you accelerate to 56 mph in a 55 mph zone... You have technically exceeded the speed limit... Whether for one foot, or one mile. In Mass, you can be issued a citation based on the officers estimation {Even if he was standing on the side of the road without radar}.

As said before, you were clocked and estimated. 
That's why it is silly to not slow down to the limit when you see a cruiser.


----------



## phuzz01

I am not required to clock you for any specific distance. It depends on the circumstances. If I clock you for a distance of 100 ft at 80mph in a 50mph zone, that would clearly be sufficient to prove that you were exceeding the speed limit. This is because an error of a few mph in either direction would not make much difference at that speed. On the other hand, if I clocked you for a distance of 100 ft at 55mph in a 50mph, that would probably not be sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were exceeding the speed limit. In that case, an error of a few mph might put you at or below the speed limit. Get it?


As others have indicated, officers with proper training and experience can get speeding convictions based on nothing else than their estimate or your speed at any given time. As I mentioned above, it depends on the circumstances.


----------



## popo

Get lost and STFU.


----------



## Officer Dunngeon

Please see my latest poll. Thanks for playing.


----------



## Guest

You hit it right on the nose. The margin of error grows as the difference in speed is small. Clocking and estimating a cars speed of 61 versus 55 is very difficult to do unluss you are right behind it maintaining a constant distance/speed. Doing the poll counting method, just being off by 1 second at low speeds can be a big difference.

I should have stated at the begining that the violation was for 6 MHP over the limit of at a posted speed of 55. Thus, approx 10% over the limit, and if I was only clocked for a distance .5 miles the margine of error could be huge. 

Hopefully there will never be a next time, but if so I will get the speedometer calibration logs.


----------



## Guest

Unregistered said:


> You hit it right on the nose. The margin of error grows as the difference in speed is small. Clocking and estimating a cars speed of 61 versus 55 is very difficult to do unluss you are right behind it maintaining a constant distance/speed. Doing the poll counting method, just being off by 1 second at low speeds can be a big difference.
> 
> I should have stated at the begining that the violation was for 6 MHP over the limit of at a posted speed of 55. Thus, approx 10% over the limit, and if I was only clocked for a distance .5 miles the margine of error could be huge.
> 
> Hopefully there will never be a next time, but if so I will get the speedometer calibration logs.


Nobody counts ploes.


----------



## Guest

Unregistered said:


> Nobody counts ploes.


That's poles..sorry.


----------



## Guest

FYI: one of the respondants above did state that "they will count the time between polls" for both their car and the car being followed to ensure that their vehicle is traveling at the same speed as the car that is being clocked.


----------



## Officer Dunngeon

I like ploes better.


----------



## Guest

Unregistered said:


> FYI: one of the respondants above did state that "they will count the time between polls" for both their car and the car being followed to ensure that their vehicle is traveling at the same speed as the car that is being clocked.


If the officer is a few car lengths behind you, how will he know when the front of your car reaches the second pole?

Was he above you in a helicopter with a stopwatch?


----------



## Clouseau

Unregistered said:


> FYI"they will count the time between polls" for both their car and the car being followed .


What if they are not holding elections?

FYI, in the city we use fire hydrants.


----------



## Guest

Unregistered said:


> If the officer is a few car lengths behind you, how will he know when the front of your car reaches the second pole?
> 
> Was he above you in a helicopter with a stopwatch?


in a car 2 cars behind me.


----------



## JoninNH

Speedo-meter? What difference does it make what kind of outfit he was wearing?

You talk about a next time? So you plan to break the law again?

There's a special way to beat all of this, but you have to promise never to tell anyone who's not a law enforcement officer, because, if every driver did this there would never be another speeding ticket written... :-$ You promise not to tell?




You promise?





DON'T EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT!!!


----------



## Guest

There is an assumption made, that I was breaking the law. I feel that I was doing 55, especially knowing he was behind me.. and be honest, for a .25 mile distance, being off by 6 MPH between 2 cars, 10% is easy, between speedometer error, clocking error, etc...... but then it was my word against his.. Oh well, thats life!!!

And no I do not expect to break the law.. again, but then I do not feel I did this time either!!


----------



## futureMSP

I find it amusing that defendants want the police to bring in all these certifications, calibration forms, etc. Then although all these papers may be correct and in order, now the power lines on the utility poles on the side of the road caused an erroneous reading. If there were no poles (I work in Vermont); maybe there was a plane flying low that no one saw that caused an erroneous reading. If that didn't happen it was the poltergeist running across the road and the officer/trooper didn't see him. Or maybe it was the invisible car that no one saw but the defendant did and that was the vehicle that I have the speed for. Thank goodness the judges who hear tickets in VT explain very clearly that if the radar passed the test at the beginning at the shift and the end of the shift and I am certified to use it the State has taken judicial notice it is accurate. I have had so many people fight the ticket because their brother's friend said it is inaccurate. The only way the radar accuracy can be fought is if you are a recognized expert witness in the arena.

I think everybody has explained how clocking works in this thread, 100 ft or 50 miles of distance, regardless, the officer/trooper says you are speeding, guess what...you are. Tough; leave earlier, plan ahead, take responsibility for speeding, whatever. 56 in a 55 is speeding. I see plenty of drivers who don't speed; and they aren't the boneheads asking "how does this work? what are the requirements for this?" They don't have to go to court to whine and complain that the officer/trooper is being mean and picking on them.

Check the box, enclose the check, seal the envelope, and grow up and become responsible.

Cars have speedometers to gauge your speed; try matching the numbers on it to the numbers to the signs that say SPEED LIMIT...believe me it is not very hard.

:sb: I am off the box now...


----------



## texdep

A good number of years ago (about 20)the district court in my area gave guidance to the departments served that when clocking a vehicle it should be at least 1/8 mi in a built up area and for at least 1/4 mile in rural areas and in no case longer than 3/4 mile. 


My belief that these distances reflected the views of the then sitting Clerk Magistrate and Judges of that court..


----------



## Guest

wow talk about an attitude.. 
The point of this email was lost way long ago and it was a simple basic question.. it had nothing to do with intent on speeding (stated I was not speeding), nothing with not paying a ticket (stated found responsible, so paying is a fact), it was a basic question on procedure. Not like its rocket science, otherwise we would have many more rocket sciectists.

no wonder why some people have a notion of license for "arrogance"


----------



## Guest

texdep said:


> A good number of years ago (about 20)the district court in my area gave guidance to the departments served that when clocking a vehicle it should be at least 1/8 mi in a built up area and for at least 1/4 mile in rural areas and in no case longer than 3/4 mile.
> 
> My belief that these distances reflected the views of the then sitting Clerk Magistrate and Judges of that court..


Thank you good guidance.. that is what i was looking for


----------



## texdep

A few observations on this thread.

Gil set up a section on this board where john q public could ask questions and even called it "ask a cop". 

So we have this individual ,who in respectful manner, asked essentially what is the procedure for "clocking a vehicle's speed"?

What was so hard about simply answering.

Why was the response basically "STFU and pay your ticket"

If anyone had legitimately answered with the proper procedure for clocking this poster would have realized its a valid method and that he was speeding, and if he then became a jerk rather then saying thank you we, could have flamed him.

But, instead we started off treating the poster like sh*t and and then told him he was a jerk for complaining about it.

My question now is why? Is it because this is the way you wish you could act but don't or do you really treat the public that way???


----------



## texdep

A Three part response:

A simple search in the MGL's yielded the "definition of speeding" in posted and unposted areas! - not the procedure for clocking a vehicles speed.

If you're telling me that there is any clerk magistrate or judge in the commonwealth who is going to respond to a defendant, "Well, if you got this from Masscops.com I find you not guilty!", then even though I have enjoyed this site for the past 2 1/2 years, I now have a much higher level of respect for it.

And finally, my question still hasn't been answered. do you treat the public like this every day on the job or only here when hiding behind your screen names.

In my ticket writing days I found that a clerk's or judge's ruling of guilty/not guilty or responsible/not responsible had more to do with the mood the clerk/judge was in that day than any statements made by the defendant and regardless of the ruling my paycheck was the same size on Wednesday. So why get so wound up over speeding tickets when there's so much more serious stuff to put that energy into, and there's a chance we can have what is usually the public's first police experience end up without one more enemy for us.


----------



## Clouseau

texdep said:


> And finally, my question still hasn't been answered. do you treat the public like this every day on the job or only here when hiding behind your screen names.
> .


Yes...every day and person.

If someone passes a marked unit, _knows_ they are speeding , figures they won't be stopped because everyone else is doing it, then approaches me in person on the street for info on how to beat it...you bet.


----------



## Officer Dunngeon

Unregistered said:


> The point of this email


This isn't an e-mail, it's a message board and you're posting on it... just to clarify that for you.



Unregistered said:


> (stated I was not speeding)
> 
> (stated found responsible, so paying is a fact)


You also already stated that you were "unprepared" when you spotted the police cruiser, so now you're changing your original story from where you first admitted that you screwed up. You were found guilty because you WERE guilty.

Again, I think you should have asked this question in court. You asking police officers to tell you that one of their own was somehow procedurally incorrect is like walking into the Republican National Convention and announcing to the delegates that George W. doesn't know how to do his job and then asking for advice on the best way to overthrow the administration.

I hope that explains any perceived attitude problems.


----------



## Guest

texdep said:


> A few observations on this thread.
> 
> Gil set up a section on this board where john q public could ask questions and even called it "ask a cop".
> 
> So we have this individual ,who in respectful manner, asked essentially what is the procedure for "clocking a vehicle's speed"?
> 
> What was so hard about simply answering.
> 
> Why was the response basically "STFU and pay your ticket"
> 
> If anyone had legitimately answered with the proper procedure for clocking this poster would have realized its a valid method and that he was speeding, and if he then became a jerk rather then saying thank you we, could have flamed him.
> 
> But, instead we started off treating the poster like sh*t and and then told him he was a jerk for complaining about it.
> 
> My question now is why? Is it because this is the way you wish you could act but don't or do you really treat the public that way???


Thank you for your response. When I did ask my question, It was just to understand the procedure, and "Ask a cop" section did seem like the correct place to educate myself. You were also correct that I was not trying to beat it, since I stated that I already lost. It's funny the you mentioned the 'Ask a cop section" section was created to ask questions, since on my way home last night I was thinking about this, and trying to figure out what I did wrong. I even reviewed every posting that I made to ensure that I did not make any attacks, and was completely professional and even many times ended my posting with thank you. I will also comment, if you do review my postings, I never changed my story from the start.

Well, I do want to thank those "few" individuals that did provide some valid information, without the bashing.

Have a great holiday (so see, not all people that are "found at fault" have a grudge, or are jerks)


----------



## MVS

unregistered,

Should there be a set distance for clocking? Why? If I'm behind you and maintain an even pace behind you even if it is 1 mile or 50 ft, and I see my spedometer reads 55, then you're speeding. But like someone else said, I could be standing on the side of the road drinking a coffee (no radar) and watch you go by and estimate your speed and cite you for speeding. 

You have an issue with the fact that the Officer only followed you for less than .25 mile, and there were other cars in between. Well if that were me following you, I could easily note that I was travelling at 45 mph and I could see you were going faster than the vehicles behind you, and it doesn't take much to estimate how much faster you are travelling. .25 mile is quite alot of distance to clock speed. Mine usaully last less than 1/10. 

It pretty simple really. When Police Officers have been doing speed enforcement for so long, we become "pro's" at being able to estimate how fast a car is travelling. Just like when a mechanic looks at a bolt and knows the exact wrench size he needs. It becomes natural.


----------



## Pvt. Cowboy

Chuck Norris can estimate the speed of airplanes, nevermind cars.

http://www.masscops.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9436


----------



## texdep

I most likely shouldn't keep this going but, I'm bored today soooo what the heck!

I really wonder if anyone here actually knows how to "clock" speed or what 3 methods are actually referred to as "clocked" because noone has described it here yet. (before you disagree really read the posts that purport to describe clocking and not what you think they say)

Also, the part that is also funny, to me at least, is clocking if done properly and testified to properly is the hardest to beat particularly at a jury trial.

Unlike "estimated" you don't need to be experienced and that can of worms doesn't open up.

Unlike "radar" it doesn't involve that little black box that everybody loves to hate.

Clocking involves simple stuff, depending on which of the three methods, a landmark like a pole or tree, a measured distance, the second hand on a watch and/or a speedometer and direct observation of the violator. All things that the average person can understand, a lawyer or violator can't twist around. The average person isn't mystified and realizes they can clock speed too sooo, if thats what the cop did the violator must have been speeding.

Yes, I know that I haven't yet described how to "clock" a speeder. I'm still curious if anyone else knows how. Heck, someone was able to look up the definition of speeding, maybe someone can look up how to "clock".

(HINT! don't go looking on a cop's forum they'll get ya )


----------



## texdep

RPD931

Just saw your post.....you must have posted while I was typing.

If you had posted about 38 replies ago this thread would have been about only 2 replies long. Where were you???


----------



## dcs2244

Sorry, everyone , I am late to respond to this thread, but here goes:

"unregistered guest" and Texdep:

I do not use radar or lidar. They do not "clock" the speed of a vehicle in the conventional sense, but provide a "snapshot" of the vehicles speed during a specified instant in time. The result is *the speed of the vehicle at that instant in time*.

If one "clocks" (a misnomer: clocking involves a stopwatch and a known distance...more on this later.) a vehicle, the resulting speed is an *average* speed. The average speed is generally lower than the speed measured using an active measuring device such as radar/lidar.

As far as the distance (D) is concerned, an adequate distance is what I decide it is (more on this later).

I use a passive speed measuring system known as VASCAR-plus. I can measure a vehicles speed from a stationary position using a known distance. My favorite lair had a measured distance of 0.0326 mile: *ALL *the citations for speed I wrote at this location resulted in a finding of *responsible. *The distance was dialed into the VASCAR unit: I then clocked (measured the time of) the offending vehicle as it passed my landmarks:

Speed = Distance (D) *divided by *Time (T)

The calculation resulted in an average speed for the offending vehicle.

VASCAR also allows the operator to measure speeds while moving. I can determine your speed as you approach the cruiser from behind, or as you pull away from the cruiser, or as you approach the cruiser from the opposite direction. Also the longer the distance, the greater the accuracy of the speed measurement. I clocked a rice rocket approaching me from behind on the Turnpike for a distance greater than 5.0 miles. He had an *average *speed of over 105 miles per hour. Found responsible at Palmer DC: what could he say?

Here is the entire process in a nutshell:

The cop estimates your speed, noting the type of car, etc: "Holy sh*t, that guy's moving"!

The cop uses VASCAR to "clock" your average speed.

You are stopped and cited for the infraction.

You appeal the citation and take a day off from work/school/the Dole to appear at court.

You are found responsible by the clerk, who gives you a break: "fifty-dollar-special".

In your self righteous zeal, you demand an appeal!

You take another day off from work/school/the Dole and go to the appeal.

Now the nasty cop who cited you appears and testifies as to the particulars.

You present a litany of excuses and delaying tactics, including but not limited to having the cop present his training/experience, the calibration of the measuring device, etc.

The judge looks at you and says: "I find you responsible, *$250.00 *(or whatever the original fine was)...when can you pay?".

Incensed, you say "But the other guy said *$50.00!!!!!!!*".

The judge says: "Yeah, well I'm not the 'other guy'...when can you pay?".

You pay your fine.

The cop collects 3 or 4 hour minimum OT...which in my case is greater than $58 an hour.:-$

I go and put a tank full of 93 octane in my Cadillac and buy two new shirts and ties for my child who attends the Wilbraham and Monson Academy...or Brown and Nichols.

All thanks to the fact that you and your fellow lemmings are unable to follow instructions.](*,)

I was not looking for you...you behaved in such a way as to bring yourself to my attention. Thank you, and Happy Motoring!:321:

And just for the record, we are not arrogant...we are right!:lol:


----------



## MVS

> The judge says: "Yeah, well I'm not the 'other guy'...when can you pay?".


Sounds like the wonderful Clerk Mag. at Dudley DC :FT:

I gotta see one of those VASCAR units 



texdep said:


> RPD931
> 
> Just saw your post.....you must have posted while I was typing.
> 
> If you had posted about 38 replies ago this thread would have been about only 2 replies long. Where were you???


Sorry, I was a late bloomer. :lol:


----------



## CJIS

CUT THE CRAP!!! This thread is still going :shock:! What the hell else could posibly be said!?!


----------



## MVS

Good point NPD 323. Question answered. Thread Closed.


----------

