# MGL 90-17 v. 90-18 Again



## ssbn04

I think I understand the difference between MGL 90-17 and 90-18, but I am struggling with the practical implementation of the two. I was ticketed for 80 MPH in a 50 MPH zone, and the ticketing officer checked the 90/17 box. At the time, he claimed (and wrote on the citation) that he paced me for 3.4 miles, even though he was in front of me, then slowed down to let me pass, then pulled me over. The stretch of Highway 2, on which we were driving, is clearly posted as a 55 MPH zone. So, it would appear to me that the citation is wrong, both in the actual speed violation, and in the MGL section under which I'm charged. The officer also misspelled the town of residence and the make of car. Lastly, the officer detailed Acton as the violation location, when we were in fact in Littleton. Whereas each of these items alone may not lead to anything, it would seem reasonable that the totality of the mistakes would lead to the ticket being dismissed.


Edit: Clean up HTML
Harry


----------



## Ptlm.Shamrock147

Hee haw says the donkey


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

As my First Sgt used to say " you need to adjust your headspace and timing son"


----------



## ssbn04

Wolfman said:


> Hang on, gotta get my asbestos underwear ready.
> 
> Your were speeding, and now you're trying to weasel your way out of taking responsibility for you selfish disregard for the safety of others by somehow saying it's the officer's fault?
> 
> Am I missing something in the above observation?
> 
> Also, what's with the HTML? Enough trouble with correlating the speed limit sign with your speedometer reading, can't you read post instructions either?


Oh, the other point in this - I was not speeding - I was driving 55 MPH in a 55 MPH zone - and the officer was flat out wrong in his assessment - I simply do not speed, never have, never will. During the stop, the officer demanded, several times, that I identify the driver of the other car - and his parting observation was, "I didn't get your friend, but I got you".


----------



## ssbn04

Wolfman said:


> Also, what's with the HTML? Enough trouble with correlating the speed limit sign with your speedometer reading, can't you read post instructions either?


Actually, I read the posting instructions and, as far as I know, I used straight text with no HTML attributes encoded. If that's not the case, then I apologize. I am curious, however; does your insulting and bad attitude carry forward into all aspects of your life, or is it merely displayed here?


----------



## Ptlm.Shamrock147

I would go to the officers station and ask to speak with him in private. Argue your point, and bring diagrams backing up your case. More than likely if he sees how serious your are, he will rip up the ticket and offer you another chance. Nothing pisses me off more than, when I think a car is speeding, i give the driver a citation, and then I am corrected later that day. You must stand up for your rights. Remember we work for you! You pay taxes!


----------



## kwflatbed

ssbn04 said:


> Actually, I read the posting instructions and, as far as I know, I used straight text with no HTML attributes encoded. If that's not the case, then I apologize. I am curious, however; does your insulting and bad attitude carry forward into all aspects of your life, or is it merely displayed here?


With an attitude like this you will not be around long.
Consider yourself warned


----------



## ssbn04

Ptlm.Shamrock147 said:


> I would go to the officers station and ask to speak with him in private. Argue your point, and bring diagrams backing up your case. More than likely if he sees how serious your are, he will rip up the ticket and offer you another chance. Nothing pisses me off more than, when I think a car is speeding, i give the driver a citation, and then I am corrected later that day. You must stand up for your rights. Remember we work for you! You pay taxes!


Thank you for the advice - it was my understanding that once the ticket is written, the dye is cast and the process has to run its course - thus my actions in looking for a robust defense. I was not aware that an officer could simply rip up a ticket if one could convince him he was mistaken.



kwflatbed said:


> With an attitude like this you will not be around long.
> Consider yourself warned


Warned for calling someone on unnecessary rudeness? So much for this being an open forum.


----------



## bbelichick

ssbn04 said:


> Thank you for the advice - it was my understanding that once the ticket is written, the dye is cast and the process has to run its course - thus my actions in looking for a robust defense. I was not aware that an officer could simply rip up a ticket if one could convince him he was mistaken.


Oh, lord...inch:




> Warned for calling someone on unnecessary rudeness? So much for this being an open forum.


It's not. It's a pro-police forum. Freedom of speech does not apply.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

KABOOM....blown in place!


----------



## SOT

And we are OFF!


----------



## Rock

ssbn04 said:


> I was not speeding - I was driving 55 MPH in a 55 MPH zone - and the officer was flat out wrong in his assessment - I simply do not speed, never have, never will.


THIS OFFICER WAS CLEARLY OUT OF HIS MIND TO STOP YOU! An outrage! Just one thing I don't understand......You said in your first post you were cited for doing 80 mph in a 50. Now you say you were driving EXACTLY 55 in a 55. What precision driving. I'm impressed.

Listen jackass, here's the deal. It's one thing to say, 'hey, I wasn't doing 80, maybe 70'. But by saying you were traveling at 55 mph in a 55 is insulting to the officer and every officer that reads your ridiculous post. Request a hearing and watch the reaction of the magistrate. It should tell all.


----------



## Killjoy

Why, in the name of God, would you presume to go to a police webite, _lie_ about your actions, then expect not only sympathy, but advice on how to get out of a ticket? You want sympathy, call your mother. You want legal advice, hire a lawyer.

I've written thousands of tickets, and I can say that almost no one tells the truth in regards to their speed. I don't ask someone "Do you know how fast you were going?", because I don't know. I know the answer, I just want to hear the person say it.

Appeal the ticket and take your chances..we usually get 4 hours of overtime to go anyways, so you're doing us a favor.


----------



## ssbn04

Rock said:


> THIS OFFICER WAS CLEARLY OUT OF HIS MIND TO STOP YOU! An outrage! Just one thing I don't understand......You said in your first post you were cited for doing 80 mph in a 50. Now you say you were driving EXACTLY 55 in a 55. What precision driving. I'm impressed.
> 
> Listen jackass, here's the deal. It's one thing to say, 'hey, I wasn't doing 80, maybe 70'. But by saying you were traveling at 55 mph in a 55 is insulting to the officer and every officer that reads your ridiculous post. Request a hearing and watch the reaction of the magistrate. It should tell all.


Rock,

I stated that I was cited for 80 in a 50, not that I was traveling at 80 in a 50 - a different matter entirely.

Yes - I was driving at 55 in a 55. The reason I am so sure of that is because, when stopped at the lights on Highway 2, I noticed the partol SUV two cars behind me. The light changed - we passed through the 45 MPH zone and into the 55 MPH zone and I increased speed to that speed. The officer pulled around me, sped up and passed me, moved back to the inside lane in front of me, then dropped back to 50 MPH or there abouts. I came out to pass him at exactly 55 MPH, moved back to the slow lane in front of him and at that time, he pulled me over.

I called the officer's detachment and spoke to the lieutenant in charge and his obervation was "Everyone has a bad day once in a while, and I guess he was yesterday."

Yes, I'll explain it to the magistrate.

You folk sure like thowing aroung terms like Jackass. Based upon the statements here, it would seem that all the law enforcment officers are always correct and a citizen is automatically a liar. As a former naval officer and veteran, I find that position short-sighted and inconsistant with reality.


----------



## tazoez

ssbn04 said:


> Oh, the other point in this - *I was not speeding* - I was driving 55 MPH in a 55 MPH zone - and _the officer was flat out wrong in his assessment _- *I simply do not speed, never have, never will.* During the stop, the officer demanded, several times, that I identify the driver of the other car - and his parting observation was, "I didn't get your friend, but I got you".


<sneeze> BULL$HIT.

Dude, didn't you read the post that says that there are some of us here that are allergic to Bull$hit.

You *CANNOT* in all honesty say that you have never sped while driving. *EVERYONE* speeds at one point or another. Or how about the classic line, "I was only going with the flow of traffic". We'll if you ever said that then guess what, you were more than likely speeding.

Pay up and shut up, it was your time to get caught. Some of us have had tickets before and you don't see us BITCHING about it. We pay for it and move on with our lives and try not to make the same mistake again (which ironically is called being an adult).

For the RED part, Try and use that one in court. See how far it gets you. LIDAR does not make a mistake, the officer can read a big dial with numbers on it (better known as a speedometer), and they are calibrated too. If any one is "flat out wrong in his assessment" then it is you jackass.


----------



## kwflatbed

ssbn04 said:


> You folk sure like thowing aroung terms like Jackass. Based upon the statements here, it would seem that all the law enforcment officers are always correct and a citizen is automatically a liar. As a former naval officer and veteran, I find that position short-sighted and inconsistant with reality.


He is not only an ass on this board,he has made an ass of himself other places !!
Some of his postings:

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/05/07/global-war-part-2.php
Global War:

What a pile of tripe. The MSM has finally woken up to the fact that the American public was sold a bill of goods as justification for the Iraq invasion. A growing Communist China, Fascist-leaning Iran and the stability of the Indian sub-continent are red herrings spouted after the fact by people such as yourself eager to defend the indefensible: The US invaded another sovereign nation for no just reason.

*1*. Posted by ssbn04 | May 7, 2007 8:31 AM

http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/06/friday-jawdropp.html
*Mabey he is not here legal*

Those of us studying for the citizenship exam are having a tough time of it - we learn the answers (three branches of government) - and it changes&#8230;.
Maybe I'll just pay the $5000 and declare myself a legal illegal

Posted by: ssbn04 | Friday, 22 June 2007 at 15:46

SSBN04
Lt. Cmdr. R.N. (Rtd.)

He says he is retired Navy and asks this:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=712370

Want to read more Google Search:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ssbn04&btnG=Google+Search


----------



## ssbn04

kwflatbed said:


> He is not only an ass on this board,he has made an ass of himself other places !!
> Some of his postings:
> 
> http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/05/07/global-war-part-2.php
> Global War:
> 
> What a pile of tripe. The MSM has finally woken up to the fact that the American public was sold a bill of goods as justification for the Iraq invasion. A growing Communist China, Fascist-leaning Iran and the stability of the Indian sub-continent are red herrings spouted after the fact by people such as yourself eager to defend the indefensible: The US invaded another sovereign nation for no just reason.
> 
> *1*. Posted by ssbn04 | May 7, 2007 8:31 AM
> 
> http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/06/friday-jawdropp.html
> *Mabey he is not here legal*
> 
> Those of us studying for the citizenship exam are having a tough time of it - we learn the answers (three branches of government) - and it changes&#8230;.
> Maybe I'll just pay the $5000 and declare myself a legal illegal
> 
> Posted by: ssbn04 | Friday, 22 June 2007 at 15:46
> 
> SSBN04
> Lt. Cmdr. R.N. (Rtd.)
> 
> He says he is retired Navy and asks this:
> http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=712370
> 
> Want to read more Google Search:
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ssbn04&btnG=Google+Search


Check your sources - the item you quoted was written by a man named Drummond - I commented upon it

Of course I'm curious as to why silver oak leaves are indicative of a higher rank then old oak leaves - why, what's the historical reason - only the US services use that particular device.

What an ass you are.


----------



## Rock

Gee, we aren't hurting your feelings are we...Jackass. As you continue to read on just remember, we are a touchy feely group. Need a hug?

BTW, some cops lie and some citizens lie. You appear to be the latter.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

Dude, didn't you read the post that says that there are some of us here that are allergic to Bull$hit.

*LMAO*


----------



## TacOps

BS, you were not going 55 in a 55. No one does the speed limit. 

It looks like you are a member of literotica.com too. That's normal for a gay sailor like you. Let me guess, it's someone else with the name of ssbn04 right?

Let me give you a piece of advice, you liberal ass, don't come on a cop forum and stop complaining about the way we act. This is OUR territory, don't expect your liberal rights to work in here like the courts have made for you out there. Because we have suspended your rights in OUR territory. 

You want to argue about the ticket? Fine, go to court. Otherwise, pay the damn ticket and own up to it.


----------



## Killjoy

> He is not only an ass on this board,he has made an ass of himself other places !!
> Some of his postings:





> For someone of that rank and experience, you should certainly know what pattern a "J" scan radar has...


Ahhhhh, nothing like outing a poser. Hey turd, did you get your medal of honor and purple heart off ebay yet?

KW, Wolf...nice job as usual.


----------



## mpd61

ssbn04...

You can PM me and we'll talk some real bubblehead talk. If you can't... then I'll understand


----------



## Tuna

SSBN04 If you are as enlightened as you pose to be why would you even lower yourself to debate on this forum. Your nothing but an ASSCLOWN looking for a reaction from the Law Enforcement community as you hide behind a keyboard. Don't be the CHICKENSHIT we all think you are, take it to court. Appeal it when the clerks hearing doesn't go your way and then argue with the judge. Your kind are a dime a dozen and quite entertaining.


----------



## CJIS

Why do people come on here asking for advice on tickets? They all seem to know they can appeal at a court house, and tell there story there. 

Seems like a waste of time to tell it here but it is entertaining never the less.


----------



## quality617

> SSBN04
> Lt. Cmdr. R.N. (Rtd.)


Not to be anal or anything, but shouldn't (Rtd) be (Ret)?

And what the hell is R.N.? USN maybe?


----------



## screamineagle

quality617 said:


> Not to be anal or anything, but shouldn't (Rtd) be (Ret)?
> 
> And what the hell is R.N.? USN maybe?


royal navy?


----------



## kwflatbed

Royal Nutcase


----------



## screamineagle

kwflatbed said:


> Royal Nutcase


 :L: I stand corrected lmao.


----------



## REILEYDOG

quality617 said:


> Not to be anal or anything, but shouldn't (Rtd) be (Ret)?
> 
> And what the hell is R.N.? USN maybe?


Maybe he's a Registered Nurse (R.N.) as well. He's very versatile.


----------



## MVS

As far as 90-17 vs. 90-18, I believe it is really up to the local courts preference. My local court tells us to only use 90-17 for _*all*_ speeding.


----------



## csauce777

ssbn04 said:


> Oh, the other point in this - I was not speeding - I was driving 55 MPH in a 55 MPH zone - and the officer was flat out wrong in his assessment - I simply do not speed, never have, never will.


So let me get this straight shitbird...the officer paced you at what you say was 55 mph in a 55 mph zone, and then decided to lie about your actual speed and increase it by 25 mph for the purposes of the ticket? Do you expect anyone to believe that...especially here? Idiot...


----------



## OfficerObie59

I have to say, not knowing the leaf thing is pretty bad. That was a question for junior NCO promotions, nevermind an officer. Silver trumps brass, not gold.

Nevertheless, let's get your point shall we?

90/17 - Speed Greater Than Resonable and Proper- Used for clocking and establishes required distances -ie, you, Used for unposted zones, Construction zones, etc. 90/17 can also be applied if youre going the speed limit in incliment weather where you shouldve been driving slower.
*Some courts seem differ as to interpretation. Some say under this that even if you were over the limit but your speed was still "Resonable and Proper" you have a defense under 90/17, while in contrast, others feel (as the statute states) violation of posted speed is prima facie that you were in violation.
​90/18 - Absolute limit - You go ANY faster than the sign, you're speeding. Clear and cut.

Anyways, don't get stupid and say dumb stuff like "I simply do not speed, never have, never will." Pull your grape out of 4th Pt of contact. Everyone speeds; you just got caught.


----------

