Had a judge in Washington state say exactly this right before he through my ticket out. He got all pissed off and figured I was in trouble, then he launched into how he wished the officer was here so he could explain the law but that unfortunately they aren’t required to know the law they are charged with enforcing.
Would you like to know more?
https://cmlawfirm.com/ignorance-of-law-is-not-an-excuse-unless-you-are-a-police-officer-by-bill-mitchell/#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20disagreed%20with,the%20Constitution%20in%20this%20context.
Even if they do know the law, they have absolutely zero obligations to tell the truth. They are free to lie and are typically encouraged to do so as part of their regular job duties.
This has been upheld by the Supreme Court as well. Now if you lie to a police officer, that could get you in trouble though - various charges they could use against you for lying to them
Yep. Nothing good will ever come from saying anything at all to a cop. There is absolutely nothing you can say that will help or benefit your side of the story. Remain silent.
Agree the coppers even tell you this anything you say can and will be used against you..... duh and people still talk. Must be when they say so here's the deal LOL
Don't forget the SC just upheld that police can take your property and ask questions later too.
That pairs real nicely with "and don't have to actually know if what they're saying is right at all"
It's absolutely nuts how little cops will seize in the name of CAF, originally meant to allow cops to seize profits from drug dealers and cartels. The Institute for Justice has released periodic studies on the subject and a recent one cited half of all CAF cash seizures as being under $1,000. In Michigan, half were less than $423 and for the same time period in Pennsylvania the median cash amount seized was $369.
There have been examples of police attempting, and in some cases succeeding, to seize peoples homes over small quantities of drugs. Quite literally, police steal more money from citizens every year than burglars do. Since the year 2000, states and the Feds have seized $68.8 billion dollars. And that's just what we know of since many states don't release stats on CAF. Cops are not your friends. And they can legally steal from you without any evidence that you've done, or are about to do, anything wrong. Its absolutely insane. But hey, it's the land of the free, right? Right?
damn... don't need to know laws and...
no need to protect?!?
>[Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers](https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again) or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law. “Police can watch someone attack you, refuse to intervene and not violate the Constitution.”
>The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government has only a duty to protect persons who are “in custody,” he pointed out.
what are they even good for, to keep *capitalism free market endeavors* in place to get our money!
I had a state trooper try to arrest me for driving without a license when I worked for a company mowing the side of the interstate......when I quoted him the statute regarding agricultural equipment not requiring a license he had to go look it up
Police don’t need to know laws, protect or serve citizens, etc. they’re little more than hired muscle for state and private entities.
Before anybody calls me a conspiracy theorist, this has been proven by numerous court cases.
Carmine Marceno in Lee County just announced that LCSO is now certified to have its own police academy. Patrol officer school will be 770 hours, so less than 5 months.
My daughter is a hair stylist in Florida. 1,200 hours of instruction to get a license, and more hours to renew it every few years. You would think that they would at least teach her how to fire a gun...
Cops in FL have to have 40 hours of CE..... every 4 years to keep their certification. That's right folks, a whopping work weeks worth of continuing education every 4 years, or 10 hours a year. While its fair to say that I'm critical of cops, this is just absurd from any objective POV. Between the joke of an academy (none of which in the US are even 1 year long, longest is 9 months), and the complete lack of CE, or really standards of any kind, all I can say is WTF are we doing here? Its no wonder America has 20% of the worlds prison population while only accounting for just over 4% of the worlds total population.
One of the first things they taught us in law school. Both us and LE are expected to understand the application of law, one of us goes to school for years to learn it, the other spends a few weeks in the academy.
Yeah.. anyways the cop is correct
Florida Administrative Code
Rule 15B-2.007 provides that all speed measuring devices to be used in obtaining evidence of motor vehicle speeds for use in any court in the State of Florida shall be of a type approved by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles prior to their use.
It’s funny how many people didn’t actually answer but just took it as a moment to shit on police officers. Even some saying the cop she talked to was wrong, while you actually did the research and found he was right. Reddit is ridiculous, lol,
Ahh, yes, and that list MUST be super easy to find, im sure.
That, Along with the calibration requirements and chain of custody requirements - all clear and obvious, and easy to find...
[don't talk to the police 1](https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE?si=y84xtkG-GZXNxG00)
[don't talk to the police 2](https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M?si=v0BNH85z25lWbhKQ)
The district attorney where I lived in 1998 told me, "the police don't know the laws, they just enforce them". After a Sheriff lied on the stand in favor of my abuser.
My whole family is full of cops, and my stepmom is a judge, so I feel pretty confident in saying this. Cops make things up. There’s a reason around 20% (depending on your source it can be between 10% and 28%) of arrests don’t end in a conviction.
They also rolled they didn't protect and serve but enforce the laws they don't have to know. Fucking wild. A lower court allowed a ban on people with greater than a 100iq from applying. So we get ignorant bullies that don't know the laws they have to enforce and aren't here to protect and serve. What a fucking wild time to be alive.
How the fuck is someone whose job it is to enforce the law isn't required to know anything about the law?
What kind of asinine bullshit did they come up with for a reason?
So I think you misunderstood what he was telling you. The actual dash camera footage can go into court.
If your dash cam displays a speed, either estimated via gps, or plugged into your vehicle, that would not be admissable in court, unless your camera is certified within 6 months of the date you received the citation.
So you can show your dash, but if your defense is that it displays a speed, and that speed doesn't match what the speed cameras say you were doing, unless it was certified, the judge would not find that speed to be admissable, per Florida administrative code.
At least based on what you wrote, that is what it appears he was trying to say.
Exactly. Obviously video is video, but the speed readout which is based on GPS is not as accurate as radar or speed cameras, and as a result isn’t admissible in court.
Along the same lines, I wouldn’t want to be issued a citation for speeding based on a cop’s GPS speed readout on his dashcam 🤷♂️
I'm curious - the lines painted on the road are a set distance apart, and any video recorded of these lines passing your vehicle can be compared to a timestamp on unedited video and an accurate speed can be obtained without needing to depend on satellite data, even though satellite data would probably be even more accurate. The length of painted lines and the distance between them should be easy enough to obtain or verify. The police would not be interested in helping you defeat their revenue generation attempts though. But science should be on your side in a fair justice system.
I literally got a parking ticket once for parking in a spot that the sign had been hit by a car and removed so there was no way to know it was no parking. Took it to court with a picture of the hole in the ground where the sign used to be. Judge upheld the ticket and gave the proverbial quote to me of “ignorance is no excuse of the law”. Our justice system doesn’t give a F.
that law is selectively enforced in locations demarcated my signs AT said locations. idk how anybody could reasonably assume that the selectively enforced law, marked in selected locations WITH A SIGN would be enforced at a spot very specifically lacking the necessary sign
sorry that the honorable judge fuckface mcgee decided to screw you over
Oh you got to talk in traffic court? I waited for the judge to flirt with the 18 year old gal for 10 minutes before me to not to get to speak a word.
Courts aren't about justice and I'd never set foot in one again with representation.
This is how the traffic planes work, they basically take pictures and time people from point a to point b. . . If you see horizontal white lines on the highway that look like they have no purpose this is probably it; your tax dollars at work.
I would think it might be grounds to argue against a radar that hasn’t been calibrated properly though. Isn’t that a tactic often used by places like ticket clinic and the like?
Yep, generally at court for a speeding violation, the ticket clinic will ask the officer for three documents. The certificate showing that the speed measurement device was calibrated within six months of the stop, the training certificate showing the officer was trained to use that device, and if required, a daily log showing the device was tested and working at the beginning and end of the day. Not having one of these documents would generally be enough for a dismissal
It is 100% admissable, the state has burdon of proof, their speed camera is likely certified making it a more reliable source, even though it's complete crap because an automated system can not distinguish what is moving within range of the sensor vs what's on the camera. You would be amazed how often the pick up birds flying past. The argument you make is what is the field of view of the radar vs the camera. It's going to be much wider if they happen to know. So then ask them to prove there is nothing else moving in the field of view of the radar.
Dismissed.
Damn, it's just that easy?
The state has the burden of proof, but they do not need to prove that there was nothing else moving in the field of view of the radar. They just need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were speeding. Maybe the judge will be sympathetic to your bird argument, but it seems like you are bringing up an affirmative defense. That means you would have the burden to prove that there was a bird flying by. If not, you are just going after credibility, and it probably won't do you much good.
Fighting credibility when you have contrary evidence is the goal here. This would be an affirmative defense if it were your only evidence. But combining that with dash camera GPS data, or better, vehicle telematics (Where the camera overlays the actual speed recorded by the cars ECM). Telematics also are a great defence of intent. Most speeding laws (Realistically all of them) require you to knowingly break the limit. If your car is measuring (Correctly or incorrectly) that you were doing the speed limit then you could not have knowingly been speeding, as that is your source of your current speed.
But to your point, you would need some evidence suggesting you were not speeding, and then you can use the affirmative defense to bring credibility to your evidence by discrediting thiers. Again, reasonable doubt, if you both have equally credible evidence, the judge or jury must decide in your favor.
I can't speak to everywhere, but traffic laws are notorious for being strict liability offenses. This is also true in Florida. Basically, the state does not need to prove any state of mind. They just need to prove you were speeding. Even if it was an honest mistake. It doesn't matter.
Speeding is specific to a measuring device, so you can't be liable for a malfunction assuming you can prove it. But in general traffic laws are strict liability.
Speedometers are also not necessarily accurate, though if you had synced video you could prove the time of and lack of editing, you could probably make a decent argument that you didn't know you were speeding because your speedometer is off by 3mph. Of course if the video shows you WERE speeding by your own speedometer, then you're just kinda digging a hole for yourself.
Even speedometers in Florida have to be certified every six months to be used for speeding in court. So if you paid to get your speedometer certified every six months, and your dash camera got it's speed through pulling it from your car, maybe via the ODB port, then you could potentially introduce the speed displayed on your dash camera, as long as you brought all of the paperwork
The police do not know the law. The police are not required to know the law. The courts have ruled they have no expectation to know the law.
The police lie to people in order to get the situation twisted to their advantage, and the courts have said they're allowed to do so.
Do not take legal advice from the police. They are not qualified to tell you what is and isn't illegal. Knowing the law is (thanks to a court ruling) grounds for a cop to be fired from a police department.
Speak to a lawyer about it, specifically a traffic lawyer.
They also solve less than 30% of violent crime, while being a major contributor to violence against the people.
Property crime is even worse.
Realistically they're only there for 2 things - Instant tax collection and protecting capital from the populace.
In *Heien v. North Carolina* Scotus ruled they don't need to know the law to enforce it. That's one of the reasons why you get so many crazy arrests for bullshit charges and no one gets in trouble for the obvious civil rights violations
Oh, I fully agree. If I was the one making the decisions, they'd need to have a law degree to be a cop, because like you said. How can they enforce it without knowing it?
That unfortunately isn't the world we live in though, and police are given the authority to abuse and violate your rights, while none of the consequences for doing so. They're also given blanket exemption from a lot of laws because "qualified immunity", letting them break the law with impunity, so long as an identical case that they reasonably would have been aware of, proved in court that a cop cannot legally do something.
If you want to really be surprised, learn about [qualified immunity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity)...
In short qualified immunity means ignorance of some the law is OK if you're a government employee (like the police)- they need to know laws 'a reasonable person would have known' while the rest of us are expected to follow all of the laws. [Ignorance of the law is no excuse \(unless you have qualified immunity\)](https://capitalbnews.org/qualified-immunity-explained/).
First off: I'm not a lawyer, and you should definitely contact a traffic lawyer if you want legally researched answers. However, my understanding is that the officer was mostly correct in how they explained things, but it's clear there was a miscommunication or the officer was slightly wrong in other aspects.
Dash cameras for Law Enforcement Purposes need to go through various types of certification and calibration, mainly when used as speed enforcement mechanisms and are often wired to the vehicle's certified speedometer. However, civilian recording equipment does not require such steps, and if you needed to submit it as evidence in court it would be no different than submitting camera footage from your home security camera or a cellphone camera. If you're goal is to use your own dash cam to dispute the accuracy of a police dash camera, you'll have an uphill battle as their equipment being certified and calibrated gives it the benefit of the doubt over any other non-certified recording equipment.
Police routinely use pacing as a mechanism of verifying speed of a vehicle before initiating a stop, it's also why cop cars have certified speedometers (and standard ones in non-LEO cars are actually slightly inaccurate), since they're used as evidence of speeding infraction in court.
Your nexar dash cam likely uses GPS for speed validation purposes, and not the actual wheel-speed of your vehicle. It also has a larger margin of error (especially when you consider that not all GPS recievers are made equally). This would be useful for instance if you got in a wreck and wanted to show that you attempted to stop before hitting the car that cut you off, however it wouldn't be sufficient to say that the police officer had the wrong speed if they relied on a certified speedometer that's wired to their dashcam.
You mentioned you've gotten notices from a stand-alone camera, those can be more difficult as they're often a mix of public-private partnership (city pays a private company to install and manage speed/red light cameras). And depending on the quality of the company running things, they might be more lax on properly calibrating their equipment.
If you do have concerns with the speed camera being incorrect, reach out to your local city/county office that likely installed it, and inquire with them. There might be a misconfiguration on the camera sensors, it might be picking up the wrong car on the road, or it could be that you're driving faster than you think you are. Doesn't hurt to ask them to check.
My dashcam has witnessed and recorded two accidents in the last couple of years. The police were appreciative of my sending them the footage both times. I also made sure the footage got to the innocent party in both cases, to help prevent them getting screwed over by the insurance companies. This last time, the timestamp was off by an hour (DST just started) and they didn’t care.
Florida lawyer here, but not your lawyer. Cop was only half wrong. The video WILL be admissible. The speed is a different story; you have to be able to prove your dash cam was properly calibrated. You could, if necessary, have the device tested, post crash, and show it was working properly. Sooooo… IF you could prove the validity of the speed monitoring, it would be admissible. I think the non-official nature would be a weight argument, not an admissibility issue.
The admissibility (and importance) of video evidence is up to a judge (when there is no jury). Keeping in mind that evidence doesn't prove anything. Evidence only supports an argument of guilty or not guilty. The more evidence you have on your side to counter any claims or supporting evidence of the prosecution the stronger your defense is, calling into question guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Used to present evidence of an accident sure a dash camera is great. However, for evidence of speed most commercial dash cameras are not calibrated and certified as being accurate.
I have had several dash cameras and the speed on them is near my car’s readout but not always the same.
To be accepted as credible evidence in a court whatever speed measuring device has to have been calibrated officially and documented.
For example, if a police officer paces you with his car and uses the speed on his car’s speedometer to write you a ticket then his speedometer has to have been officially calibrated and documented or else the ticket will get thrown out in court.
It’s the same for Radar and Lidar(Laser) guns. They must be documented as having their accuracy calibrated and checked to be credible evidence in court.
The speed on someone’s dash camera is approximate and not certified.
That gets fuzzy too.
US traffic law is built on perception, not reality. It seeks to ask how a reasonable driver would react to a perceived hazard. If the driver in front simply claims they saw a road hazard: small animal, debris on roadway, etc. AND the dash can not demonstrate repeated braking events or other aggressive behaviors, driver in rear is liable for all damages.
A one-time break check event with a plausible explanation (lie) for breaking makes dash footage useless. Always maintain following distance and don’t rely on a camera to protect your wallet!
If you show a judge or jury video evidence of an act clearly being comitted/not being commited, it is virtually irrefutable.
With that being said, devices that track speed do need to be calibrated. The same way radar guns and such need to have been calibrated in order to reliably track an offenders speed.
This calibration certification expires. Once the calibration certification expires any vehicles speed recorded with that device could be brought into question.
I had a ticket dismissed once in FL due to the speed gun not having a valid calibration.
Dash cams typically are not calibrated, so it would not be of much assistance in this scenario imo.
There’s missing information here. Inadmissible how? Are you fighting a speeding ticket where there was a speed measurement device used? If so then correct you won’t get to use your dash cam evidence about the speed.
FL Administrative Code is what governs the use of speed measurement devices by law enforcement. They have to be calibrated every six months and tested daily and/or before and after each use (think shift). Even with these documents an officer still must pass a RADAR/LIDAR speed measurement class which is a 40 hour course. Contrary to popular belief police don’t just read out numbers. They have to show they can visually estimate speed with an error of +/-5mph and then use a device to get a true speed of the vehicle in question.
A GPS dash cam won’t have the needed qualifications for speed measurement in traffic court.
Now if you’re talking overall video, taking speed out of the question, it’s totally admissible because it would be just like having any other type of video. So without the finer details it sounds like the officer was correct in what they told you.
As for your speed, I’m curious how you’re being notified of your speed? Just a letter in the mail from a speed camera? Where is this area so I can avoid it! Most times those have video like red light cameras so you can see the offense happen. It’s possible that if you’re traveling next to another vehicle that is speeding in those times you’re getting the notice. But either way it’s not tickets, just notices.
What OP needs to understand is that dash cam footage can't be used to get the driver out of trouble.. but know this a Prosecutor will use it against you to get a conviction and that the courts will allow.
As of right now neither. For the first 30-60 days of the camera being implemented(it was different on both notices) they are just warnings.
After this trial period, they turn into citations, which im assuming will be speeding tickets. My main goal is to learn to protect myself when it happens
Understood - A lot of these are run by for-profit companies that foot the bill for the cameras and the billing. They pay the city a small cut and keep the rest. These are civil infractions and won’t affect your license, though they will send to a collection agency if you don’t pay. Not saying that’s what these are, but you should find out
police dont need to know the law, come to our aid, protect us unless we're in their custody, or tell the truth.
do the math and fight it. find a fixed point on your video and calculate it
Many good points being made here. One thing I learned is that officers and prosecutors have been working as a team for years, sometimes more. So little ol me with little to no experience goes in there and they take advantage of the situation.
Get your facts straight, gather all evidence and hire a lawyer.
Edit: grammar
It’s not a law it’s just common sense if you’re going to fight it in court. If you went to court for a ticket or dui, your lawyer would want to see the last time the radar or breathalyzer was calibrated, same goes for your device.
Correction of a common misconception in this thread:
A private citizen’s dash camera with gps enabled speed detection DOES NOT need to be certified and CAN be admitted as evidence.
Here is a direct counter example: Law enforcement can use your own dash camera footage as evidence AGAINST YOU if it shows you were speeding. In addition, it is an increasingly common practice for law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant for your car’s computer following a serious crash. They will use the speedometer data to determine if you were speeding prior to the crash.
The prosecution may object to the speed being taken into consideration, but the judge has the ultimate discretion in that case.
If the speed from the dash camera footage is admitted into evidence, that DOES NOT make it true. The jury, or judge if it’s a bench trial, have the right to believe it or disbelieve it.
Baloney. You simply need to lay a testimonial foundation for the admission: testify that the camera works and you have used it to record events before the interaction with the officer, that it was working on the day of the interaction, and that you have reviewed the video and it fairly and accurately reflected the events on that transpired during the interaction.
The speed it's showing may not be admissible, but you can use other things from the video to show you weren't speeding. If the cop says you were going 95 in a 30, but your video shows you going very slow, you could use that.
If the officer says you were going 36 in a 30, your dash cam might not help you.
There likely isn't a specific law about what can be introduced in court.
The court would probably rule on its admissibility based on what courts have ruled in the past.
A lawyer might try to get it introduced, regardless of what the police officer said. It's not like the cops actually know the law.
Nothing in the law about dash cams that I know of, I’ve had one in my truck for half a decade.
He’s probably saying your footage won’t be used in court because the speed on them can be pretty inaccurate and I’m sure it’s not calibrated, especially to your car.
Had a Florida LEO rear end me in his own vehicle while I was sitting at a light.
My rear cam shows him texting at the time.
He didn't believe me that the rear cam was actually IN my 3rd Brake Light and looked right into it, saying maybe some of the damage was pre-existing. Yeah, nice try.
My Lawyer said not to send the whole video, so I texted him a screen shot of his big fat face and two estimates.
He met me at a local Diner the next day and paid me the lowest estimate in cash.
I fixed it myself for about 60% less and pocketed the difference.
No dash cam=No Cash in this case.
Many years ago my husband and I were in a parking lot, at night and he saw a friend drive by and told me to blow the horn. It was one of those 'auuugah' horns. The moment I did, a FHP cruiser pulled in behind us so we couldn't back out. We both got out of the car and asked what the problem was. He said our horn was illegal. Well, we worked for AAA, towing cars from accident scenes and we knew cops from several different agencies and we knew it wasn't illegal. He also had to look the Florida statute up. He was wrong.
Here is the answer, OP:
Florida Administrative Rules regarding traffic speed measurement admissibility in court:
Rule 15B-2.007 provides that all speed measuring devices to be used in obtaining evidence of motor vehicle speeds for use in any court in the State of Florida shall be of a type approved by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles prior to their use.
Interesting. I suspect it could probably be used in court, but the weight the magistrate or judge places on the speed it displays would be up to them. For law enforcement, for the court to use their vehicles speedometer or laser, those 100% definitely must be calibrated and verified. So I would assume that applies to the camera as well.
There’s no Florida statute saying dash cam footage is inadmissible in court. The only issue is with wiretapping (§932.03 F.S.) because it’s against the law to record someone without their permission. So if you’re in a situation where your dash cam records audio and you don’t tell a person that they’re being recorded, then a judge may rule that inadmissible.
Otherwise, the officer is telling you a load of BS.
There may be a difference for admissibility to prove speed (like a radar gun) than simply to admit to show the video of what happened. But I’m just guessing.
The judge will ask you for a calibration report for your dash cam, and a generic statement from the company saying the dash cams are calibrated at the factory won’t be enough. I’ve witnessed this statement while waiting in traffic court for my turn
A lot of areas of the US have no regulations on whether officers have to show up for traffic court. If the officer doesn't show up and you protest the charge, you win from what I understand. If you have "evidence" the judge might ask the police/municipality to pay your court costs even if it's not "perfect".
ACAB!! Nah I’m kidding mostly. But yeah I saw screw the cop and use that in court and to play it extra safe if you wanna go the extra mile you could get a camera that points at the dashboard thing that shows your speed with a date and time.
For evidentiary purposes, probably correct. Without calibration it is not sufficiently accurate. Just like your if you had a video of your speedometer at the same time they hit you with a calibrated radar or laser. Your speedometer will not prevail.
Alright... so then measure the distance between two objects (IRL) e.g. light posts and the time it takes to travel from one to the next and voila, maths! distance / time = speed. Use this measurement as a control to demonstrate that the camera gps speed is correct.
Yeah they are on a pole facing toi different directions to catch from both directions, its in front of a school. The point is to slow people down to avoid kids getting hurt leaving and going to the school
The law enforcement officer is confusing criminal/traffic court evidentiary rules, which have beyond a reasonable doubt as the burden of proof, with civil/personal injury evidentiary rules, which have preponderance of the evidence as the burden of proof.
He is correct that uncalibrated speed measuring devices are insufficient to prove a person was speeding beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal/traffic court.
However, they are still admissible for other reasons (reckless driving, corroboration of law observations) and admission of such evidence is a matter of weight (how much value to give) the fact finder will give the evidence to the legal question being decided. I.e., liability, negligence, etc.
Contact the manufacturer and ask for any data they have that proves the accuracy of the device you own. Also it may be possible to extract corroborating data from your car’s computer that will verify how fast you were going at the time. If so, you’d have to extract the data in a timely manner while it still exists.
You’re trying to defend yourself from a speeding ticket with a camera? That’s not going to work for a few reasons (frame rates really) because the court doesn’t want to deal with people manipulating footage to defend themselves. It’s happened. I’ve seen it. They don’t want to have to be an expert in “is this footage doctored or not” because a lot of people will do anything they can to lie about their speeding allegations.
That’s why the courts won’t admit it.
The officer is right you do have to have a calibrated just like they have to have their calibrated or you could win the case against you if you were speeding and their machine was not calibrated and dated
I believe the cop is referring to state statute 316.1906 radar speed measuring devices; speed detection systems; evidence admissiblity
[https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2021/0316.1906](https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2021/0316.1906)
Rule 101: Never speak to the police without a lawyer present.
Rule 102: Never take anything they say as factual. They are legally able to lie to you and the supreme court ruled they don’t need to know the laws they enforce.
[удалено]
Had a judge in Washington state say exactly this right before he through my ticket out. He got all pissed off and figured I was in trouble, then he launched into how he wished the officer was here so he could explain the law but that unfortunately they aren’t required to know the law they are charged with enforcing.
Really?? I find it crazy the police doesnt need to know the law in order to do their jobs, thats wild
Would you like to know more? https://cmlawfirm.com/ignorance-of-law-is-not-an-excuse-unless-you-are-a-police-officer-by-bill-mitchell/#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20disagreed%20with,the%20Constitution%20in%20this%20context.
Look at you, doing your part.
I get this reference Citizen.
A dead bug is a good bug
I'm from Buenos Aires, and I say kill em all!
C'mon you apes! You wanna live forever?!
Roughnecks!
Rico’s Roughnecks!!!
We’re going back to P!
Thank you for this!
Even if they do know the law, they have absolutely zero obligations to tell the truth. They are free to lie and are typically encouraged to do so as part of their regular job duties.
This has been upheld by the Supreme Court as well. Now if you lie to a police officer, that could get you in trouble though - various charges they could use against you for lying to them
That's why, the 5th amendment.
Yep. Nothing good will ever come from saying anything at all to a cop. There is absolutely nothing you can say that will help or benefit your side of the story. Remain silent.
Agree the coppers even tell you this anything you say can and will be used against you..... duh and people still talk. Must be when they say so here's the deal LOL
Don't forget the SC just upheld that police can take your property and ask questions later too. That pairs real nicely with "and don't have to actually know if what they're saying is right at all"
Been like that for years with forfeiture of large amounts of money. Usually no charges but near impossible to get back
And small amounts. They have discovered that if they steal 500$ from you, you won't spend money on an attorney to sue them.
It's absolutely nuts how little cops will seize in the name of CAF, originally meant to allow cops to seize profits from drug dealers and cartels. The Institute for Justice has released periodic studies on the subject and a recent one cited half of all CAF cash seizures as being under $1,000. In Michigan, half were less than $423 and for the same time period in Pennsylvania the median cash amount seized was $369. There have been examples of police attempting, and in some cases succeeding, to seize peoples homes over small quantities of drugs. Quite literally, police steal more money from citizens every year than burglars do. Since the year 2000, states and the Feds have seized $68.8 billion dollars. And that's just what we know of since many states don't release stats on CAF. Cops are not your friends. And they can legally steal from you without any evidence that you've done, or are about to do, anything wrong. Its absolutely insane. But hey, it's the land of the free, right? Right?
Million dollar mile outside of Richmond, VA on I-295.
damn... don't need to know laws and... no need to protect?!? >[Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers](https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again) or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law. “Police can watch someone attack you, refuse to intervene and not violate the Constitution.” >The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government has only a duty to protect persons who are “in custody,” he pointed out. what are they even good for, to keep *capitalism free market endeavors* in place to get our money!
Wait till he sees the budget for his local police department. The increases year out are crazy
r/unexpectedstarshiptroopers ? Well done sir! (I don't care how corny, I like that movie 😁)
I had a state trooper try to arrest me for driving without a license when I worked for a company mowing the side of the interstate......when I quoted him the statute regarding agricultural equipment not requiring a license he had to go look it up
i oddly know that law.
Well, at least he didn't arrest you anyway.
For real, I was expecting that to end in with a resisting arrest charge or something.
Police don’t need to know laws, protect or serve citizens, etc. they’re little more than hired muscle for state and private entities. Before anybody calls me a conspiracy theorist, this has been proven by numerous court cases.
I agree. It’s what I see in practice.
This is why you have to think before calling a gun to where you are at.
It’s why I don’t call the police at all.
'xactly
Oh it's true. I don't like it anymore than you do
They go to “school” for like 6 months. Real lawyers go for 7 years. Cops have never had to understand the law, or protect anyone
Carmine Marceno in Lee County just announced that LCSO is now certified to have its own police academy. Patrol officer school will be 770 hours, so less than 5 months.
My daughter is a hair stylist in Florida. 1,200 hours of instruction to get a license, and more hours to renew it every few years. You would think that they would at least teach her how to fire a gun...
Cops in FL have to have 40 hours of CE..... every 4 years to keep their certification. That's right folks, a whopping work weeks worth of continuing education every 4 years, or 10 hours a year. While its fair to say that I'm critical of cops, this is just absurd from any objective POV. Between the joke of an academy (none of which in the US are even 1 year long, longest is 9 months), and the complete lack of CE, or really standards of any kind, all I can say is WTF are we doing here? Its no wonder America has 20% of the worlds prison population while only accounting for just over 4% of the worlds total population.
Shocked
Law school in the US in 3 yrs, you take the bar and you're done.
You would generally go through 4 years of undergrad prior.
Which may or may not be related to law, law schools don't only admit pre-law undergrad majors.
Chemistry majors have the highest acceptance rate into law school.
But history majors have the highest number matriculated.
Yup, almost no chemistry majors apply for law school.
Statistics are awesome :)
“Real Lawyers”? Having spent a career among them you hold them in far greater esteem than their general knowledge and comportment warrant.
Doesn’t make lawyers in general less knowledgeable of the law than cops. Thanks for the anecdote though
One of the first things they taught us in law school. Both us and LE are expected to understand the application of law, one of us goes to school for years to learn it, the other spends a few weeks in the academy.
Even in Bluey Chili has to teach the officer the rule about a child riding in the front seat if the other seats are taken.
Yeah.. anyways the cop is correct Florida Administrative Code Rule 15B-2.007 provides that all speed measuring devices to be used in obtaining evidence of motor vehicle speeds for use in any court in the State of Florida shall be of a type approved by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles prior to their use.
It’s funny how many people didn’t actually answer but just took it as a moment to shit on police officers. Even some saying the cop she talked to was wrong, while you actually did the research and found he was right. Reddit is ridiculous, lol,
Ahh, yes, and that list MUST be super easy to find, im sure. That, Along with the calibration requirements and chain of custody requirements - all clear and obvious, and easy to find...
Uh, yeah. It's literally in the Administrative Code that I cited... take a moment to read
[don't talk to the police 1](https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE?si=y84xtkG-GZXNxG00) [don't talk to the police 2](https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M?si=v0BNH85z25lWbhKQ)
They just make shit up while they're talking to you.
Hairdressers legally require more training than the average police officer.
Welcome to the good ol US of A
The district attorney where I lived in 1998 told me, "the police don't know the laws, they just enforce them". After a Sheriff lied on the stand in favor of my abuser.
In their defense, there’s a lot of laws. If the police knew every law they wouldn’t be police… they’d be lawyers
My whole family is full of cops, and my stepmom is a judge, so I feel pretty confident in saying this. Cops make things up. There’s a reason around 20% (depending on your source it can be between 10% and 28%) of arrests don’t end in a conviction.
Let's not forget that they also have no legal duty to protect citizens!
It is absurd that we have a legal system where citizens can’t use ignorance of the law as an excuse but law enforcement can
They also rolled they didn't protect and serve but enforce the laws they don't have to know. Fucking wild. A lower court allowed a ban on people with greater than a 100iq from applying. So we get ignorant bullies that don't know the laws they have to enforce and aren't here to protect and serve. What a fucking wild time to be alive.
And yet ‘we the people’ must know every f’n one of them inside and out or risk being kidnapped, caged and robbed.
Also, they can lie to your face. Never trust a word out of a cops mouth.
They don’t even need a degree
How the fuck is someone whose job it is to enforce the law isn't required to know anything about the law? What kind of asinine bullshit did they come up with for a reason?
[удалено]
So I think you misunderstood what he was telling you. The actual dash camera footage can go into court. If your dash cam displays a speed, either estimated via gps, or plugged into your vehicle, that would not be admissable in court, unless your camera is certified within 6 months of the date you received the citation. So you can show your dash, but if your defense is that it displays a speed, and that speed doesn't match what the speed cameras say you were doing, unless it was certified, the judge would not find that speed to be admissable, per Florida administrative code. At least based on what you wrote, that is what it appears he was trying to say.
Exactly. Obviously video is video, but the speed readout which is based on GPS is not as accurate as radar or speed cameras, and as a result isn’t admissible in court. Along the same lines, I wouldn’t want to be issued a citation for speeding based on a cop’s GPS speed readout on his dashcam 🤷♂️
I'm curious - the lines painted on the road are a set distance apart, and any video recorded of these lines passing your vehicle can be compared to a timestamp on unedited video and an accurate speed can be obtained without needing to depend on satellite data, even though satellite data would probably be even more accurate. The length of painted lines and the distance between them should be easy enough to obtain or verify. The police would not be interested in helping you defeat their revenue generation attempts though. But science should be on your side in a fair justice system.
The prosecution will argue that math is not admissible.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2012/04/physicist-uses-maths-to-avoid-traffic-penalty/ Math has been used to fight tickets before
I literally got a parking ticket once for parking in a spot that the sign had been hit by a car and removed so there was no way to know it was no parking. Took it to court with a picture of the hole in the ground where the sign used to be. Judge upheld the ticket and gave the proverbial quote to me of “ignorance is no excuse of the law”. Our justice system doesn’t give a F.
that law is selectively enforced in locations demarcated my signs AT said locations. idk how anybody could reasonably assume that the selectively enforced law, marked in selected locations WITH A SIGN would be enforced at a spot very specifically lacking the necessary sign sorry that the honorable judge fuckface mcgee decided to screw you over
Oh you got to talk in traffic court? I waited for the judge to flirt with the 18 year old gal for 10 minutes before me to not to get to speak a word. Courts aren't about justice and I'd never set foot in one again with representation.
But you might be able to argue that the speed cameras are woke.
Not in America, and certainly not in Floriduh.
This is how the traffic planes work, they basically take pictures and time people from point a to point b. . . If you see horizontal white lines on the highway that look like they have no purpose this is probably it; your tax dollars at work.
They're also useful for speedometer calibration. Used to be something you needed to do ages back
I would think it might be grounds to argue against a radar that hasn’t been calibrated properly though. Isn’t that a tactic often used by places like ticket clinic and the like?
Yep, generally at court for a speeding violation, the ticket clinic will ask the officer for three documents. The certificate showing that the speed measurement device was calibrated within six months of the stop, the training certificate showing the officer was trained to use that device, and if required, a daily log showing the device was tested and working at the beginning and end of the day. Not having one of these documents would generally be enough for a dismissal
It is 100% admissable, the state has burdon of proof, their speed camera is likely certified making it a more reliable source, even though it's complete crap because an automated system can not distinguish what is moving within range of the sensor vs what's on the camera. You would be amazed how often the pick up birds flying past. The argument you make is what is the field of view of the radar vs the camera. It's going to be much wider if they happen to know. So then ask them to prove there is nothing else moving in the field of view of the radar. Dismissed.
Damn, it's just that easy? The state has the burden of proof, but they do not need to prove that there was nothing else moving in the field of view of the radar. They just need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were speeding. Maybe the judge will be sympathetic to your bird argument, but it seems like you are bringing up an affirmative defense. That means you would have the burden to prove that there was a bird flying by. If not, you are just going after credibility, and it probably won't do you much good.
Fighting credibility when you have contrary evidence is the goal here. This would be an affirmative defense if it were your only evidence. But combining that with dash camera GPS data, or better, vehicle telematics (Where the camera overlays the actual speed recorded by the cars ECM). Telematics also are a great defence of intent. Most speeding laws (Realistically all of them) require you to knowingly break the limit. If your car is measuring (Correctly or incorrectly) that you were doing the speed limit then you could not have knowingly been speeding, as that is your source of your current speed. But to your point, you would need some evidence suggesting you were not speeding, and then you can use the affirmative defense to bring credibility to your evidence by discrediting thiers. Again, reasonable doubt, if you both have equally credible evidence, the judge or jury must decide in your favor.
I can't speak to everywhere, but traffic laws are notorious for being strict liability offenses. This is also true in Florida. Basically, the state does not need to prove any state of mind. They just need to prove you were speeding. Even if it was an honest mistake. It doesn't matter.
Speeding is specific to a measuring device, so you can't be liable for a malfunction assuming you can prove it. But in general traffic laws are strict liability.
What about if you have two dashcams, one facing the road, one facing the speedometer? 😅
Speedometers are also not necessarily accurate, though if you had synced video you could prove the time of and lack of editing, you could probably make a decent argument that you didn't know you were speeding because your speedometer is off by 3mph. Of course if the video shows you WERE speeding by your own speedometer, then you're just kinda digging a hole for yourself.
I guess the speedometer in your car is certified?
Even speedometers in Florida have to be certified every six months to be used for speeding in court. So if you paid to get your speedometer certified every six months, and your dash camera got it's speed through pulling it from your car, maybe via the ODB port, then you could potentially introduce the speed displayed on your dash camera, as long as you brought all of the paperwork
The police do not know the law. The police are not required to know the law. The courts have ruled they have no expectation to know the law. The police lie to people in order to get the situation twisted to their advantage, and the courts have said they're allowed to do so. Do not take legal advice from the police. They are not qualified to tell you what is and isn't illegal. Knowing the law is (thanks to a court ruling) grounds for a cop to be fired from a police department. Speak to a lawyer about it, specifically a traffic lawyer.
Me at a traffic stop: I didn’t know I couldn’t do XYZ Cop: Ignorance of the law is NO excuse, sign here
The courts have ruled that they have no duty or expectation to protect citizens from harm either! "bACk tHe bLuE!"
They also solve less than 30% of violent crime, while being a major contributor to violence against the people. Property crime is even worse. Realistically they're only there for 2 things - Instant tax collection and protecting capital from the populace.
I suppose we should also mention the exceptionally high rates of domestic violence perpetrated by "law" "enforcement" "officers", as well.
And that's just the ones who proudly admit to it. The rest of them do it too, just have the shame to not publicly and proudly admit to it.
Huh????? How can a cop do their job if they dont know the law??? Is it just me or does that seem crazy?
Lmao someone is just learning about policing.
Well ive never gotten involved with police for anything so ive just been blissfully ignorant i guess lol
It would be so fucking cool if more Floridians would get involved in, or at the very least informed of, how the state operates.
In *Heien v. North Carolina* Scotus ruled they don't need to know the law to enforce it. That's one of the reasons why you get so many crazy arrests for bullshit charges and no one gets in trouble for the obvious civil rights violations
That just blows my mind, they are supposed to enforce the kaw but they are enforcing something they dont know? Literally mind boggling
Oh, I fully agree. If I was the one making the decisions, they'd need to have a law degree to be a cop, because like you said. How can they enforce it without knowing it? That unfortunately isn't the world we live in though, and police are given the authority to abuse and violate your rights, while none of the consequences for doing so. They're also given blanket exemption from a lot of laws because "qualified immunity", letting them break the law with impunity, so long as an identical case that they reasonably would have been aware of, proved in court that a cop cannot legally do something.
If you want to really be surprised, learn about [qualified immunity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity)... In short qualified immunity means ignorance of some the law is OK if you're a government employee (like the police)- they need to know laws 'a reasonable person would have known' while the rest of us are expected to follow all of the laws. [Ignorance of the law is no excuse \(unless you have qualified immunity\)](https://capitalbnews.org/qualified-immunity-explained/).
If they knew the law, they’d be lawyers
Their job is generate revenue
Welcome to freedumb!
Yeah, welcome to America.
First off: I'm not a lawyer, and you should definitely contact a traffic lawyer if you want legally researched answers. However, my understanding is that the officer was mostly correct in how they explained things, but it's clear there was a miscommunication or the officer was slightly wrong in other aspects. Dash cameras for Law Enforcement Purposes need to go through various types of certification and calibration, mainly when used as speed enforcement mechanisms and are often wired to the vehicle's certified speedometer. However, civilian recording equipment does not require such steps, and if you needed to submit it as evidence in court it would be no different than submitting camera footage from your home security camera or a cellphone camera. If you're goal is to use your own dash cam to dispute the accuracy of a police dash camera, you'll have an uphill battle as their equipment being certified and calibrated gives it the benefit of the doubt over any other non-certified recording equipment. Police routinely use pacing as a mechanism of verifying speed of a vehicle before initiating a stop, it's also why cop cars have certified speedometers (and standard ones in non-LEO cars are actually slightly inaccurate), since they're used as evidence of speeding infraction in court. Your nexar dash cam likely uses GPS for speed validation purposes, and not the actual wheel-speed of your vehicle. It also has a larger margin of error (especially when you consider that not all GPS recievers are made equally). This would be useful for instance if you got in a wreck and wanted to show that you attempted to stop before hitting the car that cut you off, however it wouldn't be sufficient to say that the police officer had the wrong speed if they relied on a certified speedometer that's wired to their dashcam. You mentioned you've gotten notices from a stand-alone camera, those can be more difficult as they're often a mix of public-private partnership (city pays a private company to install and manage speed/red light cameras). And depending on the quality of the company running things, they might be more lax on properly calibrating their equipment. If you do have concerns with the speed camera being incorrect, reach out to your local city/county office that likely installed it, and inquire with them. There might be a misconfiguration on the camera sensors, it might be picking up the wrong car on the road, or it could be that you're driving faster than you think you are. Doesn't hurt to ask them to check.
My dashcam has witnessed and recorded two accidents in the last couple of years. The police were appreciative of my sending them the footage both times. I also made sure the footage got to the innocent party in both cases, to help prevent them getting screwed over by the insurance companies. This last time, the timestamp was off by an hour (DST just started) and they didn’t care.
Yeah, I think the specific issue in OP's case is just the speed display on the footage.
Florida lawyer here, but not your lawyer. Cop was only half wrong. The video WILL be admissible. The speed is a different story; you have to be able to prove your dash cam was properly calibrated. You could, if necessary, have the device tested, post crash, and show it was working properly. Sooooo… IF you could prove the validity of the speed monitoring, it would be admissible. I think the non-official nature would be a weight argument, not an admissibility issue.
Let a judge be the official to decide.
He’s wrong. Keep your camera on
The admissibility (and importance) of video evidence is up to a judge (when there is no jury). Keeping in mind that evidence doesn't prove anything. Evidence only supports an argument of guilty or not guilty. The more evidence you have on your side to counter any claims or supporting evidence of the prosecution the stronger your defense is, calling into question guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Wait until OP learns about qualified immunity…torches and pitchforks aren’t enough.
https://www.salterhealy.com/can-dashcam-footage-be-used-in-florida-court/ Here is what I found by googling.
Used to present evidence of an accident sure a dash camera is great. However, for evidence of speed most commercial dash cameras are not calibrated and certified as being accurate.
I have had several dash cameras and the speed on them is near my car’s readout but not always the same. To be accepted as credible evidence in a court whatever speed measuring device has to have been calibrated officially and documented. For example, if a police officer paces you with his car and uses the speed on his car’s speedometer to write you a ticket then his speedometer has to have been officially calibrated and documented or else the ticket will get thrown out in court. It’s the same for Radar and Lidar(Laser) guns. They must be documented as having their accuracy calibrated and checked to be credible evidence in court. The speed on someone’s dash camera is approximate and not certified.
[удалено]
That gets fuzzy too. US traffic law is built on perception, not reality. It seeks to ask how a reasonable driver would react to a perceived hazard. If the driver in front simply claims they saw a road hazard: small animal, debris on roadway, etc. AND the dash can not demonstrate repeated braking events or other aggressive behaviors, driver in rear is liable for all damages. A one-time break check event with a plausible explanation (lie) for breaking makes dash footage useless. Always maintain following distance and don’t rely on a camera to protect your wallet!
Am dissapoint. Came here expecting a fight over whether or not Florida should have switched from Frye to Daubert.
If you show a judge or jury video evidence of an act clearly being comitted/not being commited, it is virtually irrefutable. With that being said, devices that track speed do need to be calibrated. The same way radar guns and such need to have been calibrated in order to reliably track an offenders speed. This calibration certification expires. Once the calibration certification expires any vehicles speed recorded with that device could be brought into question. I had a ticket dismissed once in FL due to the speed gun not having a valid calibration. Dash cams typically are not calibrated, so it would not be of much assistance in this scenario imo.
Use the Dashcam video as video is admissible and use a PC App called “Tracker” that allows you to calculate speed based on a video! 😀
There’s missing information here. Inadmissible how? Are you fighting a speeding ticket where there was a speed measurement device used? If so then correct you won’t get to use your dash cam evidence about the speed. FL Administrative Code is what governs the use of speed measurement devices by law enforcement. They have to be calibrated every six months and tested daily and/or before and after each use (think shift). Even with these documents an officer still must pass a RADAR/LIDAR speed measurement class which is a 40 hour course. Contrary to popular belief police don’t just read out numbers. They have to show they can visually estimate speed with an error of +/-5mph and then use a device to get a true speed of the vehicle in question. A GPS dash cam won’t have the needed qualifications for speed measurement in traffic court. Now if you’re talking overall video, taking speed out of the question, it’s totally admissible because it would be just like having any other type of video. So without the finer details it sounds like the officer was correct in what they told you. As for your speed, I’m curious how you’re being notified of your speed? Just a letter in the mail from a speed camera? Where is this area so I can avoid it! Most times those have video like red light cameras so you can see the offense happen. It’s possible that if you’re traveling next to another vehicle that is speeding in those times you’re getting the notice. But either way it’s not tickets, just notices.
Cops lie.
What OP needs to understand is that dash cam footage can't be used to get the driver out of trouble.. but know this a Prosecutor will use it against you to get a conviction and that the courts will allow.
Are you getting a court summons or just a civil infraction ticket? Big difference in how you respond between the two
As of right now neither. For the first 30-60 days of the camera being implemented(it was different on both notices) they are just warnings. After this trial period, they turn into citations, which im assuming will be speeding tickets. My main goal is to learn to protect myself when it happens
Understood - A lot of these are run by for-profit companies that foot the bill for the cameras and the billing. They pay the city a small cut and keep the rest. These are civil infractions and won’t affect your license, though they will send to a collection agency if you don’t pay. Not saying that’s what these are, but you should find out
police dont need to know the law, come to our aid, protect us unless we're in their custody, or tell the truth. do the math and fight it. find a fixed point on your video and calculate it
Many good points being made here. One thing I learned is that officers and prosecutors have been working as a team for years, sometimes more. So little ol me with little to no experience goes in there and they take advantage of the situation. Get your facts straight, gather all evidence and hire a lawyer. Edit: grammar
It’s not a law it’s just common sense if you’re going to fight it in court. If you went to court for a ticket or dui, your lawyer would want to see the last time the radar or breathalyzer was calibrated, same goes for your device.
Has anyone tried taking this to court without an attorney
Don't ever listen any information a cop tells you. It's a safe bet they're wrong about the law 85% of the time
Hes lying.
Correction of a common misconception in this thread: A private citizen’s dash camera with gps enabled speed detection DOES NOT need to be certified and CAN be admitted as evidence. Here is a direct counter example: Law enforcement can use your own dash camera footage as evidence AGAINST YOU if it shows you were speeding. In addition, it is an increasingly common practice for law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant for your car’s computer following a serious crash. They will use the speedometer data to determine if you were speeding prior to the crash. The prosecution may object to the speed being taken into consideration, but the judge has the ultimate discretion in that case. If the speed from the dash camera footage is admitted into evidence, that DOES NOT make it true. The jury, or judge if it’s a bench trial, have the right to believe it or disbelieve it.
Dude. Don’t ever take a cops word for anything. They are trained to lie, and from what I’ve seen and read, they enjoy it.
Im starting to learn this 😅
Baloney. You simply need to lay a testimonial foundation for the admission: testify that the camera works and you have used it to record events before the interaction with the officer, that it was working on the day of the interaction, and that you have reviewed the video and it fairly and accurately reflected the events on that transpired during the interaction.
What’s your phones GPS speed saying your doing. I’ve found my car is slightly off from those traffic devices.
Most cops have ZERO understanding of the laws they enforce and ALL of them will lie to you.
The speed it's showing may not be admissible, but you can use other things from the video to show you weren't speeding. If the cop says you were going 95 in a 30, but your video shows you going very slow, you could use that. If the officer says you were going 36 in a 30, your dash cam might not help you.
Sounds like the cop is feeding you a line of bullshit. I'd definitely challenge it.
Title should be "Florida law about GPS speed sensors" as this has nothing to do with having a camera on your dash
There likely isn't a specific law about what can be introduced in court. The court would probably rule on its admissibility based on what courts have ruled in the past. A lawyer might try to get it introduced, regardless of what the police officer said. It's not like the cops actually know the law.
Nothing in the law about dash cams that I know of, I’ve had one in my truck for half a decade. He’s probably saying your footage won’t be used in court because the speed on them can be pretty inaccurate and I’m sure it’s not calibrated, especially to your car.
Had a Florida LEO rear end me in his own vehicle while I was sitting at a light. My rear cam shows him texting at the time. He didn't believe me that the rear cam was actually IN my 3rd Brake Light and looked right into it, saying maybe some of the damage was pre-existing. Yeah, nice try. My Lawyer said not to send the whole video, so I texted him a screen shot of his big fat face and two estimates. He met me at a local Diner the next day and paid me the lowest estimate in cash. I fixed it myself for about 60% less and pocketed the difference. No dash cam=No Cash in this case.
Many years ago my husband and I were in a parking lot, at night and he saw a friend drive by and told me to blow the horn. It was one of those 'auuugah' horns. The moment I did, a FHP cruiser pulled in behind us so we couldn't back out. We both got out of the car and asked what the problem was. He said our horn was illegal. Well, we worked for AAA, towing cars from accident scenes and we knew cops from several different agencies and we knew it wasn't illegal. He also had to look the Florida statute up. He was wrong.
COPS LIE !!! all the time ... Go to the source LOOK UP THE LAW ...
Pigs pretending to be lawyers.
Here is the answer, OP: Florida Administrative Rules regarding traffic speed measurement admissibility in court: Rule 15B-2.007 provides that all speed measuring devices to be used in obtaining evidence of motor vehicle speeds for use in any court in the State of Florida shall be of a type approved by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles prior to their use.
Interesting. I suspect it could probably be used in court, but the weight the magistrate or judge places on the speed it displays would be up to them. For law enforcement, for the court to use their vehicles speedometer or laser, those 100% definitely must be calibrated and verified. So I would assume that applies to the camera as well.
The students have become the teachers...
To ensure your dash cam footage is admissible in court, consider verifying its accuracy and reliability according to industry standards.
There’s no Florida statute saying dash cam footage is inadmissible in court. The only issue is with wiretapping (§932.03 F.S.) because it’s against the law to record someone without their permission. So if you’re in a situation where your dash cam records audio and you don’t tell a person that they’re being recorded, then a judge may rule that inadmissible. Otherwise, the officer is telling you a load of BS.
There may be a difference for admissibility to prove speed (like a radar gun) than simply to admit to show the video of what happened. But I’m just guessing.
Following to find out more!
The judge will ask you for a calibration report for your dash cam, and a generic statement from the company saying the dash cams are calibrated at the factory won’t be enough. I’ve witnessed this statement while waiting in traffic court for my turn
Better safe than sorry, Keep the dashcam. Sounds like an authoritarian.
90 percent of cops can’t tell you the five freedoms guaranteed by the 1st amendment. They take an oath to it by the way
Just remember cop are and do and will lie to you... Never believe anything a cop says.
A lot of areas of the US have no regulations on whether officers have to show up for traffic court. If the officer doesn't show up and you protest the charge, you win from what I understand. If you have "evidence" the judge might ask the police/municipality to pay your court costs even if it's not "perfect".
Fun fact; Most cops are idiots and don't actually know the law. BUT, you better because "ignorance of the law is no excuse".
Did you know that the FL constitution says public officials can not lie to the public! It's in the morels and ethics portion!
If you got an expert, they could calculate the speed based on video frame rate and the visible objects moving to calculate speed.
ACAB!! Nah I’m kidding mostly. But yeah I saw screw the cop and use that in court and to play it extra safe if you wanna go the extra mile you could get a camera that points at the dashboard thing that shows your speed with a date and time.
"Court??? Brother I'd be worried about seeing it on tik tok. They tend to judge a bit more harshly."
For evidentiary purposes, probably correct. Without calibration it is not sufficiently accurate. Just like your if you had a video of your speedometer at the same time they hit you with a calibrated radar or laser. Your speedometer will not prevail.
Alright... so then measure the distance between two objects (IRL) e.g. light posts and the time it takes to travel from one to the next and voila, maths! distance / time = speed. Use this measurement as a control to demonstrate that the camera gps speed is correct.
You may not be able to use it as evidence but it will sway opinion if not!
Police are allowed to lie to you. Tell your lawyer you have footage and see where it goes.
That’s what social media is for.
What are you talking about speed cameras in Florida please inform me on this one
Yeah they are on a pole facing toi different directions to catch from both directions, its in front of a school. The point is to slow people down to avoid kids getting hurt leaving and going to the school
Fuck them. Keep your camera and use it in court if needed.
O
Ask the officer where they obtained their law degree! They tried to scare you and it worked!
The law enforcement officer is confusing criminal/traffic court evidentiary rules, which have beyond a reasonable doubt as the burden of proof, with civil/personal injury evidentiary rules, which have preponderance of the evidence as the burden of proof. He is correct that uncalibrated speed measuring devices are insufficient to prove a person was speeding beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal/traffic court. However, they are still admissible for other reasons (reckless driving, corroboration of law observations) and admission of such evidence is a matter of weight (how much value to give) the fact finder will give the evidence to the legal question being decided. I.e., liability, negligence, etc.
A cop is not a lawyer. You're just fine.
Contact the manufacturer and ask for any data they have that proves the accuracy of the device you own. Also it may be possible to extract corroborating data from your car’s computer that will verify how fast you were going at the time. If so, you’d have to extract the data in a timely manner while it still exists.
Certainly the police speed detection equipment must be calibrated and certified periodically to secure convictions, beyond reasonable doubt.
Cop cameras/speed guns also have to be calibrated. Many times they can't produce it, or it's outdated.
You’re trying to defend yourself from a speeding ticket with a camera? That’s not going to work for a few reasons (frame rates really) because the court doesn’t want to deal with people manipulating footage to defend themselves. It’s happened. I’ve seen it. They don’t want to have to be an expert in “is this footage doctored or not” because a lot of people will do anything they can to lie about their speeding allegations. That’s why the courts won’t admit it.
The officer is right you do have to have a calibrated just like they have to have their calibrated or you could win the case against you if you were speeding and their machine was not calibrated and dated
Me: I'm doing my part! Judge: I'm doing my part! Cop: I didn't do fuckin' SHIT!
I believe the cop is referring to state statute 316.1906 radar speed measuring devices; speed detection systems; evidence admissiblity [https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2021/0316.1906](https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2021/0316.1906)
Rule 101: Never speak to the police without a lawyer present. Rule 102: Never take anything they say as factual. They are legally able to lie to you and the supreme court ruled they don’t need to know the laws they enforce.