More proof Ohio is a backward-A$$ state.

Submitted by James Burrill Angell on

Apparently the Ohio Supreme Court has determined Ohio police can give speeding tickets without actually using a radar. Their best guess is good enough.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100618/OPINION03/6180359/1016/Radar-not-required-in-Ohio

Think I already see the line of cops at the border waiting for Michigan drivers coming over who were in their opinion driving over the border.....errr......over the speed limit.

GVBlue86

June 18th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^

All I can say is wow. It only takes one Buckeye fan cop to ruin the party for anybody in MI driving down there. I'm just gonna go through Indiana down and around.

Tater

June 18th, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^

This is going to make the journey to Columbus on game day really, really suck for Michigan fans.  Getting cars vandalized and getting ticketed for 56 in a 55 was bad enough.  Now, the police can just lie and their word is "the law."

I don't know whether I should be happy or sad to know that the Michigan State Police have too much class to recirprocate. 

KidA2112

June 18th, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^

That's what hurts the most as far as being in this slump against them. There used to be plenty of neutral places in Ohio where you could wear your Michigan stuff and not have to deal with idiots. Toledo, Cleveland, I grew up around the WVA/PA/OH side and it wasn't bad at all until they started winning.

Erik_in_Dayton

June 18th, 2010 at 11:54 AM ^

The case involved someone going 80 mph in a 60 mph zone.  You can't eyeball that, more-or-less?  It's just judging the time between distances...I'm pretty sure that other states have allowed this for awhile. 

Erik_in_Dayton

June 18th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^

It's not different than a police officer ticketing you for jaywalking or reckless driving (like weaving in and out of lanes w/out using your signal).  In either instance, the officer may not be able to refer to anything but what he/she saw.

Don't get me wrong, I take your point, but the reality is that a cop could screw you over anytime if he/she wanted to. 

Bryan

June 18th, 2010 at 12:11 PM ^

Patrol officers are trained in Ohio and must be able to estimate the speed of a vehicle within 3-4mph to pass the academy, and this officer had 13 years on the job. The court based it on case law that has consistently held the officer's judgement is sufficient weight to bypass the independent verification (radar). 

Even with this, I will still speed when I'm in Ohio in order to get through it as fast as possible

Mr. Robot

June 18th, 2010 at 12:43 PM ^

Its not about the individual case when it goes that high up the court chain. The problem is that the officer didn't get him on the gun, and because the court ruled that isn't necessary, any policeman that passes training can say determine anybody they want is speeding. If you've got a Michigan plate and the cop decides you ought to be paying a tax to use Ohio's roads, he now has every right to give you a ticket AND have it stand up in court if you should deem it worth the trip down to fight it. I'm not syaing that all Ohio cops would do such a thing, but the fact is, on November 27, it only takes one who will.

I can say this much, if I get a ticket in Ohio for visual evidence of speeding, I am definitely not paying it. I never speed in Ohio because I know it only takes one doucher (Especially with a UM plate). I'll just make sure I'm not the one driving to Columbus in 2012.

Njia

June 18th, 2010 at 12:51 PM ^

Establishes, then, the upper bound at which you can have a legitimate defense for speeding. If the error is +/- 4 MPH, and the speed limit is 65 MPH, then feel free to go 69 MPH with impunity. If the trooper uses his "estimated" speed by eye-balling you rather than a radar gun, you can claim you were doing the speed limit, 65 MPH. Based on the allowed error, and the cop's testimony, he can't claim otherwise.

Search4Meaning

June 18th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^

Is that Ohio State Police/Sheriffs must use marked patrol vehicles when on traffic duty - no unmarked cars.

And at the end of the day they still have to live in Ohio.

teldar

June 18th, 2010 at 1:02 PM ^

I live in the Columbus and there was an article in the toilet papr/rag here that this will not be allowed and a radar/laser gun must be used. This ticket was thrown out/

bronxblue

June 18th, 2010 at 1:13 PM ^

I doubt this precedent will remain unchallenged going forward.  Sure, going 81 in a 60 is pretty easy to guess, but just wait until they write a ticket for "guesstimating" 72 in a 65.  I understand where the Ohio court is coming from, but this situation is a bad test case for the greater law.

COB

June 18th, 2010 at 1:52 PM ^

"Pacing" or a cop judging your speed based on theirs, is allowed in a bunch of states and has been for years.  It is extremely difficult to disprove as it is an obvious he-said-he-said scenario.  I don't believe the intent of the law is to have cops eyeballing people from the side of the road from now on. 

Rico616

June 19th, 2010 at 12:32 AM ^

I was on the Ohio turnpike driving to DC and an Ohio cop pulled me over because I wasnt "1 car lengths for every 10mph that I was driving behind the car in front of me". Seriously? I was hardly tailgating but I guess I was supposed to be 7-8 car lengths behind instead of 5. I only got a warning but it sure was a waste of 15 minutes.

On my brothers way home from NY he was pulled over for the same reason, but he actually received a ticket.

It's kind of ticky tacky if you ask me. However on my way back to Michigan from DC there was a group of me and 3 other cars going about 100mph for a good 30 or 40 miles and no cop in site...so maybe thats why they're so anal.