The case alludes to this being valid only if the officer is trained and certified in estimation. This is a substantial instructional block in every academy that I know of in Mass. This estimation principle, if you will, is mostly used in an unforseeable scenerio. You will not find officers setting up on a stationary traffic enforcement assignement armed only with their estimation skills. The prime example of how this is used-
You are on patrol in your cruiser. You are stopped, waiting to pull out from a sidestreet or strip mall or something like that. Your dashmounted radar is facing straight forward and straight back (perpendicular to the traffic flow) so it is useless on short (immediate) notice. You have no handheld with you. Now, you have travelled this road hourly for most of your adult life and you know and are comfortable with what the traffic flow looks like at any given hour. Just then, from around a distant corner, you see a smaller car headed towards you. Based on all your experience and training (nevermind as a police officer, just as an alert motorist) you know beyond all reasonable doubt in your mind that this vehicle is travelling well in excess of the posted speed limit of X. This vehicle is travelling so fast that you believe it could eventually become a hazard to other motorists but not so fast that it is out of control.
What do you do?
A. Nothing, because you didnt get it on radar or laser and you clearly do not have enough to stop the vehicle on any foolish reckless driving violaions (which there is no such thing btw)
B. Unlawfully stop the vehicle and only verbally chastise the operator
C. "estimate" the vehicle's speed based on your inherent knowledge of the road and the traffic flow and cite the individual accordingly, knowing that even though you don't have 100% assurance of your estimation's accuracy but in the name of the public good, you are bound to "act" in some way.
D. shoot the person and go get coffee and donuts
This is truly not meant to provoke an argument but rather to illustrate the necessity of the law/policy. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but this is reasonable in mine.
Disclaimer- As many of you know from my previous posts, I am not a big speed enforcement guy (or state revenue agent as it were) as this practice would make me a hypocrite, but there are some times when you just need to trust the system.
BTW- Lawn psycho, you are off track if you think the liberal courts in Mass give two flying hoots about revenue when it comes to tickets, appeals, or anything else within their judicial scope. I have seen sooooo many fines just eliminated for no good reason. They truly do not factor governmental revenue into justice. They are far more likely to find on behalf of the violator just to spite the police.
|