Aircraft

[redhead]

Disclaimer: THIS IS NOT ME...I DID NOT GET THIS TICKET :smile: This was posted on another forum that I visit, and I have been intrigued by it.


Ok, so a friend/forum poster was driving down 101 through the infamous King City trap. He got tagged by the plane at 90 in the 70. Was written for cvc22356(b) He says he is going to fight is using CVC 40801.
And this is a direct quote from him:
In this case the pilot clearly used a speed trap method to determine the speed which by the way is not accurate, and the citing officer who MUST verify the violation independently failed to confirm the violation as he indicated on the ticket that the violations not committed in his presence, declared on information and belief.

Ok, so there it is. His side.
What I do not understand and have not been able to find though all sorts of post on all sorts of LE forums is how the Observers track a car and "pace" or "estimate" the speed. The last 2 ride a longs I have been on with CHP's, neither have worked with a/c so they did not have a conclusive answer. I am not asking for the inside secret or anything, I am just wondering if having the sign(Patroled by A/C) posted allows the LEO to use lines or any other point of reference, which 40801 would incite being a speed trap?

I just turned in my PHQ, so I hope to be in the academy soon enough to find out the answer, or at least have the proper resources to find it...and if I need to wait, so be it. I don't have to fight it, he does :smile:

Thanks guys and be safe....

[Darth Choke]

The pilot does not have to use a speed trap scenario. He can pace the car from the air matching speed with speed.

[redhead]

The pilot does not have to use a speed trap scenario. He can pace the car from the air matching speed with speed.Perfect.
We had "experts" on the other site saying this was not possible. But, thank you. Dont worry, not sharing with him. Just needed to know for myself.

[Mac]

We had "experts" on the other site saying this was not possible.
LOL - I'm glad you put "experts" in quotes.....it can be done, and is prosecuted successfully and often in many courts. Let us know how your friend's day in court goes.

[Your Mentor]

When issuing a citation for aircraft speed enforcement, we don't list ourselves as the citing officer. We are listed as the issuing officer and the pilot is listed as the citing officer; hence the ground unit marking the "Not Committed In My Presence," box. Also there is plenty of case law supporting aircraft speed enforcement. A speed trap, as defined under California law, is ANY method used to determine a violator's speed in which a formula using time, distance and speed is employed. If you remove one of those elements; time, distance, or speed, it ceases to be a speed trap by definition. There are large painted white rectangles along highways were aircraft are used but the pilot is not clocking the car as it passes them. That would constitute a speed trap. The pilot uses those marks to accurately determine the aircraft's speed over ground. As the pilot does this, he or she positions the plane so as to match the target vehicle's speed. This is no different than a ground unit pacing a vehicle. At no time is the violator "clocked" because the pilot isn't concerned with how much time the target vehicle took to travel between two points. In fact, the distance the violator travels while being paced is irrelevant.

[redhead]

Thank you very much. I just learned a ton!! :smile:

[Mac]

...and the citing officer who MUST verify the violation independently failed to confirm the violation as he indicated on the ticket that the violations not committed in his presence, declared on information and belief. [/i]

There's where the so-called "experts" are wrong again. There's NO requirement that the citing officer on the ground has to independently verify the violation. The pilot is in radio contact and verifies that the ground officer is stopping the correct vehicle, then (just as Your Mentor said) the issuing officer writes the pilot's name/ID number in the box that says "Arresting Officer if other than above". Scenarios such as this are exactly why the I&B (Information & Belief) box exists on the citation.

Aircraft enforcement has been used successfully for quite some time, and the courts have taken judicial notice of the fact that the methodology is valid and does not constitute a speed trap. I've seen many, many aircraft cites contested in court, and have yet to see a judge/commissioner throw one out on that basis (although many defendants have tried).

[Darth Choke]

BY THE WAY...


Working airplane details are reeeaaallllly fun!! http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/sarge/Tongue_anim.gif

[Your Mentor]

You said it Darth!!!:biggrin:

[nuke1601]

Since we are discussing aircraft, has anyone been a pilot for the CHP?

[Your Mentor]

One forum member shows he is a pilot out of Fresno; propeller26. He hasn't posted yet but you could email him with questions. Get him to join in on the topic. I'm sure he could give us all some great first hand information.

[Tom]

My ex riding partner is a pilot in GGD. If you ask me I'll ask him or I may know. Doubt it though. Actually he is the "other" guy in my avatar.

Tom

[gofly]

In aircraft patrols, who actually issues the ticket (since you guys said it wasn't the actual officer in the car)? Is it actually the pilot or the observer?

Also I'd really likek to hear any info you get regarding the aviation unit.

Thanks. Be safe.

[Your Mentor]

We probably made it more confusing than it is. The ground unit issues the ticket. There is a seperate space on the citation to list the pilot as the "arresting officer" even though there's no real arrest. It's a legal term only. If the ground unit didn't issue the ticket the plane would have to land which is kind of difficult.

[gofly]

If someone who gets a ticket from an airplane detail wants to fight it and go to court, which of the officers must go: issuing, pilot, observer, all three, any two?

Thanks. Be safe.

[dw]

The "arresting" and "citing", so generally the observer (to testify he determined the speed of the vehicle and it was the same one stopped), and the officer on the ground (to testify to the identification of the driver, and again, that it was confirmed to be the correct vehicle.)

[lomotor]

I've worked a detail where we worked with the airplane and issued citations. I've also been to court on these. Usually the court subpoenas the aircraft observer (the guy who paced him and said "ya that's him", and the issuing officer for identification purposes. Ultimately it's the flight officer who is the citing officer and the ground officer is just the ink "press hard four copies" guy.

[gofly]

and the pilot just gets to sit there and look cool. almost as cool as the motor officer. :cool:

Good Luck. Be Safe.