appear or trial by declaration?

[martyreeus]

Hi,

I got a speeding ticket in Oakland.
I was travelling at a speed i know is safe and below the speed limit along 880.
It was around 1am on a friday morning. The officer went behind me and pulled me over, instructed me to go to a staging area where there are 2 more police cars at the exit. He told me that I was speeding at 75 on a 45 mile zone along 880. I told him that I was not aware that I was. I was under the impression that he pulled me over for suspicion of DUI. He wrote me a ticket and told me that he was going to give me a break by writing that I was travelling at 75 on a 65 mile zone. I signed the ticket. I never got a chance to ask him details about how he found me to be travelling at that speed. When I checked the ticket, the facts written are as follows . . .
22349 (a) vc exceeds 65 mph max
Speed approx. 75+
Max. speed 65
Location of violation: I-80 n/b from 2nd 29th to 16th
Beat and Area stated.
The space where radar/lidar unit/vehicle patrol no. were BLANK

I am definitely going to contest this ticket.
My question is should I go for a trial by declaration or go to court?
What are my chances and how come there are no specific evidences stating how he was able to log me at
75mph?
I know that the burden of proving my guilt lies on the accuser to prove my guilt. What evidence does he have?
Thanks and I hope to get some thoughts.

Marty

 

[army judge]

You'll have to edit until trial to discover the evidence in a traffic case. But, the cop won't be proving anything. That burden will be born by the prosecutor or city attorney.

A trial by declaration isn't worth your time, if you want to cross examine the officer.

That said, if a trial is what you want, a trial is what you should seek.