Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mhuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!mhuxd!cwc
From: cwc@mhuxd.UUCP (Chip Christ)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: re: Defense..., etc.
Message-ID: <1248@mhuxd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Feb-84 09:29:02 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxd.1248
Posted: Tue Feb  7 09:29:02 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Feb-84 14:24:58 EST
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 11

_
Sounds, to my layman's ear, like that judge is asking for just that--
a "federal case".  It's been shown time and time again that those radar
units used for clocking traffic can be really flakey (I think I read or
saw of a case where a tree was clocked at 65 mph).  To refuse to examine
documentation bearing on the validity of the evidence used to find the
motorist guilty of speeding is asking for an appeal (unless, of course,
the driver was outrageously guilty, like doing 80 in a 40 mph zone).
Any thoughts from legal types?

					Chip