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