My boyfriends brother his girlfriend myself and my boyfriend were driving home from a Cavs game last night.
The officer told us one speed then wrote a different speed on the ticket.
We asked to see the radar and he became very rude and short tempered and told us "why there is nothing to see. if i were to show you all that would be there is the gun."
By Ohio law did the officer have to show us the radar gun?

I don't think he has to show you, but he could have if he was a nice guy. Ha-ha oh I forgot we're talking about cops. There are allot of things he is supposed to do to make sure the radar is working right. First find out what kind of radar he was using. They have to check and tune the radar before and after each use and keep a record of it. There are more things but you have to get him on a technical mistake. Don't feel bad I'm in the same boat as you. Good luck!

By Ohio law did the officer have to show us the radar gun?
Hello kc:

Nope.

excon

I don't think he has to show you, but he could of if he was a nice guy. Ha-ha oh I forgot we're talking about cops. There are allot of things he is supposed to do to make sure the radar is working right. First find out what kind of radar he was using. They have to check and tune the radar before and after each use and keep a record of it. There are more things but you have to get him on a technical mistake. don't feel bad I'm in the same boat as you. Good luck!!


This doesn't answer the question.

The answer is no.

I live in Ohio and the answer is no, they do not have to show you. It is up to your attorney to make them prove it.

In fact it would be a violation of most department policy to allow you into the front of the police car to allow you to see it.
Noramlly there is no real "gun" it is a box often built into the car or attached to the dash.

Next often there is nothing to show, some don't automatically lock on the fastest speed, so the gun will merely show 0 if he did not hit the lock buttom. He reads it, and writes down what he sees.

And in most courts the officers word as to the reading is all the evidence needed you will have to try and prove,
1 officer is known to lie
2. officer was not POST certified to use radar equipment
3. equpment was ot properly tested before the start of shift
And dozens of things you try and use to have the radar readig thrown out

I was a police officer in the military and in Washington, DC, and in addition to all of the above, the police officer does not have to show you anything at the time of the offense but his valid identification (I assume he was wearing a uniform) and a copy of the charging document (the ticket). The burden of proof and showing the things that support it come at the time of the trial, if there is one.

In my state the officer does not have to charge you with the actual reading that appears on the "gun", they can "give you a break" and charge you with any speed less than the actual reading.

Wow, I wasn't aware the police were under no obligation to show you the instrument in the U.S. I do believe that in Canada you can most definitely ask to see the speed that was recorded.

That's the way it is in the U.S. (barring some local laws to the contrary) and the reasoning should be obvious. Demonstrating elements of the case to the defendant on the street serves no legal purpose. It simply holds up traffic and proves nothing. That's what courts are for.

Yes at the end of the day, you show them, they still say it was not right, or they lie in court and say that was not what it said. ** when you do lock it on. I was lucky in one car, it locked onto the fastest time but my regular old radar gun, merely went down to 0 when I laid it down, it showed the speed, and as they slowed it, the display showed the slower speed. So really on the older equipment there is no display to show.

I can't image a department allowing someone to be in the front of the car, with the computer equipment, the raido equipment and the other weapons stored there.

Wow, I wasn't aware the police were under no obligation to show you the instrument inthe U.S. I do beleive that in Canada you can most definetly ask to see the speed that was recorded.


I will check but I believe in Canada you can ask what speed was recorded but do not have the "right" to see the actual instrument which recorded that speed.

Thanks Judy, I would be very interested in the answer. I know that you have the right to ensure the machine is working properly, whether that means the police must perform a diagnostic test or show you the actual piece of equipment I do not know for fact.

Thanks Judy, I would be very interested in the answer. I know that you have the right to ensure the machine is working properly, whether that means the police must perform a diagnostic test or show you the actual piece of equipment I do not know for fact.


If we are talking about showing it to you at the place of your "arrest" (which is, technically, what a ticket is), no, they don't have to and no, they don't.

At trial - yes.

Not sure we were on the same page - but that's the word from a friend of mine who is an RCMP.

I am pretty sure one is able to inquire or have the officer ensure the equipment is working properly on site. I cannot remember where I came across that information but there are things a person can view or inquire about on site. Of course I've fallen short of actually checking this:)

You can ask anything you want but the officer is under no obligation to demonstrate to you that the equipment is working on the street with traffic whizzing by. Again, that is what the court is for.

Just thought I'd let you know, I went to court and got my ticket dismissed. It's worth going at least you have a half of a chance.

Hey, I was a court bailiff and you would be surprised how many cops don't show up for traffic court, at least in my area. And every case they have gets dismissed if they don't appear! Only the very serious cases get continued as a general rule.

just thought I'd let you know, I went to court and got my ticket dismissed. It's worth going at least you have a half of a chance.



Why was it dismissed? The Officer didn't show (which is what I'm gathering happened)?

We did have one judge who got so fed up with officers not appearing that he started issuing body attachments for officers who didn't appear. He caused quite a stir and got his name in the papers, but attendance by officers on traffic court day drastically improved!

Yes, but the decision was the Judges.

I sure is! The judge is the only person who can dismiss a case that the prosecution has gone forward on...