Ok so me and a buddy were having a debate and nothing was stated to be "set in stone" and had a lot of wording that contridicted previously statements...much like all of NJs laws. But, here it is.... We all know big white signs with black lettering and numbers state speed limits. But when entering a turn the yellow signs with black lettering and numbers are cautionary signs or speed limit signs? We had a friend who go pulled over for going above the yellow sign in a turn on a motorcycle, HOWEVER he was doing under the white speed limit sign that was posted. Still has a court date that got pushed back because the cop never showed up. But whats your take on it?

The permanent speed limit signs over-ride the non-written speed limits such as "25-MPH in residential areas, etc".  Those temporary signs that you're describing over-ride the permanent signs.

The permanent speed limit signs over-ride the non-written speed limits such as "25-MPH in residential areas, etc".  Those temporary signs that you're describing over-ride the permanent signs.

Say whhaaaaat? Too much over-riding here....

I believe the yellow signs are a suggested speeds....

 

Did he get a ticket for "speeding" or something else? 

I believe the yellow signs are a suggested speeds....

 

Did he get a ticket for "speeding" or something else?

+1

This is how I was taught most of those signs are warning/caution for 18 wheeler type vehicles .

Good example exit ramp bend with speed posted in yellow 20 mph ,if I was transporting bulk liquid I'd exit at 10 mph to avoid a roll over.

They are advisory signs and hold the same force as speed limit signs but it's a different infraction.   Ask me how I know.

Here's what I was told by several cops in the past:

 

The white signs are the speed limit. The yellow ones, such as around curves, are advisory. They can't give you a ticket for speeding, for exceeding the "yellow sign" speed, as long as your under the posted "white sign" limit. HOWEVER, I was told that if you get into/cause an accident where your speed was above that "yellow sign" advisory speed, then you can be ticketed for  careless or reckless driving.

I suppose that would also apply, minus an accident, if say you were exceeding that "yellow sing" number around a corner and were observed to be "drifting" around the corner, or otherwise appearing to not have control of the car.  I think that would be pretty hard to do, while still under the "real" "white sign" limit, unless snow/ice/etc... were involved, in which case, your speed might be considered excessive/unsafe for the conditions, regardless of being under the "white sign" limit. 

I would think you could get careless driving or unsafe operation of a motor vehicle.

It wasn't a speeding ticket from what we know...it was a careless...which I said was Bullchit...If an accident or some sort or property damage was caused like hoping the curb and taking out a bush or two would have happened I can see the jusitifying reason to give careless or even wreckless driving summons....Again, from what we know from words and not physically being there was that cop stated "Its because he was going above yellow signed posted speed limit" I feel the cop just didnt like "rice rocket motorcycles" and is the reason why he got what he got.

Careless driving does not legally equate to a posted warning/advisory sign. It relates to the operation of the vehicle itself.

Warning/advisory signs are not enforceable unto themselves.

 

Edited for clarification: Diamond shaped signs are not enforceable.

Construction signs however are enforceable.

It wasn't a speeding ticket from what we know...it was a careless...which I said was Bullchit...If an accident or some sort or property damage was caused like hoping the curb and taking out a bush or two would have happened I can see the jusitifying reason to give careless or even wreckless driving summons....Again, from what we know from words and not physically being there was that cop stated "Its because he was going above yellow signed posted speed limit" I feel the cop just didnt like "rice rocket motorcycles" and is the reason why he got what he got.

Yeah. Sounds totally like the cop's fault. That must be it then. Just tell that to the judge. Case closed. Sorry for the inconvenience. Have a nice day.

Still has a court date that got pushed back because the cop never showed up. 

 

Wait. Huh?

Best thing that can happen is when the ticketing officer fails to appear in court. 

You sure you have any of this story straight??

Careless driving does not legally equate to a posted warning/advisory sign. It relates to the operation of the vehicle itself.

Warning/advisory signs are not enforceable unto themselves.

 

Edited for clarification: Diamond shaped signs are not enforceable.

Construction signs however are enforceable.

You even said it yourself...

 

Yeah. Sounds totally like the cop's fault. That must be it then. Just tell that to the judge. Case closed. Sorry for the inconvenience. Have a nice day.

+1 even if your sarcasm is horrible just as much as you are butthurt by me having an opinion.

Still has a court date that got pushed back because the cop never showed up. But whats your take on it?

If the cop didn't show up he should have asked the judge for it to be dismissed on the spot, no?

Back to the first part of your into, I always thought that if a cop failed to show the case is thrown out not postponed.  Isn't that a case of the DA failing to produce a witness and the case should be dismissed.

 

 

edit- looks like while I was typing someone beat me to this.

You even said it yourself...

 

+1 even if your sarcasm is horrible just as much as you are butthurt by me having an opinion.

 

The sarcasm matches the disrespect for the police officer. 

The whole story sounds bogus anyway.

If the cop didn't show up he should have asked the judge for it to be dismissed on the spot, no?

 

judicial and prosecutorial discretion as I understand it.

The sarcasm matches the disrespect for the police officer. 

The whole story sounds bogus anyway.

I disrespected him because I made an assumption of him perhaps not liking a certain type of motorcycle....damn man you need some tougher skin or perhaps its that time of month....bogus no, as I previously stated...all this was told to us...I will get more of the story as soon I talk to him again.

Careless driving does not legally equate to a posted warning/advisory sign. It relates to the operation of the vehicle itself.

Warning/advisory signs are not enforceable unto themselves.

 

Edited for clarification: Diamond shaped signs are not enforceable.

Construction signs however are enforceable.

True. I don't think you can be charged with "violating" the advisory sign, per-se. The way it was explained to me was, if you exceed that 'advisory" and have no problems (no crash,etc...) then more power to you, "have a nice day". If, on the other hand, you do have an accident while going around said curve, and while exceeding the "advisory" limit, then they will hold it against you. Again, not a speeding ticket for exceeding the "advised" limit, but rather an "unsafe operation", "careless", or "reckless", because you would have allegedly acted in an imprudent manner by ignoring the advisory.  By exceeding the advised "safe" speed, you are assumed to be at fault. To make an analogy to the gun laws, and to paraphrase a court ruling: "when a driver exceeds the posted "advisory" speed, he does so at his own peril"

 

 

It wasn't a speeding ticket from what we know...it was a careless...which I said was Bullchit...If an accident or some sort or property damage was caused like hoping the curb and taking out a bush or two would have happened I can see the jusitifying reason to give careless or even wreckless driving summons....Again, from what we know from words and not physically being there was that cop stated "Its because he was going above yellow signed posted speed limit" I feel the cop just didnt like "rice rocket motorcycles" and is the reason why he got what he got.

 

Yeah. Sounds totally like the cop's fault. That must be it then. Just tell that to the judge. Case closed. Sorry for the inconvenience. Have a nice day.

 

I don't really see how what 2ANJ said was "disrespectful" to the cop; certainly nothing to warrant your bad attitude. ASSUMING, things happened the way he said, and there was nothing else to the story (no accident, stunt riding,etc...), then I think the cop was in the wrong. It sounds like he basically wrote an improper "careless" ticket, because he knew a speeding ticket wouldn't stick. You yourself pointed out that the advisory signs are not enforceable "unto themselves", so if all the bike rider was doing was going faster then the advisory sign "allowed", with no other legitimate "bad acts", then he shouldn't have been ticketed at all. 

 

Back to the first part of your into, I always thought that if a cop failed to show the case is thrown out not postponed.  Isn't that a case of the DA failing to produce a witness and the case should be dismissed.

 

 

edit- looks like while I was typing someone beat me to this.

I've had my share of speeding tickets (or things issued instead of speeding) and sat through numerous municipal court sessions, and from what I've seen, the prosecutors/judges are way too "forgiving" of no-shows and delays by "arresting" officers. Unless, the cop involved has pissed someone off, or has missed multiple appearances without a "good" reason, the judge will almost always "let it slide", and inconvenience the defendant with a postponement. 

 

The other thing to keep in mind though, is they may not have been there for a trial, but rather the "first appearance"/pleading, which the officer/witnesses are not obligated to show up for. Its assumed that nobody is ready for trial at that point, so it won't be happening that day. IF the officer is there, or has already spoken to the prosecutor, you may be able to negotiate a plea, and "handle" everything that day/evening, but if not, you're coming back for a trial at another time.

Back to the first part of your into, I always thought that if a cop failed to show the case is thrown out not postponed.  Isn't that a case of the DA failing to produce a witness and the case should be dismissed.

 

 

edit- looks like while I was typing someone beat me to this.

From my past summons that I pleaded not guilty to they gave the officer another chance to appear due to the fact "he was on a call at the time" on shift but on a call....So I went back a month later and he showed up...

True. I don't think you can be charged with "violating" the advisory sign, per-se. The way it was explained to me was, if you exceed that 'advisory" and have no problems (no crash,etc...) then more power to you, "have a nice day". If, on the other hand, you do have an accident while going around said curve, and while exceeding the "advisory" limit, then they will hold it against you. Again, not a speeding ticket for exceeding the "advised" limit, but rather an "unsafe operation", "careless", or "reckless", because you would have allegedly acted in an imprudent manner by ignoring the advisory.  By exceeding the advised "safe" speed, you are assumed to be at fault. To make an analogy to the gun laws, and to paraphrase a court ruling: "when a driver exceeds the posted "advisory" speed, he does so at his own peril"

 

 

 

 

I don't really see how what 2ANJ said was "disrespectful" to the cop; certainly nothing to warrant your bad attitude. ASSUMING, things happened the way he said, and there was nothing else to the story (no accident, stunt riding,etc...), then I think the cop was in the wrong. It sounds like he basically wrote an improper "careless" ticket, because he knew a speeding ticket wouldn't stick. You yourself pointed out that the advisory signs are not enforceable "unto themselves", so if all the bike rider was doing was going faster then the advisory sign "allowed", with no other legitimate "bad acts", then he shouldn't have been ticketed at all. 

 

I've had my share of speeding tickets (or things issued instead of speeding) and sat through numerous municipal court sessions, and from what I've seen, the prosecutors/judges are way too "forgiving" of no-shows and delays by "arresting" officers. Unless, the cop involved has pissed someone off, or has missed multiple appearances without a "good" reason, the judge will almost always "let it slide", and inconvenience the defendant with a postponement. 

 

The other thing to keep in mind though, is they may not have been there for a trial, but rather the "first appearance"/pleading, which the officer/witnesses are not obligated to show up for. Its assumed that nobody is ready for trial at that point, so it won't be happening that day. IF the officer is there, or has already spoken to the prosecutor, you may be able to negotiate a plea, and "handle" everything that day/evening, but if not, you're coming back for a trial at another time.

+++++1 ...well said

I disrespected him because I made an assumption of him perhaps not liking a certain type of motorcycle....damn man you need some tougher skin or perhaps its that time of month....bogus no, as I previously stated...all this was told to us...I will get more of the story as soon I talk to him again.

 

This is the second time you've made a statement that couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm not in the least bit "butthurt". And where am I showing thin skin? 

Your story sounds bogus as well as being accusatory towards others. I got no skin in your little blame game at all. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of your story. 

This is the second time you've made a statement that couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm not in the least bit "butthurt". And where am I showing thin skin? 

Your story sounds bogus as well as being accusatory towards others. I got no skin in your little blame game at all. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of your story. 

Notice you are the only one who is getting their panties in a knot..."bogus"? What benefit do I get from that? Everyone else who has posted has given their $.2 but you on the other hand got defensive and accused me of disrespecting someone...Here is a little advice that I am sure alot of us have learned at a young age "If you dont have anything nice to say then....dont say anything at all" If you haven't heard that already may I be the first. Enjoy your day dear sir and try to get some sleep you sound a little cranky.

You yourself admitted that you disrespected the police officer.

I started my response by providing information regarding the legality of the signs that you questioned. Upon further reading of your story, I didn't find you/your friend to be particularly sympathetic figures in this situation. But this is the internet, so your opinion is the only one that matters. Sue me for expressing mine.

If the cop didn't show up he should have asked the judge for it to be dismissed on the spot, no?

You can, and sometimes that works, but generally the judge will postpone once or twice to give the cop a chance to show up.

 

If you bring a lawyer, you are more likely to get the ticket dismissed if the cop doesn't show up because your attorney can explain to the judge that you had to pay for him to be there whether or not the cop showed up, and you shouldn't have to pay for him to come with you again.

 

In my experience, bringing a very good lawyer to traffic court is like bringing a nuclear missile to a knife fight. 

 

I used to get a lot of speeding tickets, a long time ago.  When I would go by myself I'd get about half dismissed.  Never got  a ticket with points when I brought a strong attorney.  It's a cost/benefit thing.  The lawyer might cost $200-$500, but that's a lot less than the increased insurance bills.

I disrespected him because I made an assumption of him perhaps not liking a certain type of motorcycle....damn man you need some tougher skin or perhaps its that time of month....bogus no, as I previously stated...all this was told to us...I will get more of the story as soon I talk to him again.

 

You yourself admitted that you disrespected the police officer.

I started my response by providing information regarding the legality of the signs that you questioned. Upon further reading of your story, I didn't find you/your friend to be particularly sympathetic figures in this situation. But this is the internet, so your opinion is the only one that matters. Sue me for expressing mine.

The first sentence was supposed to be in question form...I am so sorry for not putting the correct punctuation.

You can, and sometimes that works, but generally the judge will postpone once or twice to give the cop a chance to show up.

 

If you bring a lawyer, you are more likely to get the ticket dismissed if the cop doesn't show up because your attorney can explain to the judge that you had to pay for him to be there whether or not the cop showed up, and you shouldn't have to pay for him to come with you again.

 

In my experience, bringing a very good lawyer to traffic court is like bringing a nuclear missile to a knife fight. 

 

I used to get a lot of speeding tickets, a long time ago.  When I would go by myself I'd get about half dismissed.  Never got  a ticket with points when I brought a strong attorney.  It's a cost/benefit thing.  The lawyer might cost $200-$500, but that's a lot less than the increased insurance bills.

I do not completely agree.  I agree to the same downgrades regardless of whether or not you have an attorney.  I have no problem beating lawyers during radar trials.  When this happens you get the extra benefit of points, court costs and paying the lawyer.  

  I have no problem beating lawyers during radar trials. 

In my experience bringing a good lawyer prevents trials.  Prosecutors either drop the case or agree to drop it to a non-points fine for a non-moving non-traffic violation.

 

In multiple cases I paid a few hundred dollars for "parking on the sidewalk" instead of a speeding ticket.

 

Also, most pertinent to the original poster, if the cop fails to show up you can often get it dismissed with a lawyer present.  Without that, it will always get postponed, even multiple times.

 

The only time you'd ever go to court to fight a radar ticket is if you could get strong evidence via subpoena that the gun was a piece of crap, or that the speed limit was improperly posted, etc.  I agree, if you are going to fight a ticket on its merits just go alone, because you're going to lose anyway.

 

They key is that except in extreme cases of speeding where you actually put people's lives in jeopardy, all speeding tickets are merely attempts at increasing revenue.  If you give the town an alternate method of collecting almost as much revenue without wasting time in court they will almost always take it.

In my experience bringing a good lawyer prevents trials.  Prosecutors either drop the case or agree to drop it to a non-points fine for a non-moving non-traffic violation.

 

In multiple cases I paid a few hundred dollars for "parking on the sidewalk" instead of a speeding ticket.

 

Also, most pertinent to the original poster, if the cop fails to show up you can often get it dismissed with a lawyer present.  Without that, it will always get postponed, even multiple times.

 

The only time you'd ever go to court to fight a radar ticket is if you could get strong evidence via subpoena that the gun was a piece of crap, or that the speed limit was improperly posted, etc.  I agree, if you are going to fight a ticket on its merits just go alone, because you're going to lose anyway.

 

They key is that except in extreme cases of speeding where you actually put people's lives in jeopardy, all speeding tickets are merely attempts at increasing revenue.  If you give the town an alternate method of collecting almost as much revenue without wasting time in court they will almost always take it.

I thought this was true also until I learned that its no DMV points but insurance agencies still see the ticket title may it be "unsafe driving" or whatever they labeled that non-point pay out.