What is the best excuse to get out of a speeding ticket?

What is the best excuse to get out of a speeding ticket?

After a brief hiatus from posting for my law school exams, I’m back to answer perhaps the most frequently asked question of all time for police officers: What is the best excuse to get out of a speeding ticket?

During my time doing speed enforcement I heard more excuses than I can count, some were pretty lame, others pretty good, but according to a study by 2 psychology researchers at the University of Waterloo, who surveyed 1000 motorists who had been charged with speeding, the most effective excuse was simply, “I’m sorry.”

Based on my own experience I would agree.  Police officers hear lots of excuses from the people they deal with and sometimes it’s just refreshing to hear someone accept responsibility for their actions and apologize.  That may create some good will on the officer’s part and I think (as does one of the authors of the study) that it can also give them the impression that you are less likely to speed again than the person who denies that they did it or makes excuses for why.

One of an officer’s objectives in doing any kind of enforcement is to deter people (individually and collectively) from committing the offence in the future.  Obviously one way to do this is through issuing tickets, but if an officer perceives that an individual’s remorse is evidence of the fact that they are less likely to speed again, they may feel there is no need to issue a ticket in order to deter future speeding.

That being said, the study still only found that this excuse worked in about 30% of cases where motorists apologized and it only worked for motorists going about 40 km/hr over the limit.  When it did work, it lowered the fine, on average, by about $51.

This is definitely an interesting study, but it certainly doesn’t pave the way for people to speed and expect to get off scott free!  The study will be published in June in the Journal of Law and Human Behaviour and you can read more about it in an article in the Kitchener-Waterloo Record.

What this study doesn’t address is whether excuses for speeding work in court.  While, “I’m sorry” might help you get the fine lowered if you are pleading guilty, no excuse is likely to help you be found “not guilty”.

The reason for this is that speeding is an absolute liability offence, which means that if you take your ticket to trial, once all the elements of the offence are proven, you can not raise any defence other than that of duress (which basically means that you were speeding in response to a threat of death or serious bodily harm to yourself or another person).  For an absolute liability offence it doesn’t matter why you were doing it and if you try to offer an excuse in court the Justice of the Peace will likely explain to you what I just said and tell you that the “why” is irrelevant.

So if you get caught speeding, you might want to just say, “I’m sorry”.  If you get the ticket anyway you can try saying it again in court, but if that doesn’t help, save your breath.

 

About the author: Simon Borys is a former police officer who is currently studying law at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario to become a criminal lawyer.

Tags: criminal lawyer, Kingston, Speeding, Ticket, Traffic

Posted in Police and Law News, Police Myths

7 Responses to “What is the best excuse to get out of a speeding ticket?”

• Dennis says:

  September 12, 2011 at 11:06 pm

  I often wonder if a defence against speeding is that the limit set is unreasonable. If you talk to any competent traffic engineer, they would say that the safest speed is the 80th percentile (namely that speed at which 80 percent of the traffic travels at or below), which typically is about 20% higher than most posted limits.

  Essentially the view would be that the law is there to promote safety and there are a number of studies that make the case that it is speed differential rather than absolute speed that is the least safe. So particularly if you are in a road situation where the average traffic speed is higher than the posted limit on a typical basis in similar conditions, the argument would be “I am doing what is safest, which is the intent of the law”.

  I particularly get angry at speed traps, in Alberta where they set a construction zone for speed when the workers are there at some extraordinary low limit and on the weekend or evening, there is no obstruction to traffic, all lanes are free and without impediment but the limit is still set at 50kmh or whatever. And the local constabulary sits there taking in big fines as there may be as much as 50kmh difference between the normal speed limit and the construction speed limit.

  Thoughts?

  Dennis

  Reply
  • Simon Borys says:

    September 12, 2011 at 11:39 pm

    Interesting suggestion Dennis. However I think that the defence of unreasonable limit would not be successful. The jurisprudence on regulatory law (such as the HTA) is pretty clear that the government is given a wide discretion to chose from among the various options. In other words, they could have chosen 50 or 60 or 80, but they chose 60. It may not be the best choice, but it doesn’t need to be – it just needs to be reasonable , and showing that the speed limit is unreasonable, as opposed to just not optimal, is a big hurdle to overcome. Perhaps if you could mount enough statistical and scientific evidence you might be able to meet that threshold, but I doubt it would work.

    Way to think outside the box though!

    Reply
• Ryan says:

  December 9, 2011 at 11:33 am

  I would agree with you Simon, “I am sorry” is best way of getting out of ticket or getting that ticket reduced further. When I am on enforcement I only stop vehicles that are traveling at rate above what I have i determined prior to starting the enforcement. I will also reduce my PON’s down to a pre-determined speed based on the speed traveling ie. 80km/h in 50km/h to 65km/h but if I get other factors like no insurance slip or no ownership or attitude when the window comes down this will change and will result in no reduction or a lessor reduction.
  Glad to see things are going well for you in your career change!

  Reply
  • Chris K says:

    January 5, 2012 at 11:44 pm

    Ryan (or Simon), you are a police officer right? If so, I have a very much related question. There are a lot of unreasonably set 50 zones in my city (Oshawa) often on two lane near-rural roads with some sparsely located rural properties adjacent to the road. Doing 80 there is common and I’d prefer 90 myself – which indeed feels very safe. If I get pulled over, sure, I could say “sorry” and hope for the best, BUT what if in all honesty, I was not sorry, but instead – I was trying to drive SAFELY (not feed the cop any BS) and what if I told the officer instead that it was my intent not to harm anyone else on the road, but I did believe 50 was way too low and asked the cop his opinion. Would this be taken as arrogant or would he more likely agree that 50 was a joke. If so, perhaps 70 or so would be more reasonable and my 90 would only represent 20 over. What do you think? Would this fly, or should I plain lie and tell him I am sorry?

    Reply
    • Simon Borys says:

      January 7, 2012 at 4:46 pm

      I can’t advise you what you should say to an officer if you are stopped for speeding, but I can say that speeding is what is known as an absolute liability offence, meaning that if you drove over the posted speed limit, then you are deemed to have committed the offence. Your intention in speeding, in fact whether you even knew you were speeding or not, is wholly irrelevant. (Unless you are doing more than 50 over the limit, then you are allowed a defence because of the increased penalties). So whatever you say to the officer is irrelevant with respect to whether you committed the offence, but, of course, it can have an impact on whether the officer exercises their discretion to charge you or not.

      Reply
• carl says:

  December 11, 2011 at 11:48 pm

  hi,
  I live in York Region and there are many changes to speed limits in an attempt to lower speeds. The region has undertaken to reduce speeds along highway 7 from 80 and 70 to 60 and as low as 50 in some areas. During this transition it can very easy to make mistakes by exceeding the limit. Some think that this has created a big opportunity to increase revenues from speeding tickets as drivers adjust to the new reality. Should there not be some discretion exercised during this period, i.e warnings rather that ticketing. Upon entering Highway 7 from a sideroad , you do need to gain some speed and can overshoot 50 by 10 or 15 before settling to 50, Yet you can be clocked at 65 for a very short instant in time and be considered 15 over the limit.

  Reply
  • Simon Borys says:

    December 14, 2011 at 10:35 pm

    There usually is a grace period when speed limits are changed, but, as with any enforcement, it is just within the discretion of the officer to charge or not.

    Reply