Obedience to and effect of traffic laws

[Metrum]

Based on truth.Officer admitted no crime had been suspected can the following behavior be normal or lawful under Illinois statue below.Also not responding to any call or anything.Sure it did happen to me.

Officer states in report:turned on video when he saw me "following too close".The Video was already running and shows he was a least a quarter mile behind and sped up way in excess of speed limit.

This was not addressed in court other than judge making comment to himself which was overheard as "whats this".I believe my lawyer was a bit inept.But under oath he got the officer to state that he had no reason to believe
anything or suspect anything untill he saw the claimed violation.
I was under the impression that no one is above the law.I would like to know if this lawful practice.If I read the law as written it would seem not lawful.I know to resond to calls or to investigate something.But here he forgot that the tape was already running.





625 ILCS 5/11‑205) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11‑205)
Sec. 11‑205. Public officers and employees to obey Act‑Exceptions.
(a) The provisions of this Chapter applicable to the drivers of vehicles upon the highways shall apply to the drivers of all vehicles owned or operated by the United States, this State or any county, city, town, district or any other political subdivision of the State, except as provided in this Section and subject to such specific exceptions as set forth in this Chapter with reference to authorized emergency vehicles.
(b) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or when responding to but not upon returning from a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set forth in this Section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.
(c) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:
1. Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of
this Chapter;

2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign,
but only after slowing down as may be required and necessary for safe operation;

3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he
does not endanger life or property;

4. Disregard regulations governing direction of
movement or turning in specified directions.


(d) The exceptions herein granted to an authorized emergency vehicle, other than a police vehicle, shall apply only when the vehicle is making use of either an audible signal when in motion or visual signals meeting the requirements of Section 12‑215 of this Act.
(e) The foregoing provisions do not relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the duty of driving with due regard for the safety of all persons, nor do such provisions protect the driver from the consequences of his reckless disregard for the safety of others.
(f) Unless specifically made applicable, the provisions of this Chapter, except those contained in Section 11‑204 and Articles IV and V of this Chapter, shall not apply to persons, motor vehicles and equipment while actually engaged in work upon a highway but shall apply to such persons and vehicles when traveling to or from such work.
(Source: P.A. 89‑710, eff. 2‑14‑97; 90‑257, eff. 7‑30‑97.)

[Lfpdlieu302]

what were you charged with? are you basically concerned with wheter or not he could speed up to catch you without any lights or siren? according to subsection d, its talking about an emergency vehicle other than a police vehicle. unless i'm too wacked out today and am reading it wrong!! lol

[Group9]

Maybe, I'm not following you either. Are you saying that your reading of this law is that law enforcement officers would not be allowed to speed up to catch, say.... speeders?

[Group9]

It kind of sounds like he got caught in some kind of agressive driver operation. Following too closely. Isn't that what they often charge people with who are observed doing road rage/agressive driving?

[Metrum]

Ok let make it simple.

You are driving well over the speed limit,and have no reason for it.Not responding to a call,not investigating anything,your just doing it.I understand that in your work it is permisible to speed,run red lights,u turns,etc.Having reason to do so,responding to call,catch up to speeder,etc.Ok now you have no reason,but you do it anyways.So are you above or within the law.

[Orleander]

So....the cop caught someone speeding/tail-gating but he only caught them because he himself was speeding. Is the question "Can a person be cited for an illegal act if the cop is doing an illegal act himself?"

[jaunt10]

i had kind of the same thing happen to me. the cop said i was speeding (no radar or laser) and supposedly caught me through his "calibrated speedometer." the funny thing is i saw him driving pretty fast to catch up with me and when he did i was at a stop sign completely stopped (he was not directly behind me before this). i fought it in their traffic court and won.

[Metrum]

"Can a person be cited for an illegal act if the cop is doing an illegal act himself?"

Yes put it that way.He said under oath" had no reason to believe or suspect any illegal
activity had occured,prior".Video shows he is at least 2-3 tenths behind catching up at high rate of speed.He had no hunch,nothing to explain this.

[Metrum]

The simple answer is that yes, police can legally exceed the speed limit in order to catch up with speeders and other traffic violators. It does not diminish the fact that the violator being pursued broke the law.

If a speeder passes me at 70mph in a 45mph zone and I am standing still, it may require me to exceed 100mph for a short distance in order to catch up with that speeder. That's what the Police Interceptor package was intended for and if I can do this safely there is no issue there. It does not change the fact that the speeder was guilty of driving at an unlawful speed.

Ok but the police car is not catching up to anyone for any reason.They are just doing it.Are you saying that if you see some cars a mile down the road,and you drive 100 mph just to catch up.Your saying this is lawful?

[Metrum]

So if your going to the store to buy milk driving 20-30-40 miles over the posted speed limit/your saying this is legal?

Your having a bad day and on your way to the store you decide to pull someone over
for whatever reason.So now you write on your report you just happened upon such infraction.

Ok someone video taped your actions prior,and your story and Video dont add up.

So if there was no Rodney King Video,cops could get away with beating him to a pulp,.

[Metrum]

When on the highway, we also drive what is termed "patrol speed", which is significantly above the posted speed limit. This enables us to overtake the average driver and give each vehicle a cursory glance for obvious violations. It also prevents traffic backlogs which occur whenever a police car simply does the speed limit because everyone is afraid to pass one.
While running at patrol speed, sometimes we glimpse others ahead or behind us who are travelling at non-uniform speeds compared to the rest of traffic. Then we close with those individuals and deal with them. It's standard practice.

I don't know what your issue is because you seem to be trying to hide or confuse it. Just come staright out and ask your question. If you're upset because you got a ticket from an officer that came up behind you at a faster speed, just be up front and say so.

Ok so I am in Illinois.Where is this legal reference that alows you to cruise at (patrol speed)above speed limit.This was not on major highway,local residential area.Under 625 ILCS 5/11-205 it seems to say unless your responding to ,investigating,you should also obey laws.So if your allowed to do this I would imagine its in writting.Can you point me to it.

[Metrum]

Sorry, I'm done. I've tried to help you out but you insist on trying to walk me through your scenario blindfolded. I said I'd discuss your specific situation but I won't play the "bits and pieces" game.

Im a normal citizen.
I have to abide the traffic laws in my State.
As a patrol officer are you exempt from traffic laws %100 of time.

[mcsap]

It is a PROVEN fact that while trying to catch up to a suspected violator, we IMMEDIATELY turn on lights and sirens we are ASKING for a chase. People WILL flee if we are far enough away. If we are DIRECTLY behind them and more than likely have their plate numbers, they are much LESS likely to run. This activity PREVENTS needless pursuits, crashes and injury or death.

When I am trying to catch up to someone, I DO NOT run lights and siren. Now if it is heavy traffic or if I had to get through a red light etc, I most certainly would use my lights/siren. Just trying to catch up to someone for a better look at a possible or suspected violation is the latitude that we are given to enforce the laws.

You had a lawyer, if he was inept , complain to the person who hired him. Then again, maybe he wasn't inept and you just lost because the judge sided with the officer and not you.

[Group9]

"Can a person be cited for an illegal act if the cop is doing an illegal act himself?"

Yes put it that way.He said under oath" had no reason to believe or suspect any illegal
activity had occured,prior".Video shows he is at least 2-3 tenths behind catching up at high rate of speed.He had no hunch,nothing to explain this.

Why did he have his video on? They are not running every time a police car is moving. They are activated to record the observations of the officer when he thinks he has witnessed a violation. What you are saying makes no sense. You need to get a better story than this one before you go to court.

[mcsap]

Sounds like he was already there "inept lawyer" and LOST.