It appears one of the new trends is for the police to write a "Following too close" ticket.  Sometimes they use laser radar to calculate the speed of the car in front of you, your speed and the distance between the cars. This is a ticket that should be reserved for rear end accidents, but is now being used when all cars are traveling below the speed limit and we just need someone to give a ticket to.

Note: We are not attorneys, you may wish to consult counsel before proceeding. Conviction of a moving violation may result in points against your drivers license and increased insurance rates, along with possible suspension of your license. This page should not be considered legal advice.

OK here we go: Most ordinances or State statutes for this violation are written like the following:

Essentially there are 2 parts to this statute (You need to research and know exactly what the code you are accused of violating is) this is sample code.

Part number A: This is probably the part you are accused of violating since B applies only to trucks and is meant for two lane, two way roads. (so two of them don't screw you when you are passing one and leave you to be hit head-on by a car coming the other way.)

Defending yourself against a traffic ticket is one of the hardest things you'll ever do. The court will act as if it can not believe someone is actually challenging a ticket. They will make you wait while every individual who is pleading guilty, but is trying to get the sentence reduced testifies as to their circumstances. They may even call you to the stand, thinking you have to be pleading guilty, only to make you go wait to talk to a prosecutor.  They'll do anything they can to wear you down so you'll just pay it & get out of there so they can go on with their business.

Hey, if you've invested the time to actually waste your time to go down there you might as well be heard.

Obviously, if the officer is not in court you will ask for a dismissal.  If the court tries to get a continuance you will state that the state (county, city) "set the court date and if I am ready to present my case, and given the fact that the state set the court date, they should be ready to present their case. Ask for immediate dismissal of the charges based on the fact that the prosecution set the court date and their witness has failed to appear."

If the officer is there, the prosecution will call their witness: The officer will testify, under oath, that he did witness you following too closely and will probably present the numbers showing the speed of the 1st car, your speed and the distance between your vehicle and the vehicle in front of you. You will not dwell on this information, it will soon become irrelevant. If he refers to any standard representing "reasonable and prudent" following distance, OBJECT to the statement and follow with "The statute in question does not say what the standard for a reasonable and prudent following distance is" the witness is speculating as to the stature's intent.

You will need to make notes of all he says on a clean sheet of paper in case there is another question you wish to ask the officer during cross examination. Or an item you may wish to use in your closing arguments.

If your violation is similar to the above and when it is your turn to cross examine you will ask the following questions:

1. Officer "Friendly" will you please read for the court Section 18.21.011 (The section/statute/ordinance, etc. that your are accused of violating)

2. Now Officer "Friendly", can you please tell the court, where in (The section/statute/ordinance, etc. that your are accused of violating) it tells everyone what the standard is for a "reasonable and prudent" distance is. (He can't, there isn't one)  If he needs some help you can ask him "I don't see that it cites any specific rule for how many feet, per mile per hour constitute "reasonable and prudent" nor any correction factor for say rain, snow or ice, do you?" (he has to answer no)

If the officer tries to divert to the Drivers manual remind the officer that the statute does not identify the drivers manual as the standard or refer to it in any way and in fact does not declare any standard. And additionally it does not provide any sort of correction factor for rain, snow or ice.

3. Officer "Friendly" please describe the relative position of your vehicle, the vehicle I'm accused of following too closely and my vehicle. (chances are he shot you from either the front or behind)

4. So Officer "Friendly", is it safe to say that you could not see my feet or the feet of the driver in front of me? (he has to answer that he did not see your feet nor the feet of the driver in front of you.  There is no way he could have, and you have to make him admit it. Even if you have to ask him if he has X-ray vision.)

It might be prudent to have pictures of where he was looking at vehicles to prove there was no way he possibly could have seen you feet. Make him admit that was approximately where he was sitting & enter them into evidence if you have to. Stating that the photos from the Officer's observation point clearly show you can not see a driver's foot. (make sure to DRIVE THIS HOME)

5. Can you tell the court the age or mental capacity of the person I was following? (he obviously can not)

6. So Officer "Friendly" you could not see whether my foot was on or over the brake or not could you? And you could not see whether the driver of the vehicle in front of me had their foot over or on the accelerator or not could you? (he has to say no)

7. Officer "Friendly" can you agree with me that the stopping distance for a vehicle depends on both the reaction time of the driver and the speed it is going along with the friction factor of the pavement. In other words, a vehicle will travel a certain distance (V * Rt) before the brakes are applied & then a stopping distance, once the brakes are applied, that is determined by the Speed (velocity), the grade of the roadway & the friction factor of the roadway?

(The formula for stopping distance of a vehicle is:)

d = V*Rt + V/(2g(f + G))

Where:

Rt=Reaction Time in seconds
d = Braking Distance (ft)
g = Acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
G = Roadway grade as a percentage; for 2% use 0.02
V = Initial vehicle speed (ft/sec)
f = Coefficient of friction between the tires and the roadway

8. So Officer "Friendly", since we have established the fact that you could not see my feet you had no way of ascertaining my reaction time, did you? (there is no way he could have - if this turns into an argument your side is that if your foot was over or on the brake your reaction time could have been as little as 0)

9. Officer "Friendly", can you identify positively the vehicle I was following and do you have personal knowledge as to who the driver is? (he won't, he stopped you)

10. Officer "Friendly", since grade is a factor in stopping distance, can you tell the court what the grade of the roadway is in the exact location where you claim the violation occurred? (he won't be able to and it would be nice if you had  a copy of the plans for the roadway in question that showed what the grade is. You can request them from the Highway department or the road agency in charge of maintaining the road you were ticketed on. If he guesses, especially if he guesses wrong make sure to point it out)  It does not matter what the real grade is, he is not going to know. We are establishing that he has no factual basis to determine what is reasonable & prudent.

11. Officer "Friendly", acceleration is defined as the rate of change of velocity with respect to time. Since you took a snapshot of the speeds of our respective vehicles it is impossible for you to determine whether I was decelerating or if the driver ahead of me was accelerating isn't it? (he has to answer yes)

12. And Officer "Friendly", since it is clear you could not see the position of my feet, there was no way you could accurately determine my reaction time is there? (he has to say no. If he tries to say anything else, remind him he is under oath and it has already been shown he could not see your feet so there is no way he can possibly determine what your braking reaction time was at the time of the alleged violation)

13. Officer "Friendly", can you please show the court what the friction factor was at the time of the alleged violation.

(normal friction factor of rubber on wet asphalt is approximately 0.25 - 0.7 - rubber on dry asphalt is 0.5 - 0.8)

(normal friction factor of rubber on wet concrete is approximately 0.45 - 0.75 - rubber on dry concrete is 0.6 - 0.85)

14. If he says anything over 1 he obviously does not know what the hell he is talking about and you should remind him that a friction factor, by definition, can not be over 1.

15. Ask him what test he ran to determine the friction factor on the pavement on which you were traveling, and if so where are the results of said test. (he won't have one)

16. Then you had no idea of what the friction factor was at the time of the violation did you? (he couldn't have - he just admitted he had no test results)

17. Officer "Friendly", since you took the speed of my vehicle, and the vehicle in front of me at an instant in time, and acceleration or deceleration is defined as the rate of change of velocity with respect to time, you do not have any way of calculating the acceleration or deceleration rate of either vehicle do you?  (he doesn't)  (if he tries to somehow say he does remind him that he could not possibly know that without continuous speed readings of both vehicles.)

18. "Officer Friendly", can you please tell the court the make and model of the vehicle I am accused of following too close? Can you tell us the age and gender of the person driving that vehicle? (he obviously can't, he did not pull them over)

Rest the Defense.  Make sure you get a closing statement.

In your closing statement you will say something similar to this.

Your Honor, the defense respectfully requests that all charges be dismissed for the following reasons.

1. The witness has admitted he could not see my, nor the others driver's feet and has no idea of the age or mental capacity of the person driving the vehicle I was following - therefore he has no basis on which to calculate either of our reaction times a basic component of stopping distance. There is no basis to assume we are equal.

2. The witness has admitted that he does not have any tests that say what the friction factor was on the section of pavement I was traveling, another basic component is calculating stopping distance.

3. Driving is a continuous act not an instantaneous act.  Given that the witness does not have any way to calculate the acceleration or deceleration of either vehicle he has no way to calculate our respective velocities for any point in time other than the instant he hit us with radar. Therefore he has no way to calculate whether we were getting closer to each other or moving further away from each other.

4. The statute in question, does not provide a standard for "reasonable and prudent" so the witness is left to his own devices to determine what that is "reasonable and prudent" and the traveling public has no way to know what the witness believes is "reasonable and prudent" and has no way to measure it to insure they are in compliance.

5. Finally, since the officer can not determine the reaction time of either driver, and in fact has not contacted the driver in front of me, has no idea of what the grade of the road is, has no idea of what the frictional factor of the roadway was and has no way to determine the relative acceleration or deceleration of the vehicles in question, he has no way to solve for stopping distance of either vehicle and therefore has no way to know whether I was following too close or not.

6. Since there is no physical evidence (in other words, I did not crash into the vehicle in front of me) and he has no way to calculate either vehicle's true stopping distance or either driver's reaction time there exists more than a reasonable doubt in this case and I respectfully ask that it be dismissed.

If you still lose ask the clerk for an appeal form and pay the appeal bond.

Good luck to all in fighting bogus traffic tickets!