Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would just pay it. If you needed to get to the hospital by speeding, you should call 911 and ride in an ambulance. You honestly probably shouldn’t have been driving at all if you were in that dire of a situation.

The ambulance ride can cost an arm and a leg, depending on your insurance, PP. This is why OP drove herself, just like the majority of patients in the US who don't have adequate insurance in the face of astronomical medical costs.

If you're feeling well enough to contest it, sure, OP. Come armed with hospital discharge papers, point out the date, time and diagnosis. It might work, especially if this is your first ticket in a long time.

Sounds reasonable, I would try this.

Good luck OP! 👍🏽

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would just pay it. If you needed to get to the hospital by speeding, you should call 911 and ride in an ambulance. You honestly probably shouldn’t have been driving at all if you were in that dire of a situation.

Just wanted to say NOT TO FOLLOW THIS ADVICE if the emergency is a stroke.

You are saying that people having strokes should drive themselves to the hospital?

Time is brain. You don't want for the ambulance, you get the patient in the closest car and drive as fast as possible to the nearest hospital and deal with the tickets later.

Okay, but the person HAVING the stroke should not drive themselves to the hospital.

What jurisdiction gives tickets for 41/30? Most cameras you don’t even get a ticket until you’re 12mph over. So your ticket would say 42/30.
I would pay it personally. It’s either time or money your giving up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would just pay it. If you needed to get to the hospital by speeding, you should call 911 and ride in an ambulance. You honestly probably shouldn’t have been driving at all if you were in that dire of a situation.

Just wanted to say NOT TO FOLLOW THIS ADVICE if the emergency is a stroke.

You are saying that people having strokes should drive themselves to the hospital?

Time is brain. You don't want for the ambulance, you get the patient in the closest car and drive as fast as possible to the nearest hospital and deal with the tickets later.

If I were the judge I would not have much sympathy for the "severe infection" excuse. To justify speeding and putting others lives at risk it better be an acute problem (i.e. severe wound, you are literally about to give birth...).

Is this in DC? DH got a speeding ticket on his way to the hospital after I had just given birth. He contested it and said he was in a hurry to bring our toddler to the hospital to see the new baby and they forgave the ticket. This was many years ago and it was a write-in process as opposed to appearing in person, so it was worth a shot!

Here is the thing. Just pay the fine and move on. It's not expensive and doesn't affect your insurance and driving record.
If you are in Maryland, speed camera tickets are $40. You won't get points on your license and this is usually not reported to insurance providers.
Here are your options:
1- Pay the fines. You admit you are guilty.

2- Plead guilty with explanation and hope for a reduced fine. You would still be considered guilty.
If the judge empathize with your situation and cut the fine in half. You pay $20 instead of $40. Is that worth it to you?

3- Plead not guilty and request a trial. This is the only way to get it totally off all of your records.
First of all, you won't win this case with your explanation about speeding to the ER. This would be an admission of speeding. At best it you would get a reduced fine with that explanation but still be guilty of speeding.
To beat this speeding ticket, you would a defense like:
- a camera error
- another person was driving your car at the time
- picture isn't conclusive, there may be other on the image
- speed signs in the area were obstructed, so you couldn’t know the speed limit
- proper procedures weren't followed


Just pay the fines and move on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would just pay it. If you needed to get to the hospital by speeding, you should call 911 and ride in an ambulance. You honestly probably shouldn’t have been driving at all if you were in that dire of a situation.

Just wanted to say NOT TO FOLLOW THIS ADVICE if the emergency is a stroke.

You are saying that people having strokes should drive themselves to the hospital?

Ideally someone else would drive them but don’t wait for an ambulance to arrive. Go straight to the hospital.

That said maybe the guidance has changed and ambulances are better equipped to handle suspected stroke caaes

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Appeal it. We got a speeding ticket while I was in labor and appealed it online and the appeal was successful and the fine was waived.

Include some proof. In my appeal I included a copy of my sibley discharge papers to show that the dates lined up. I also stated that the location of the camera was within 1 mile of Sibley which was true.

It is not guaranteed it will be overturned but I think it has a decent chance of working.

Being in labor is very different from "a severe infection". 1-4 minutes may make a world of difference when your water has broken and you are in labor. There are many issues that could be affected by how quickly you get to a trained professional to help you deliver.

For a severe infection, 1-4 minutes is not going to make a difference. If it is, then the infection is so severe that the patient should not be driving themselves and should be taking an ambulance or having someone else drive them. I would be very shocked if any judge would consider a severe infection where the patient can drive themselves to be justification to speed one mile from the hospital.

So PP's case is much more time urgent than OP's case.

Lol. Women can be in labor for 24 hours. This is a load of crap.

I agree. Not all pregnancies require urgency or emergency care. A small handful might.

The point is that there are no infections that the patient can still drive themselves to the hospital/ER that are serious enough to warrant speeding to the hospital.

I don't think either truly justifies any leniency, but I can see a judge possibly being swayed by the pregnancy. There is zero justifications for leniency in OP's case.

Speeding is against the law because are a danger to yourself and others on the road when you speed. Especially if you are medically compromised as you are describing. I don’t see any way you would not pay your ticket.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would just pay it. If you needed to get to the hospital by speeding, you should call 911 and ride in an ambulance. You honestly probably shouldn’t have been driving at all if you were in that dire of a situation.

Just wanted to say NOT TO FOLLOW THIS ADVICE if the emergency is a stroke.

You are saying that people having strokes should drive themselves to the hospital?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Appeal it. We got a speeding ticket while I was in labor and appealed it online and the appeal was successful and the fine was waived.

Include some proof. In my appeal I included a copy of my sibley discharge papers to show that the dates lined up. I also stated that the location of the camera was within 1 mile of Sibley which was true.

It is not guaranteed it will be overturned but I think it has a decent chance of working.

Being in labor is very different from "a severe infection". 1-4 minutes may make a world of difference when your water has broken and you are in labor. There are many issues that could be affected by how quickly you get to a trained professional to help you deliver.

For a severe infection, 1-4 minutes is not going to make a difference. If it is, then the infection is so severe that the patient should not be driving themselves and should be taking an ambulance or having someone else drive them. I would be very shocked if any judge would consider a severe infection where the patient can drive themselves to be justification to speed one mile from the hospital.

So PP's case is much more time urgent than OP's case.

Lol. Women can be in labor for 24 hours. This is a load of crap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Appeal it. We got a speeding ticket while I was in labor and appealed it online and the appeal was successful and the fine was waived.

Include some proof. In my appeal I included a copy of my sibley discharge papers to show that the dates lined up. I also stated that the location of the camera was within 1 mile of Sibley which was true.

It is not guaranteed it will be overturned but I think it has a decent chance of working.

Being in labor is very different from "a severe infection". 1-4 minutes may make a world of difference when your water has broken and you are in labor. There are many issues that could be affected by how quickly you get to a trained professional to help you deliver.

For a severe infection, 1-4 minutes is not going to make a difference. If it is, then the infection is so severe that the patient should not be driving themselves and should be taking an ambulance or having someone else drive them. I would be very shocked if any judge would consider a severe infection where the patient can drive themselves to be justification to speed one mile from the hospital.

So PP's case is much more time urgent than OP's case.

I do not think a judge is going to make a decision on the medical urgency of a particular hospital or doctor visit. I think they would be choosing to excuse something that was justifiably a one time event. Vs. if I was just speeding along the route I take my kid to school, that just means I am likely doing that habitually.

Anonymous wrote:I would just pay it. If you needed to get to the hospital by speeding, you should call 911 and ride in an ambulance. You honestly probably shouldn’t have been driving at all if you were in that dire of a situation.

Just wanted to say NOT TO FOLLOW THIS ADVICE if the emergency is a stroke.

How much was the ticket OP?