True story:
Stopped by officer on I-5, cited for speeding 15 over the limit (allegedly). Officer claimed he used radar gun to detect my speed. So, what next?
Decided to opt for a contested hearing. Requested discovery from prosecution. Received officer's sworn statement -- "radar gun clocked defendant driving X mph, in a Y mph zone etc..."
Prosecutor's Argument: Officer concluded that the defendant was driving 15 miles above the speed limit. He obtained this reading from the radar gun which he is licensed and trained to use. The court requires that each radar gun be certified for use by a trained expert per Washington state patrol protocol. The officer also claimed that the radar gun was certified and that he performed initial tests on the Laser equipment prior to using it on the day of the incident.
Aha! this is an LR question, but what type? And How do I undermine or destroy the Prosecution's argument?
In the end, after much research, it turned out to be a necessary assumption question. The radar gun was not properly certified per Washington State Patrol protocol; therefore, per IRLJ 6.6, subsection (c), the radar gun reading was inadmissible.
I presented this, the Judge agreed, and the case was dismissed. Incredible. Guess this stuff really works!!! Thanks!