logoalt Hacker News

dataflowtoday at 2:23 AM2 repliesview on HN

> As in, if I meant to travel at 70 and was instead doing 100 it doesn’t matter that I sincerely meant not to speed and did not know I was speeding, I can still be convicted even if the judge believes I had no intent.

IANAL but from what I've looked up in the last there's at least willfulness that matters for these things. For example if you could prove that happened because your car accelerator pedal broke and you had no opportunity to react, I'm pretty sure you would not be guilty, strict liability or not.


Replies

deepwoodstoday at 3:01 AM

At that point you are not so much "driving" as you are sitting in the driver's seat of a renegade vehicle.

Spooky23today at 3:51 AM

There are exceptions usually for extraordinary events.

In New York there’s a concept of doing various things “in the furtherance of justice”. Judges have broad discretion to dismiss or reduce tickets.

Often it so happens that those reductions increase the city/towns share of the revenue.

In those cases, the judge may find that circumstances would make a traffic ticket unjust. But the standard of guilt is strict and clear cut.