For a number of defendants, it is not the first time they had to face a judge for traffic infractions. On Monday, the first three defendants were heard in their respective cases.
The highest speed transgression, proportionally, came from a 22-year-old man who was aught going 125 kilometres per hour in a 70 km/h zone in Merl.
In his defence, the defendant told the judge that he did not know that the speed limit was 70km/h on that particular stretch of road as the previous speed limit was 130km/h. The judge dismissed his excuse, saying "before the speed camera, the speed limit goes down to 90km/h and then 70km/h. There are road signs signalling this." The young man vowed to pay attention to road signs from now on. But it wasn't the 22-year-old's first traffic infraction. He was once caught going 141km/h in a tunnel. For the prosecution, this was a clear case of "délit de grande vitesse" — a term reserved for gross speeding. The prosecution demanded a hefty fine and a driving ban of 6 months on probation.
In another case brought before the judge, a 36-year-old man was caught going 146 instead of 90km/h between Dippach and Helfent in March 2018. The defendant, who was on his way to work at the time, did not try to excuse his dangerous behaviour, saying he knew the speed limits. He apologised to the judge, who reminded the defendant that it was already his third traffic infraction for speeding and also said that he wasn't just speeding by 3 or 10 km/h. Because the defendant was already caught speeding in 2014 and 2016, the prosecution demanded a monetary fine and a one-year driving ban which would still allow the defendant to drive to and from work.
In the last traffic-related case of the day, the court heard a 42-year-old man who was caught going 79km/h in a 50km/h zone in Frisange in September 2017. The taxi driver said that his client had asked him to drive faster. But in this case, as in the two previous ones, the driver was also already known to the police for speeding. The judge reminded the taxi driver that he too needed to adhere to traffic regulations and that he needs his driver's licence to carry out his job. The defendant replied that he would try to change his ways. In this case, the prosecution also demanded a hefty fine and a driving ban of one year, with the exception from the man's way to and from work.
The verdicts are expected for 5 March.
