Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

Anyone seen this about the legality of GATSO evidence

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11 January 2005, 09:47 PM
  #1  
Ga22ar
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Ga22ar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Anyone seen this about the legality of GATSO evidence

Not sure if anyone has posted this already, but

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/defa...p?storyId=9689
Old 11 January 2005, 09:58 PM
  #3  
Petem95
Scooby Regular
 
Petem95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scoobynet
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Pistonheads
GATSOS OVER-READ YOUR SPEED

Court case could prove thousands of speeders innocent

Gatso-based evidence could be responsible for convicting thousands of innocent motorists, according to research by David Edgar, a retired electronics engineer and former professional inventor.

The Gatso speed cameras he has investigated over-estimated motorists' speed by up to 25 per cent because the time between the two flash photography images, which constitutes legal evidence on which prosecution is based, was much longer than specified.

Edgar's 35-year unblemished driving record is under threat from prosecution by West Midlands police for allegedly driving 41 mph in a 30 mph zone. Wallsall-based Edgar has pleaded not guilty to the driving offence and will defend himself in the Birmingham Magistrates’ Court on Thursday 13 January 2005.

After receiving his summons, Edgar became suspicious of the accuracy of the Gatso-based evidence and developed a laser aligned, optically triggered digital timer that measures to an accuracy within 1/100th of a second the time lapse between the two flashes produced by a Gatso speed camera.

He became concerned about the accuracy of the Gatso speed camera when his requests for disclosure about how speed cameras are calibrated for accuracy were ignored by both the police and the Crown Prosecution Service. His requests for information sent to Gatsometer in the Netherlands and UK were also ignored, as was his formal application to Birmingham Magistrates’ Court to force disclosure.

Edgar said, “I really felt they had something to hide so I decided to investigate the critical timing accuracy."

Having tested the opto-digital timer on a number of Gatso speed camera sites including Newtown Birmingham, Walsall and Cannock area, Edgar soon discovered that well over 80 per cent of them were inaccurate. In particular, there were serious timing errors between the two flashes which are supposed to flash at exactly half a second (500 milliseconds) apart.

Edgar's tests show the timings are anything but accurate. Typically they are 630 milliseconds apart, which changes legal evidence about how far a vehicle has travelled. In particular, it creates the illusion that a vehicle has travelled much further between flashes than it actually did -- some 25 per cent further.

For instance a vehicle travelling at 35 mph would have travelled an extra 2.03 metres when the timing between the two flashes is 630 milliseconds, and that puts the vehicle in the next set of parallel line markings which are spaced two metres apart.

Since these serious inaccuracies clearly affect the reliability of the actual recorded speed of a vehicle, it suggests that photographic evidence cannot be relied on by the prosecution, as reasonable doubt exists concerning the accuracy of that evidence.

Having now investigated and researched the Gatso method of speed camera entrapment the police and CPS are relying on Mr Edgar said “ I have also discovered some other disturbing facts that affect the accuracy and reliability of the entire measuring system, these will be brought to the attention of the Birmingham Magistrates Court on Thursday 13 January 2005, come along it should be an interesting day in court.”

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign commented, "If Mr Edgar's claims are proven then almost everyone convicted by a Gatso speed camera will be able to apply to have their case reopened. I have spoken to Mr Edgar and his extensive research seems unequivocal."
Good luck to him!! How gutted would the government be if he won his case, and it openned hundreds of thousands of previously closed convincations!!! We can only hope
Old 11 January 2005, 10:03 PM
  #4  
Vegescoob
Scooby Regular
 
Vegescoob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Yes read it last night. Looks like possibly more scamminess from this scammiest of governments.
Old 11 January 2005, 11:44 PM
  #5  
john_s
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
john_s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Preston, Lancs.
Posts: 2,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Interesting stuff. Will await eagerly to see what else come out regarding this.

John.
Old 12 January 2005, 06:55 AM
  #6  
r32
Scooby Regular
 
r32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Far Corfe
Posts: 3,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hope he wins ...............
Old 12 January 2005, 07:37 AM
  #7  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

It is worth noting that most of these devices determine your speed by radar/laser and the photographic evidence is used only to support these readings.This just highlights the importance of requesting all the evidence and making sure you check it, had Mr. Edgar not done this he would have just rolled over and signed the cheque like the majority of people do. As you can also see his actions are also keeping the camera partnerships busy defending themselves and this costs them money and resources that they would otherwise be using to hunt you and me down. Needless to say if we were all as effective as Mr. Edgar then the partnerships would be out of business within months. Oh, and they get no cash from any case that goes to court so they will get no return from Mr. Edgar at all, even if he is fined.
Old 12 January 2005, 08:03 AM
  #8  
RB170
Scooby Regular
 
RB170's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I so want to be there
Old 12 January 2005, 10:12 AM
  #9  
AndyC_772
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
AndyC_772's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

the photographic evidence is used only to support these readings
So, what happens if the photographic evidence contradicts the radar?

If the two flashes are supposed to be 500ms apart, then it's trivially easy to design the camera such that they are exactly 500ms apart, with an error measured in microseconds. An error of even 1% can, frankly, only be deliberate.

Do we have concrete evidence that the flashes are supposed to be exactly 500ms apart?
Old 12 January 2005, 12:35 PM
  #10  
Kiwi
Scooby Regular
 
Kiwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

If everybody went to court rather than pay the FPN the whole system would fall down anyway.
Old 12 January 2005, 12:40 PM
  #11  
Leslie
Scooby Regular
 
Leslie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

We know that radar measuring cannot be guaranteed to be 100% correct all the time for a variety of reasons. It is necessary to have the photographic distance travelled evidence to corroborate what the camera is stating. If the photographic equipment is wrong then the case should be thrown out.

Les
Old 12 January 2005, 12:42 PM
  #12  
SJ_Skyline
Scooby Senior
 
SJ_Skyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Limbo
Posts: 21,922
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Good luck Mr. Edgar!!
Old 12 January 2005, 12:53 PM
  #13  
Floyd
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
Floyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,470
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

If it is proven then they'll either make th cameras more accurate of rely on more scamera vans. I hope it's not the latter

F
Old 12 January 2005, 05:43 PM
  #14  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AndyC_772
So, what happens if the photographic evidence contradicts the radar?
In theory each and every GATSO tax demand should have its radar reading checked against the distance travelled between the two photos. That is to say that someone should look at every set of photos and do the distance/time calculation to ensure that it supports the radar information.

What do you think the chances are that this actually happens?

The only evidence you, as a punter, has that the camera told the truth is the two photos and so it is essential that you get them and do the measurements yourself. To do this you need to know the distance between the lines on the road and the time between the photos.

One chap was recently "done" for 54mph in a 30mph and fought the case as he knew he was in a traffic jam at the time. When he got the two photos, after fighting for months to actually get them, it was shown that his speed was 13mph.

So, even if the flash may be inaccurate you should always demand the photos along with the information relating to timing between flashes and distance between lines. Although this should have been checked against the radar reading I suspect you will find that the partnerships don't find checking the radar speed against the photo speed very cost effective and so it may not have been done. This is supported by the number of people who win cases when they get the photos or who have cases withdrawn when they demand to get the photos.

Clearly Mr Edgar's case opens up yet another angle which is that not only might the radar be inaccurate, as has been shown through the photo evidence, but the actual photo evidence may be dodgy as well. Even if this "error" is shown to be accidental what are the odds that no cameras are ever found which under read a motorists speed?
Old 12 January 2005, 05:50 PM
  #15  
GC8
Scooby Regular
 
GC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by hedgehog
It is worth noting that most of these devices determine your speed by radar/laser and the photographic evidence is used only to support these readings.
Thats not actually correct with GATSO camera; your speed is approximated by radar and the photographs are taken to establish your guilt.

Simon
Old 12 January 2005, 05:55 PM
  #16  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Yes, that is true and my statement was incorrect but is based upon the way the devices are used in the real world. As I said, in theory, each and every radar speed is checked against the photos to show that the "accusation" is correct. However, I suspect that in many cases this doesn't happen and people just sign on the guilty line based upon the radar.

In theory I was wrong, but it is how it is working in practise which is why you should demand to see the photos!
Old 12 January 2005, 06:30 PM
  #17  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

News just in...

Mr Edgar was due in court tomorrow and had requested that in view of the complexity of his arguments that he be allocated a full day in court to present his evidence. However, yesterday he discovered that he had been allocated only 2 hours (I suppose if you've already decided the verdict it doesn't take long to hand it down and get back down the Masonic with the Chief Constable) and so he has requested an adjournment.

He has made the court aware that he will not be in court tomorrow and that if the case goes ahead in his absence he will appeal immediately to the Crown Court.

Under the current circumstances having his case heard in the Crown Court may well be to his advantage in terms of the verdict and is likely to be much higher profile so if you don't see a result tomorrow, or even see that he has been found guilty you will know why: the system doesn't actually want him to present his defence.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
28
28 December 2015 11:07 PM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM
shorty87
Other Marques
0
25 September 2015 08:52 PM
Bazil_SW
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
24
21 September 2015 11:55 PM



Quick Reply: Anyone seen this about the legality of GATSO evidence



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 PM.