hedgehog

The following from Paul Smith at Safe Speed makes interesting reading, especially for those of us with Jap cars. Looks like someone saw a fast car and made up a speed to get a good high profile conviction, but overlooked one vital point:

The Press and Journal reports today an Inverness court case where alleged evidence from a laser speed meter was shown to be impossible.
Safe Speed calls for urgent action to preserve public confidence.

The Police evidence was based on laser speed meter reading of 131mph presented in support of a charge of dangerous driving, but the car was an import still fitted with Japanese market speed limiter.

Engineers tested the car and found that it was incapable of exceeding 107mph. When the court was presented with this evidence they returned a 'not proven' verdict.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) commented: "We hear many complaints about laser speed meter evidence, but it is very unusual for the accused driver to be able to demonstrate that his speed was anything other than that claimed by the Police. The courts usually convict, but unusual cases like this prove the point that laser speed meter evidence can be unreliable."

"Confidence in speed enforcement is already low," explains Paul, "many people see speeding fines as nothing more than a stealth tax. This case will further damage public confidence. Over zealous speed enforcement has badly affected the relationship between the police and the public. Vital respect for Police is earned over decades and lost in minutes. Chief Constables please take note!"

Safe Speed demands either:

* a full explanation of the failure of the speed meter in this case or
* an immediate end to the use of laser speed meters in prosecutions

Jap2Scrap

*Waits for the SN brigade to come and say, "Well he was still speeding so he should pay the fine like a man," totally missing the point once again.

Surely the overwhelming evidence against Gatsos and now laser equipment has to lead to something. They can't get away with 'framing' motorists any longer.

ajm

Another flaw appears in their "house of cards". How long before the whole lot comes tumbling down?

the moose

Each time I've been done by a laser I was travelling faster than they stated. Each time I've been pulled by a police car I was doing the same speed as they showed on the in-car camera. I therefore know that based on my own experience, the equipment is broadly accurate.

There may be mistakes from time to time, but in general they're accurate.

To say that ALL speeding detection devices are inaccurate is just daft - some coppers are bent, simple as that. There's nothing wrong with the equipment, but I'd accept that better regulation of the operators is needed.

Jay m A

iTrader: (2)

So what its saying, is if you are going to speed, do at least 120+, then when in court stick the limiter back on

the moose

So it's not just me thinking this then ...... we all know how easy it is to restrict/derestrict Japanese imports, and I'd not be at all surprised if this chap had the limiter stuck back on as soon as he'd been pulled.

I may be doing him a massive disservice ....... but I bet I'm not.

Neil Smalley

Moose, if you read some of the articles in www.pepipoo.com you'll see the LTI 20-20 is far from accurate in certain situations.

Daryl

Crikey, how many times have you been caught speeding?

Anyway, any case that casts doubt on the credibility of speed detection devices is alright by me!

Leslie

It is certainly true that radar speed measuring equipment is not 100% reliable. It has been demonstrated in court in the past that a "doppler" wheel can produce wildly inaccurate readings and that is why the camera takes a double picture of the car in the trap. Laser equipment is working at a very short wave length and thus a small error could produce a big speed reading variation I imagine although I have no evidence to back that up. These things are supposed to be self calibrating but we do not know how external influences can affect them. Such an effect would not be dependent on calibration.

I personally do not hold with the rash of speedcams all over the country. I can see their worth in restricted ares such as schools, hospitals, and elderly people's homes etc. They seem to prefer sleeping policemen for that which damage our cars and can be dangerous. It is a fact that the best way to monitor motorists was by use of traffic police cars so that all the other and more serious infringements such as unlicensed drivers, uninsured drivers and drunks etc. can be sorted as well.

Les

r32

There is a right that if you are prosecuted then it must be with reliable evidence whatever the crime. Inaccurate evidence is not acceptable.

the moose

A lot.

One time was 120+mph, got let off by police biker. Some confusion over whether it was me or another rider - similar bikes, similar leathers. Very good about it, but we both got a bollocking, no ticket.

Lasered at 99mph, speedo said I was probably going 110, adjust for speedo accuracy, and it's about right. Court appearance and points.


Lasered at 95mph, talking to, no ticket.

VASCAR at 90ish in 50, court and points, and I'd agree with that speed.

GATSO at 38mph, and again, I'd agree with that. Points/fine.

I've never been unfairly done for speeding (well, maybe once), and since I speed every time I get in the car (literally), I'm not doing badly.

Leslie

You are very lucky then, so far.

Les

NotoriousREV

Heard this mentioned on the BBC News. Personally, I think Gavin Wallace may have dropped a bollock here. I wouldn't be surprised to hear of him getting investigated for perjury given that I could remove or replace my speed restrictor within a matter of minutes. That answer of "no" could haunt him for a very long time. All IMHO, of course.

GC8

I understand that the expert witness was asked whether the speed restrictor had been removed and he answered that it had not; he wasnt asked whether the speed limiter had been or could have been bypassed. The speed restrictor isnt removed in JDM cars; it it remains after converting the speedometer to display miles per hour, it comes into effect at 180mph rather than 180kph (112mph) as before.

Simon

NotoriousREV

According to a report quoted in another thread on here, the expert witness was asked if the device could have been tampered with, to which he replied "no".

Russs

He answered that in his opinion it hadn't been tampered with.

Don't think you can been nicked for having an opinion.

If you want to know for sure, PM Gav, he is registered as WallaceP on here iirc.

WallacePerformance

Just to confirm on this thread by myself and not to get any acusations thrown against me here that I did not and never did say that a speed de-restrictor was never fitted to this car.

I was simply asked if at the time of examining the car, were there any signs of a de-restrictor fitted or been fitted. Of course the answer was no. I was also asked could such device have been fitted and removed from the vehicle and I ANSWERED YES TO THIS QUESTION.

The reason the case was thrown out was due to insufficient evidence that the vehicle had been tampered with to remove the restriction (or in our terms - fool the ECU).

Hope this clears up what any journalists said or invented....

Gavin Wallace

blueone

Sounds like you have a case for Libel then, perhaps speak to a solicitor and send a letter off to all the newsgroups that libelled you asking for recouse and compensation for the blemish on your otherwise unstained character. If it can be shown that this has impacted on your business then I would expect a rahter large settlement to be in order.
Follow this link and it will explain it much better than me!
http://www.urban75.com/Action/libel.html

hedgehog

This is well worth a look for anyone who still believes that the laser devices may be accurate:

http://www.pepipoo.org/files/inside_out.rm

NotoriousREV

Thanks for clearing that up Gavin, I was worried that the bloodsuckers were going to come after you! Looks like a good result all round

WallacePerformance

Case was dismissed, no more than that. The Guy got off so he's happy. I got a good bit of publicity in the press and TV so I'm happy.

I think it's safe to say I will leave it there.

Gavin