Was it 149km/h or 76km/h? Biker's barrister father wins $60,000 battle to beat speed - Page 3

In Focus · 28-10-2011, 06:11 PM

This reminds me of the time at my cricket club when one of the players, a cop, brought down a radar gun (I think it was borrowed "unofficially" from somewhere). So, we all had a go at bowling the ball down as fast as we could, and a few egos got dented when it was revealed just how far off first-class pace we were...

To get slightly back towards being on topic - if it could detect a cricket ball, I'm sure it would have no trouble picking up a car-sized object.

Aussie XB12SS · 28-10-2011, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtxb67

it has everything to do with it, but you need to read my post

I did - a few times & stand by my comment as this thread has nothing to do with thieving.
But thats me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtxb67

maybe, but some believe a speedster getting off on a technicality is ok, yet the guy stealing their car, belongings or the innocence of someone close to them getting off on a technicality is wrong . . . "they" can't have it both ways

Not me. I couldn’t care less if someone speeding gets a fine.

My issue is with people being booked incorrectly for whatever reason. If it takes someone with money & brains to prove it’s been done incorrectly then so be it. Now some poor buggar who can’t afford to fight a legitimate case might not get done so quickly & incorrectly.

If someone is done for speeding or whatever in a vehicle then it should be point blank & no reason to argue.

Perhaps it will mean that more training is done. All the technology out now for revenue raising there should be no chance of mistakes because some people’s livelihoods depend on it.
More people than just this joker are getting off. It’s only these types of cases or ones involving police officers being done that we hear about.

prydey · 28-10-2011, 07:15 PM

Aussie XB12SS - you are missing the point entirely!

if i stole your car and wrecked it, but avoided any punishment because i hired a lawyer who managed to get me off on a technicality, you'd be ok with that??

yes, the speed gun may have been used incorrectly, but by the riders own admission, he was speeding. its not like the rider was innocent. some form of punishment was warranted.

Aussie XB12SS · 28-10-2011, 07:25 PM

No I’m not.
Read my other post
I said originally that if the equipment was used correctly he would have been booked correctly & we wouldn’t even be talking about it.
If someone stole my car & got off he’d have other issues to worry about like the nob I caught in my house but that would be a spot for a thieving & getting off thread.

fmc351 · 28-10-2011, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie XB12SS

I did - a few times & stand by my comment as this thread has nothing to do with thieving.
But thats me.

Not me. I couldn’t care less if someone speeding gets a fine.

My issue is with people being booked incorrectly for whatever reason. If it takes someone with money & brains to prove it’s been done incorrectly then so be it. Now some poor buggar who can’t afford to fight a legitimate case might not get done so quickly & incorrectly.

If someone is done for speeding or whatever in a vehicle then it should be point blank & no reason to argue.

Perhaps it will mean that more training is done. All the technology out now for revenue raising there should be no chance of mistakes because some people’s livelihoods depend on it.
More people than just this joker are getting off. It’s only these types of cases or ones involving police officers being done that we hear about.

And his post had very little to do with thieving. You need to look beyond the title (thieving) and see the plot (technicalities).

His point was using technicalities to get off an offence of any kind. Traffic, criminal or otherwise. Would anyone be cheering if someone got off another offence with a technicality, or would the thread be running along the lines of weak courts and soft sentences etc. History tells us the answer, so his question was really rhetorical.

I dont think GTXB is suggesting the law should be able to wrongly ping someone, he is merely making the observation that there is a double standard being demonstrated by members of this forum. Its suits them, so they are fine with it. When it doesnt suit them, they wont be.

Aussie XB12SS · 28-10-2011, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

And his post had very little to do with thieving. You need to look beyond the title (thieving) and see the plot (technicalities).

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh & you edited your post - had me stuffed for a minute.

As you originally asked would I be happy if someone stole from me & got off because the coppers didn’t do their job properly & the thief got off on a technicality?
No I wouldn’t because the copper stuffed up.

Maybe we are thinking along the same lines but explaining it differently?

**Grunter** · 28-10-2011, 07:41 PM

What technicality? The way the device should have been used and the fine was based on was reading incorrect. It was either right and he would have been guilty or it wasn't and he gets off.

I'd be interested as to why the in car reading was dismissed as well. I wonder if it to was also not in a position to take a accurate reading? Or I'm guessing as the fine was based off the 149kph that it couldn't be applied?

Either way, the officer was found to be at fault for not following procedure for the reading to be accurate.

**Revolver** · 28-10-2011, 07:43 PM

I saw this on Today Tonight last night.

I wanted to stick in my thoughts, but its just not worth my time. I thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss, but by the way this thread is going downhill, it too is going to be pulled over with some drivers being handed some paper...............

fmc351 · 28-10-2011, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie XB12SS

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh & you edited your post - had me stuffed for a minute.

As you originally asked would I be happy if someone stole from me & got off because the coppers didn’t do their job properly & the thief got off on a technicality?
No I wouldn’t because the copper stuffed up.

And I dont expect anyone would disagree with that. However OT, chances are people would be raking the copper over coals for his error, rather than acknowledge we all stuff up at times, coppers are no different.

That doesnt mean we should be cheering the bloke that got off. But we can dissect the error, and try to improve things to prevent it reoccurring etc.

**Grunter** · 28-10-2011, 09:17 PM

I should hasten to add, that that's not a shot at the police officer at all. They are human and mistakes happen!

b0son · 28-10-2011, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie XB12SS

I said originally that if the equipment was used correctly he would have been booked correctly & we wouldn’t even be talking about it.

Exactly. There's a reason why the operating guidelines for this equipment exist - because of the likelihood of erroneous readings when they arent followed.

If the cops start taking shortcuts and use the equipment incorrectly, a proportion of drivers will be booked for offences they did not commit.

How is this at all fair?

Supercharged · 28-10-2011, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grunter

I'd be interested as to why the in car reading was dismissed as well. I wonder if it to was also not in a position to take a accurate reading? Or I'm guessing as the fine was based off the 149kph that it couldn't be applied?

Either way, the officer was found to be at fault for not following procedure for the reading to be accurate.

Once they deciced to go for the 149km/h that was the end of the lesser charge as I think you can not be charged twice for what is the same offence.

fmc351 · 29-10-2011, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0son

Exactly. There's a reason why the operating guidelines for this equipment exist - because of the likelihood of erroneous readings when they arent followed.

If the cops start taking shortcuts and use the equipment incorrectly, a proportion of drivers will be booked for offences they did not commit.

How is this at all fair?

So youre suggesting that coppers are going around and deliberately framing people? En masse?

Falc'man · 29-10-2011, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

So youre suggesting that coppers are going around and deliberately framing people? En masse?

Lol. Nowhere does he say or imply that. The way I read it is if they're not doing correctly they can make mistakes.

fmc351 · 29-10-2011, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Lol. Nowhere does he say or imply that. The way I read it is if they're not doing correctly they can make mistakes.

Its well and truly implied. These arent trolley collectors, they are police who know the gravity of any shortcut they take. Any officer taking a shortcut on these things, is setting someone up. I thought that was the implication of the thread.

burnz · 29-10-2011, 02:39 AM

love the "close enough good enough" mentality..
149k~76k well hes over the 60 limit so book him anyway.

well the burgular look similar lock him up anyway.

fact is both machine's gave two very different readings, when they should have been the same right down to the decimal point as they are regarded as an instrument of accuracy.

this prove's that they are not the messiah the gov has brainwashed poeple into thinking.

Falc'man · 29-10-2011, 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

Its well and truly implied. These arent trolley collectors, they are police who know the gravity of any shortcut they take. Any officer taking a shortcut on these things, is setting someone up. I thought that was the implication of the thread.

That's a gross over reaction. You really have a strong and unreasoning desire to sneer at anyone who suggests that the authorities are not flawless. If you want to turn this into how angelic and righteous you think police officers are then you need to consider that before anything they're human and they do make errors of judgement and mistakes, and no one here has suggested they do this intentionally. The guy was not implying this at all so it's not really fair that you twist it around.

gtxb67 · 29-10-2011, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burnz

fact is both machine's gave two very different readings, when they should have been the same right down to the decimal point as they are regarded as an instrument of accuracy

i had the idea that the radar clocked him at 149 kph and after they took off to pull him over, he was clocked at 76 kph. if that is the case of course there can be 2 different readings

2011G6E · 29-10-2011, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i had the idea that the radar clocked him at 149 kph and after they took off to pull him over, he was clocked at 76 kph. if that is the case of course there can be 2 different readings

The Today Tonight show last night cleared it up completely. The one image of the short stretch of road between the straights where he supposedly did 149kph exposed the lie of the entire situation. The laser focussing on him for "Three continuous seconds" on that short piece of road would not have been possible had he in fact been doing that speed. How many other people have been booked after a quick ping with the radar or laser?
Not to mention that there is another elephant in the room no one talks about much (at least not those in power). Why don't hand-held detectors have a memory log? All the "evidence" we are ever provided with is a piece of paper. Those machines could quite easily have a data log on a memory card, encrypted so it can't be fiddled with, which, in the case of someone contesting a fine, be downloaded and show that on X date at X time a car did X speed. This wouldn't do away with the error that these machines must have in them (they're only an electronic device...do you implicitly trust every electronic device you own to be 100% accurate?), but it would at least give the cops a leg to stand on in court.

But nothing will change...I work with several ex-policeman, and they all laugh about the same thing. They said the "procedure" if you were questioned in court about a speeding fine on those rare occasions that someone appeals one, is to first say you "saw the offender approaching and estimated his speed to be between X and Y kilometers per hour, I then consulted the radar/lidar and confirmed his speed to be X kilometers per hour".
This way, you aren't questioning a soulless piece of electronics that is prone to error, you are questioning the experience and judgement of a serving police officer, whose "expert judgement" was only backed up by the device.
What crap...they sit in the back of the camera car doing bugger all and sometimes (let's be honest..."normally") don't know a speeder has gone by until the camera pings them (I know this from having a relative in the poilce force, and also the ex-cops I know), and if using a handheld in busy traffic, all they do it stare at the traffic through the gun, flicking from car to car (as we blatantly on the Today Tonight show last night with one cop using a laser...he certainly wasn't taking three seconds on each car). It's all a game, and there's no way we can be on the winning side.

So I think we should all stop our whinging, and do as the nice man said on TT last night...don't speed and the infallible perfect 100% accurate electronic device held in the wavering hand of a fallible human standing by the side of a busy road will never ever make the sligthest mistake...

flappist · 29-10-2011, 10:38 AM

Keep it civil, this is starting to get argumentative and that will end in tears....

Stazza_Brendan · 29-10-2011, 10:43 AM

I agree. Surely it wouldn't be hard for a radar gun to have a memory card that lasts duration of shift. Recording.
Gps location
Time and date
Direction gun was facing
Speed vehicle was caught at
Time in seconds that the car was tracked for

My old $40 phone does the first 3 things on that list. Surely not hard to adapt all of that into a radar gun. If you want to fight a fine. Police pulls your file from the database.
According to gps location you were in a 60km zone and radar tracked you at 75km for 4 seconds. Takes alot of the he said, she said out of court room.

flappist · 29-10-2011, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stazza_Brendan

I agree. Surely it wouldn't be hard for a radar gun to have a memory card that lasts duration of shift. Recording.
Gps location
Time and date
Direction gun was facing
Speed vehicle was caught at
Time in seconds that the car was tracked for

My old $40 phone does the first 3 things on that list. Surely not hard to adapt all of that into a radar gun. If you want to fight a fine. Police pulls your file from the database.
According to gps location you were in a 60km zone and radar tracked you at 75km for 4 seconds. Takes alot of the he said, she said out of court room.

I would add to that 3 axis accelerometers (to make sure the LIDAR is not moving), distance to targeted vehicle (sampled with each pulse) and high definition video image showing absence of anything else that may have corrupted the reading (such as rain, fog, bird flying through beam etc.).

I have used quite a few different LIDARs and RADARs over the years and have demonstrated a parked car doing 20km/h.......

nstg8a · 29-10-2011, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

I would add to that 3 axis accelerometers (to make sure the LIDAR is not moving), distance to targeted vehicle (sampled with each pulse) and high definition video image showing absence of anything else that may have corrupted the reading (such as rain, fog, bird flying through beam etc.).

I have used quite a few different LIDARs and RADARs over the years and have demonstrated a parked car doing 20km/h.......

agree completely, this tech is cheap these days, esp compared to what they earn the govt...

b0son · 29-10-2011, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

So youre suggesting that coppers are going around and deliberately framing people? En masse?

Hardly. I'm saying the police do not have sufficient technical understanding to appreciate what circumstances may give rise to erroneous readings - thats why the operating guidelines exist. If they take shortcuts assuming the equipment is never wrong, mistakes will be made, and people will be booked for an offence that was never committed.

Considering that you are guilty until proven innocent where these offences are concerned, it is entirely reasonable for the police to be expected to dot the i's and cross the t's in terms of the way they operate the equipment.

The idea that people are getting off on a technicality is wrong.

b0son · 29-10-2011, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

Its well and truly implied. These arent trolley collectors

They're also not braniacs. They would need to be physicists in order to understand how and why false readings occur, and what needs to be done to avoid them.

Quote:

Any officer taking a shortcut on these things, is setting someone up. I thought that was the implication of the thread.

The implication was that they are not qualified to know the implications of their shortcuts, and are inadvertently setting drivers up through their own ignorance.

b0son · 29-10-2011, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

I have used quite a few different LIDARs and RADARs over the years and have demonstrated a parked car doing 20km/h.......

Or back in the days of roadside radar, where the beam was so wide, a big enough vehicle (eg. truck) completely out of frame could trip the radar and falsely implicate the non-speeding vehicle in frame.

I've seen cops argue this was impossible with a PhD physicist...

Bossxr8 · 29-10-2011, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

So youre suggesting that coppers are going around and deliberately framing people? En masse?

I wouldn't be suprised if some officer short of his quota didn't smudge figures to get the results he or she needs.

I'm not saying it happens, but its not beyond the realms of possibility.

gtxb67 · 29-10-2011, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

The Today Tonight show . . . . ever make the sligthest mistake...

that may all be true, but i only posted to suggest that if one reading was from a radar and one was from the police car, then there was likely to be 2 different speeds quoted

prydey · 29-10-2011, 05:41 PM

the amount of people that have been wrongly accused of speeding would pale into insignificance against those who were guilty as charged.

show of hands all those who have been wrongly caught!!

i'm no fan of police or speed camera's/guns etc, but most people that are caught are guilty as charged!

apparently lawyers are honest people and today tonight is factual now too.

burnz · 29-10-2011, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

the amount of people that have been wrongly accused of speeding would pale into insignificance against those who were guilty as charged.

show of hands all those who have been wrongly caught!!

i'm no fan of police or speed camera's/guns etc, but most people that are caught are guilty as charged!

apparently lawyers are honest people and today tonight is factual now too.

climbing wagga hill doing 40k's i was pinched for 110k's..
20k's over the limit for truck's at the time,
being stationary waiting for the officer! my radar detector went beserk when he zapped a car doing the right thing 110..