LTI 20-20 UltraLyte 100 Calibration checks

LTI 20-20 UltraLyte 100 Calibration checks

Author
Discussion

pinchmeimdreamin

9,837 posts

217 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
ging84 said:
If that is all genuinely true
what is the fking point in having courts at all
Possibly because even with all that he was speeding wink

speedking31

3,543 posts

135 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
Davo93 said:
In the officer's statement, he states that the 30mph limit is not regularly posted along the road but indicated at either far end of the change of limit and that the limit should "be taken" by the residential built up area and spacing of street lamps no more than 200 yards apart, as illustrated by the highway code.

Where I was caught, the limit goes from a 40mph to a 30mph.
So if the initial signs are obscured by traffic or foliage (all too common these days) is it possible to be pinged in the first 200 m? That is a favourite mobile speed check scenario. It is difficult for the driver to establish the spacing of streetlamps until he has passed several.

dukeboy749r

2,539 posts

209 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
Much as I'd hate to question the honesty of any police officer - despite our fallibility as human beings, a similar article to the Daily Mail one appeared in MCN - and it demonstrated the failings of a similar, hand-held laser speed gun.

Perhaps you didn't mean to sound sanctimonious HantsRat - and we may agree that, quite often, the Daily Mail does write some 'tosh' - just because it seemingly questions an area you are familiar with, does not make it wrong every time.

There remains the concept in this country of being innocent until proven guilty - not all technology is infallible - as we all too often discover.

And whilst it may only be 'a few quid ffs' (breadvan72), it is also a matter of principle at times.

jith

2,752 posts

214 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
Davo93 said:
HantsRat said:
You seem to be challenging purely based on an admin error of not writing down your speed on a piece of paper? I personally don't think you will be successful. Ultimately if the officer has the speed written down in his PNB and statement, I think this will be enough for a conviction.
As I have said previously, as this was a hand held device with no recording hardware attached to it, it ultimately boils down to the court siding with the officers evidence or my defence. It is their word against mine.

Without any physical evidence (photos, video evidence), it is an offence which is based purely on the accuracy of the officers evidence. If that accuracy can be questioned and highlights a technicality which can find me not guilty, then I believe that it is right to challenge the evidence offered. I believe that there is a significant "reasonable doubt" in relation to the evidence offered by the officers.


Edited by Davo93 on Monday 17th August 13:08
Davo, please read this and absorb the concept of the police and the crown prosecuting with absolutely no physical evidence, and this when they clearly had the ability to provide it.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Whilst the above case revolved around a stop at the roadside and a different detection method, the principle is exactly the same.

We won this case simply due to dogged determination and the incompetence of the PF on no less than 6 appearances in court. But it cost the accused a few quid, to put it mildly and, in Scotland, you don't get a penny in expenses even if you win outright!

I tell you what though, the feeling leaving court after winning is worth a king's ransom!

J

HantsRat

2,369 posts

107 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
Just to add. I just spent 30 mins in the back yard (Before I started my shift before certain individuals moan) and spent the time trying to produce this slip affect on the laser.

Not once could I get an inaccurate reading. I must have had over 200 'hits' but all returned 0mph or an error.

From watching some of these videos, they were either using an american imported version of the gun with different software or they were standing side on to a moving vehicle. I don't think any police officer would every conduct speed enforcement with the vehicle side on. You would be positioned in front of the car heading towards or away from you pointing the gun at the numberplate. There may be small angles but the front and rear is always in view.


Edited by HantsRat on Thursday 20th August 14:28

AA999

5,180 posts

216 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
Just going down a level in to how the guns work..
Correct me if I'm wrong but a speed gun needs a minimum of two readings in order to formulate a speed reading of the target.
If over a distance the first reading was taken from the top of the windscreen (or wing mirror etc.) and the second reading from the front of the bonnet then this is a difference in distance that would be around 2m,3m,4m varying on vehicle type of course.

The time between readings will be such that it can record a significant difference in distance, so probably around 0.5seconds?

So adding up the distance travelled by vehicle plus 2m,3m,4m etc. divided by the time between readings (0.5sec?) will give the recorded speed of the vehicle.

In 0.5seconds a vehicle at 30mph travels 6.7m.

2m,3m,4m (dependant on vehicle type) adds to a significant amount of distance of the 6.7m 'travelled' by the 'gun reading'.

This leads on to how easy it is for a hand held speed gun to read the exact same place on an approaching vehicle in order to get a precise speed measurement?
And the ease of doing this obviously decreases as the distance between copper and vehicle increases.

I can see how it can lead to questions of reliability.


Edited by AA999 on Thursday 20th August 15:38

Vaud

50,289 posts

154 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
As I understand it the pulses are ~30ns. That is very brief. It sends 100-600 of these pulse at close to the speed of light. It completes calculations in 300-400ms - but it only needs a small sample - the car will not have moved an appreciable distance in that time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIDAR_speed_gun

"Laser pulse [Pulse A] "flies" towards the target and hits the target vehicle license plate. At the same time the pulse is released into flight [Release Time A], a timer is started by a high resolution high-speed timer built into the LiDAR gun. Additional laser pulses are also sent at a rate of 100-600 pulses per second. The advent of high-speed timers was a critical technology, making "time-in-flight" measurement of light possible. So the LiDAR measures time-in-flight of each pulse and requires only 2 pulses over a period of time of as little as 3 ms (theoretically) to determine the velocity of a vehicle. The LiDAR unit, however, takes additional measures in order to provide some additional validation that the measure is correct"


AA999

5,180 posts

216 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
Vaud said:
As I understand it the pulses are ~30ns. That is very brief. It sends 100-600 of these pulse at close to the speed of light. It completes calculations in 300-400ms - but it only needs a small sample - the car will not have moved an appreciable distance in that time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIDAR_speed_gun

"Laser pulse [Pulse A] "flies" towards the target and hits the target vehicle license plate. At the same time the pulse is released into flight [Release Time A], a timer is started by a high resolution high-speed timer built into the LiDAR gun. Additional laser pulses are also sent at a rate of 100-600 pulses per second. The advent of high-speed timers was a critical technology, making "time-in-flight" measurement of light possible. So the LiDAR measures time-in-flight of each pulse and requires only 2 pulses over a period of time of as little as 3 ms (theoretically) to determine the velocity of a vehicle. The LiDAR unit, however, takes additional measures in order to provide some additional validation that the measure is correct"
Just wondering what happens if for example during the pulses that 1/2 come back as a measurement from the wing mirror and the top part of bonnet and the second half as the gun traces down the bonnet and to the number plate?
Which set of results would it take and which would be rejected?

I guess it comes down to the word of the officer in him being confident that what he targetted was the exact same part of the vehicle along its track as it approached?

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
AA999 said:
Just wondering what happens if for example during the pulses that 1/2 come back as a measurement from the wing mirror and the top part of bonnet and the second half as the gun traces down the bonnet and to the number plate?
Which set of results would it take and which would be rejected?

I guess it comes down to the word of the officer in him being confident that what he targetted was the exact same part of the vehicle along its track as it approached?
The gun has an algorithm to reject outlying results.

So, for example:

2, 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 17, 14

Would have the outlying results (9 and 17) ignored, whilst the steady and expected result. If there are too many outlying results, the gun refuses to return a speed and provides an error message.

However... in court, the importer rejects questioning about how sensitive the algorithm is, as it is a commercial secret.

The reality is that the reason that there must be an alignment check is just like the sights of a rifle, the crosshairs do not guarantee that this is where the bullet/beam is being sent.

Indeed, there is no laser 'pointer' which shows which car's actually being targeted - it's all on the sights - which may very well be aimed towards a vehicle half a mile or more away.

Davidonly

1,080 posts

192 months

Thursday 20th August 2015
quotequote all
JustinP1 said:
AA999 said:
Just wondering what happens if for example during the pulses that 1/2 come back as a measurement from the wing mirror and the top part of bonnet and the second half as the gun traces down the bonnet and to the number plate?
Which set of results would it take and which would be rejected?

I guess it comes down to the word of the officer in him being confident that what he targetted was the exact same part of the vehicle along its track as it approached?
The gun has an algorithm to reject outlying results.

So, for example:

2, 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 17, 14

Would have the outlying results (9 and 17) ignored, whilst the steady and expected result. If there are too many outlying results, the gun refuses to return a speed and provides an error message.

However... in court, the importer rejects questioning about how sensitive the algorithm is, as it is a commercial secret.

The reality is that the reason that there must be an alignment check is just like the sights of a rifle, the crosshairs do not guarantee that this is where the bullet/beam is being sent.

Indeed, there is no laser 'pointer' which shows which car's actually being targeted - it's all on the sights - which may very well be aimed towards a vehicle half a mile or more away.
All of this before the question of scatter and reflections are factored in. LIDAR not fit for purpose.

GreatGranny

9,097 posts

225 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
OP, while I admire your determination and single mindedness you are onto a loser on this one.

I realise its a matter of principal but when 90% of the posters, including some who actually know what they are talking about, say you have little chance of winning then it maybe a good idea to let this one go.

It will potentially cost you many times what the original fine would have been.

At the end you will be poorer and a lot more bitter.

jith

2,752 posts

214 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
GreatGranny said:
OP, while I admire your determination and single mindedness you are onto a loser on this one.

I realise its a matter of principal but when 90% of the posters, including some who actually know what they are talking about, say you have little chance of winning then it maybe a good idea to let this one go.

It will potentially cost you many times what the original fine would have been.

At the end you will be poorer and a lot more bitter.
You actually have no idea how he will feel at the end of it, because you don't know him.

Some of us defend ourselves against the odds for the simple reason that the principle of the issue matters a great deal, and the concept of "sucking it up" or "just taking it on the chin" is deeply offensive.

It all depends on how each of us feels about the manner in which this type of enforcement is carried out and the fact that these systems actually exist when they are so deeply flawed in theory and practice.

Personally speaking, I have proven to myself and others over a great many years that the whole system, unlike that for real criminals committing serious crimes, is deeply prejudiced in favour of the prosecution services. Attempting a defence is extremely difficult and technically complex, and the single most prevalent problem is the technical ignorance that exists with the prosecutors, the judges and even the police themselves. This makes the business of promoting a technical argument in court brutally difficult.

Then there is the expense: there is something overtly offensive about a system that in England, actually punishes the individual to a greater level for daring to defend themself. And in Scotland we have the wonderful practice of having no expense award whatever to the defence even if you win outright! An unbelievable and totally unacceptable prejudice, but occurring on a daily basis.

The acceptance of this kind of prejudice is why the system is sustaining itself, driving standards are arguably at an all time low and the majority of drivers just pay up and accept the unacceptable. What you have to ask yourself is how bad will it get before we do something about it to change things?

J

Vaud

50,289 posts

154 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
jith said:
What you have to ask yourself is how bad will it get before we do something about it to change things?
Like what?

You could help change things - lobby your MP and seek support in the House of Lords?

AA999

5,180 posts

216 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
jith said:
You actually have no idea how he will feel at the end of it, because you don't know him.

Some of us defend ourselves against the odds for the simple reason that the principle of the issue matters a great deal, and the concept of "sucking it up" or "just taking it on the chin" is deeply offensive.

It all depends on how each of us feels about the manner in which this type of enforcement is carried out and the fact that these systems actually exist when they are so deeply flawed in theory and practice.

Personally speaking, I have proven to myself and others over a great many years that the whole system, unlike that for real criminals committing serious crimes, is deeply prejudiced in favour of the prosecution services. Attempting a defence is extremely difficult and technically complex, and the single most prevalent problem is the technical ignorance that exists with the prosecutors, the judges and even the police themselves. This makes the business of promoting a technical argument in court brutally difficult.

Then there is the expense: there is something overtly offensive about a system that in England, actually punishes the individual to a greater level for daring to defend themself. And in Scotland we have the wonderful practice of having no expense award whatever to the defence even if you win outright! An unbelievable and totally unacceptable prejudice, but occurring on a daily basis.

The acceptance of this kind of prejudice is why the system is sustaining itself, driving standards are arguably at an all time low and the majority of drivers just pay up and accept the unacceptable. What you have to ask yourself is how bad will it get before we do something about it to change things?

J
Well put.
I've always hated the angle of being in an automatic stance of being guilty and having to prove your innocence, rather than the advertised "innocent until proven guilty", the so called "bed-rock" of UK justice that we try to advertise to the world.

jbsportstech

5,069 posts

178 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
go to war with the courts and police over am proven home office approved device and see if you can get a better result than 3 pts and £100 fine.

The OP has not said I checked my speed along that section and it was defo below 30mph. He just thinks recalling that drive he wasn't speeding no specifics which makes me question how sure they are.

Rightly or wrongly its auto assumption of guilt that's our current system. You may catch them out a technical issue but I doubt it.

Alex

9,975 posts

283 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
JustinP1 said:
About 8 years ago I was in a similar position.

At the mags court, when they went out to deliberate, the clerk came over to be hand outstretched to shake mine and congratulated me on the best self represented case he had seen in his 20 years there. He then turned to the police officer and said that whatever the outcome he needed to look at what he was doing again.

In my case, under cross-examination, the officer admitted:

1) Only one of the two plane checks were performed before the duty started.

2) No checks were performed at the end of duty.

3) Nothing was recorded about checks in his notebook.

4) No site checks were carried out.

5) That he did not know the ACPO Code of Practice existed - a document which stated that to ensure integrity of evidence all of the above needed to be completed.

It should be noted that since that time, the foreword of it has been changed to 'Guidance'.

Compare the strength of my case, and compare it to yours. I was found guilty at mags court.

I appealed to Crown Court, and was represented by a specialist solicitor and barrister.

The prosecution case, as weak as it was was based on the memory of the police officer. His final question in cross-examination was if he could remember what colour my car was. He could not. This would be bad enough, except my car was a bright yellow TVR.

Despite all that, I was found guilty again.

Also note that things in terms of how the officers are prepped and the CPS briefs are aware of the issues have got a lot better.


From this, I hope you could perhaps reassess your chances here and whether you should save yourself a few hundred quid.
This concurs with my experiences, and it makes me so angry. The mags barely listen to details of the defence and always side with the cop, and ignore any mistakes he or she might have made.

Alex

9,975 posts

283 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
jith said:
Some of us defend ourselves against the odds for the simple reason that the principle of the issue matters a great deal, and the concept of "sucking it up" or "just taking it on the chin" is deeply offensive.
Spot on. Everyone should do this to clog up the system.

I dragged my last one out for over 9 months.

pinchmeimdreamin

9,837 posts

217 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
Alex said:
jith said:
Some of us defend ourselves against the odds for the simple reason that the principle of the issue matters a great deal, and the concept of "sucking it up" or "just taking it on the chin" is deeply offensive.
Spot on. Everyone should do this to clog up the system.

I dragged my last one out for over 9 months.
What was the outcome ?

How much did it cost you ?

Alex

9,975 posts

283 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
The offence was 67mph in a 60mph limit (A31 Hog's Back).

I pleaded not guilty, requested the calibration certificates, the video from the mobile speed camera. Surprisingly, they sent it all without question, although it took a few months.

I had it all reviewed by a speed camera "expert", who reckoned I had a case, but said I'd probably still lose in court.

At the first hearing, the police officer actually turned up. He was a really nice guy and even sat with me reviewing the video and explaining what he was doing at the time. He was due to retire in 2 weeks.

Another hearing was scheduled to hear the case. The day before I called to change my plea to guilty. Got 3 points and £165 fine.

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Friday 21st August 2015
quotequote all
Unless the officer admits a mistake - theres little or no chance of getting off a speed ticket. In the old follow for 3/10 mile / calibrated speedo days we never reported anyone for less than 10mph over - just had a bking for less.