Reader responses to Daily Mail claims of dodgy lasers
Discussion
14 letters on pages 26 and 27 of today's Mail all from drivers questioning accuracy of speed readings.
Two colleagues were travelling in two cars in a 30 limit; one was clocked at 41 and the other at 49 even though they were in convoy at the same speed which they both agreed was within the 30 limit.
Another was found guilty though the photo produced showed Error 3, at which time the cop lied to the court by telling them this meant that the picture had bene enlarged. They accepted this and convicted.
Two colleagues were travelling in two cars in a 30 limit; one was clocked at 41 and the other at 49 even though they were in convoy at the same speed which they both agreed was within the 30 limit.
Another was found guilty though the photo produced showed Error 3, at which time the cop lied to the court by telling them this meant that the picture had bene enlarged. They accepted this and convicted.
I agree, its more than dishonesty, as I have mentioned in a similar thread the erosion of the ACPO Code of Practice into 'ACPO Guidelines' as a system of disinformation by policy.
When this policy is challeged, the 'powers that be' turn on the law for support, and just their own say-so to stop the public actually knowing the same figure that they based their hypotheses on.
Its a matter of time as long as we keep the pressure on...
When this policy is challeged, the 'powers that be' turn on the law for support, and just their own say-so to stop the public actually knowing the same figure that they based their hypotheses on.
Its a matter of time as long as we keep the pressure on...
I agree, its more than dishonesty, as I have mentioned in a similar thread the erosion of the ACPO Code of Practice into 'ACPO Guidelines' as a system of disinformation by policy.
When this policy is challeged, the 'powers that be' turn on the law for support, and just their own say-so to stop the public actually knowing the same figure that they based their hypotheses on.
Its a matter of time as long as we keep the pressure on...
When this policy is challeged, the 'powers that be' turn on the law for support, and just their own say-so to stop the public actually knowing the same figure that they based their hypotheses on.
Its a matter of time as long as we keep the pressure on...
justinp1 said:I would disagree Justin.
Its a matter of time as long as we keep the pressure on...
While it’s not legally recognised that there is a flaw in the Lidar design which allows it so achieve spurious readings, all the newspaper articles, TV programmes, protests in the world won’t change a thing (take Iraq for example, what a crock of 5hite that was – and continues to be).
Two things I would say about those comments in the paper:
Two people have picked up on the aspect of emitted power, but I can tell you that is not a problem. These units have been accepted to be eye safe by several orders of magnitude, even when viewed close up or through a telescope. It makes sense considering the short duration of the pulses.
Brian Rigg (‘Rigg’ who just happens to be a lorry driver!) is wrong about the 10% over-speed being acceptable in law. Any speed above the indicated limit is illegal (absolute offence). If it can be proven that a vehicle was at 30.1 in a 30 limit, the driver can be prosecuted as usual.
The rest hits the right notes.
smeggy said:
Its a matter of time as long as we keep the pressure on...
I would disagree Justin.
While it’s not legally recognised that there is a flaw in the Lidar design which allows it so achieve spurious readings, all the newspaper articles, TV programmes, protests in the world won’t change a thing (take Iraq for example, what a crock of 5hite that was – and continues to be).
Hi Smeggy,
I was hoping the situation was going to be like Vietnam, as oppose to Iraq! I shall live in hope!
Perhaps a potential new government would see it as an election winner to stop the 'speed kills' propaganda. It would certainly ring true with the growing millions who have been flashed and had their back pockets raided in the interests of 'safety'.
justinp1 said:I think you might have somthing there Justin, that's worth chasing up - I think I will.....
Perhaps a potential new government would see it as an election winner to stop the 'speed kills' propaganda. It would certainly ring true with the growing millions who have been flashed and had their back pockets raided in the interests of 'safety'.
Some (many?) Magistrates need re-education as to what constitutes "reasonable doubt". They appear to think (have been indoctrinated?) it means that police witnesses are always right, even when there is contrary evidence (allegedly, officer testifies that the road was wet and the weather was overcast (or similar) ... his photographic record shows a dry road and clear shadow under the vehicle ... Magistrates accept his word over the photograph ... then convict on the speeding evidence of the photograph! And who said the camera never lies? - Streaky
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff