Gatso camera photographs v. indicated speed
Discussion
Can someone answer a question for me?
I have recently received an NIP for exceeding a 30mph.
I have asked for all the evidence as I did not believe at the time I was doing more than 35mph.
They have sent me the photos, and the details of the Gatso flash interval, and the road marker spacings, but refused to send evidence of the gatso calibration.
However, the photos clearly show that my car only passed four+ markers in the half second between flashes.
This equates to a speed of 30mph.
The Gatso says I was doing 40mph.
Question is, do I go to court, or pay up?
HELP!!!!!!!
I have recently received an NIP for exceeding a 30mph.
I have asked for all the evidence as I did not believe at the time I was doing more than 35mph.
They have sent me the photos, and the details of the Gatso flash interval, and the road marker spacings, but refused to send evidence of the gatso calibration.
However, the photos clearly show that my car only passed four+ markers in the half second between flashes.
This equates to a speed of 30mph.
The Gatso says I was doing 40mph.
Question is, do I go to court, or pay up?
HELP!!!!!!!
Double check your maths then go to court! Or better still ring them up and point out that their own evidence proves you weren't speeding, whereupon they should quietly let it drop (but don't hold your breath for an apology).
Sounds like they have sent the NIP out solely on the strength of the radar reading from the GATSO, without bothering to check that the camera shots corroborate the reading. Sounds like either the radar was out of calibration, or else it was tripped spuriously - perhaps by a vehicle travelling the other way.
As far as I understand it, for you to be found guilty in court there needs to be primary evidence + corroboration. In this instance the primary evidence says you were speeding but the corroborative evidence says you weren't, so NOT GUILTY!
Sounds like they have sent the NIP out solely on the strength of the radar reading from the GATSO, without bothering to check that the camera shots corroborate the reading. Sounds like either the radar was out of calibration, or else it was tripped spuriously - perhaps by a vehicle travelling the other way.
As far as I understand it, for you to be found guilty in court there needs to be primary evidence + corroboration. In this instance the primary evidence says you were speeding but the corroborative evidence says you weren't, so NOT GUILTY!
BlackStuff said:
Double check your maths then go to court! Or better still ring them up and point out that their own evidence proves you weren't speeding, whereupon they should quietly let it drop (but don't hold your breath for an apology).
Sounds like they have sent the NIP out solely on the strength of the radar reading from the GATSO, without bothering to check that the camera shots corroborate the reading. Sounds like either the radar was out of calibration, or else it was tripped spuriously - perhaps by a vehicle travelling the other way.
As far as I understand it, for you to be found guilty in court there needs to be primary evidence + corroboration. In this instance the primary evidence says you were speeding but the corroborative evidence says you weren't, so NOT GUILTY!
Quite correct
The speed reading is by radar, the corrobation (distance travelled) should be checked before a nip is sent, I doubt they do check.
Fight it, sounds like an easy case, get in touch with the papers too!
Check out www.abd.org.uk
Click on the Speed Camera link and go to the bottom of the page. The formulas are all there for you to work out your speed.
Click on the Speed Camera link and go to the bottom of the page. The formulas are all there for you to work out your speed.
Thanks Gentlemen,
Your comments have all supported what I thought, so I have written back accordingly.
The photos and speed calcs definitely support a sub-32mph figure so what was doing 40 I don't know. There is a car going in the opposite direction on the pics, but he doesn't look to have gone far either.
I'll post up the results as soon as I get them.
Thanks again
Your comments have all supported what I thought, so I have written back accordingly.
The photos and speed calcs definitely support a sub-32mph figure so what was doing 40 I don't know. There is a car going in the opposite direction on the pics, but he doesn't look to have gone far either.
I'll post up the results as soon as I get them.
Thanks again
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff