Important info read this:
Discussion
Read this:
A Walsall motorist who holds a 35-year unblemished driving record is being prosecuted by West Midlands police for allegedly driving 41 mph in a 30 mph zone. David Edgar who has pleaded not guilty to the driving offence will be defending himself in the Birmingham Magistrates' Court on Thursday 13th January 2005.
Mr. Edgar (52) who is a retired Consultant Electronics Engineer and a former Professional Inventor has come up with a laser aligned, optically triggered digital timer that is capable of measuring the time lapse between the two flashes which are produced by a Gatsometer speed camera to within 1/100th of a second.
Mr Edgar first became concerned about the accuracy of the Gatso speed camera when his requests for disclosure of how the speed cameras were calibrated for accuracy were ignored by the Police and Crown Prosecution Service in addition to Gatsometer in the Netherlands and UK, so too was his formal Application to the Birmingham Magistrates' Court to force disclosure. Mr Edgar said, "I really felt they had something to hide so I decided to investigate the critical timing accuracy.
NOTSO ACCURATE
Having tested the opto digital timer on a number of Gatso speed camera sites including Newtown Birmingham, Walsall and Cannock area Mr Edgar soon discovered that well over 80% of them are inaccurate, in particular there are serious timing errors between the two flashes which are supposed to flash at exactly half a second apart (500 milli seconds) thus the recorded distance a vehicle has travelled relative to the parallel road markings are inaccurate. In the tests which Mr Edgar has conducted the timings are anything but accurate, typically 0.63 seconds, needless to say this inaccuracy then reflects on the distance a vehicle has travelled thus creating the illusion (for the benefit of the prosecution) that a vehicle has travelled much faster than it actually did, for instance a vehicle travelling at 35 mph would have travelled an extra 2.03 metres when the timing between the two flashes is 0.63 seconds and that puts the vehicle in the next set of parallel line markings which are spaced 2 metres apart.
BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
Since these serious inaccuracies clearly affect the reliability of the actual recorded speed of a vehicle the photographic evidence cannot be relied on by the prosecution as there is reasonable doubt concerning the accuracy of the photographic evidence.
OTHER CONCERNS
Having now investigated and researched the Gatso method of speed camera entrapment the police and CPS are relying on Mr Edgar said " I have also discovered some other disturbing facts that affect the accuracy and reliability of the entire measuring system, these will be brought to the attention of the Birmingham Magistrates Court on Thursday 13th January 2005, come along it should be an interesting day in Court"
A Walsall motorist who holds a 35-year unblemished driving record is being prosecuted by West Midlands police for allegedly driving 41 mph in a 30 mph zone. David Edgar who has pleaded not guilty to the driving offence will be defending himself in the Birmingham Magistrates' Court on Thursday 13th January 2005.
Mr. Edgar (52) who is a retired Consultant Electronics Engineer and a former Professional Inventor has come up with a laser aligned, optically triggered digital timer that is capable of measuring the time lapse between the two flashes which are produced by a Gatsometer speed camera to within 1/100th of a second.
Mr Edgar first became concerned about the accuracy of the Gatso speed camera when his requests for disclosure of how the speed cameras were calibrated for accuracy were ignored by the Police and Crown Prosecution Service in addition to Gatsometer in the Netherlands and UK, so too was his formal Application to the Birmingham Magistrates' Court to force disclosure. Mr Edgar said, "I really felt they had something to hide so I decided to investigate the critical timing accuracy.
NOTSO ACCURATE
Having tested the opto digital timer on a number of Gatso speed camera sites including Newtown Birmingham, Walsall and Cannock area Mr Edgar soon discovered that well over 80% of them are inaccurate, in particular there are serious timing errors between the two flashes which are supposed to flash at exactly half a second apart (500 milli seconds) thus the recorded distance a vehicle has travelled relative to the parallel road markings are inaccurate. In the tests which Mr Edgar has conducted the timings are anything but accurate, typically 0.63 seconds, needless to say this inaccuracy then reflects on the distance a vehicle has travelled thus creating the illusion (for the benefit of the prosecution) that a vehicle has travelled much faster than it actually did, for instance a vehicle travelling at 35 mph would have travelled an extra 2.03 metres when the timing between the two flashes is 0.63 seconds and that puts the vehicle in the next set of parallel line markings which are spaced 2 metres apart.
BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
Since these serious inaccuracies clearly affect the reliability of the actual recorded speed of a vehicle the photographic evidence cannot be relied on by the prosecution as there is reasonable doubt concerning the accuracy of the photographic evidence.
OTHER CONCERNS
Having now investigated and researched the Gatso method of speed camera entrapment the police and CPS are relying on Mr Edgar said " I have also discovered some other disturbing facts that affect the accuracy and reliability of the entire measuring system, these will be brought to the attention of the Birmingham Magistrates Court on Thursday 13th January 2005, come along it should be an interesting day in Court"
I may be wrong, but AIUI the photographic evidence is merely a record of the speed recorded by the radar sensor on the GATSO. The second photograph is taken to sort out issues where two cars are in frame. The car that has travelled furthest in the second picture should be the one travelling at the higher speed. (NOTE should - I'm sure there are a few circumstances where a heavily braking car could lose enough speed in the nominal half second to put it to the rear of the slower car).
StressedDave said:
I may be wrong, but AIUI the photographic evidence is merely a record of the speed recorded by the radar sensor on the GATSO. The second photograph is taken to sort out issues where two cars are in frame. The car that has travelled furthest in the second picture should be the one travelling at the higher speed. (NOTE should - I'm sure there are a few circumstances where a heavily braking car could lose enough speed in the nominal half second to put it to the rear of the slower car).
The photo is taken to back up the radar info. If the calibration is off then the photo's get taken a further distance apart, hence making it *look* like youve travelled further than in reality, so you must be speeding. The camera never lies or so they say, except that it does. However, theyll not pay any attention to the radar readings if the photo clearly shows the distance with the supposedly accurate timing.
Ive voiced concerns regarding just this scenario before, but due to the secrecy regarding the scameraships, you cant get hardly any info out of them, all theyre after is money.
Hmm - not being au fait with the workings of the damn things, doesn't the photo show how far a vehicle has travelled within a set time - therefore proving to a high degree of accuracy what speed was being done.
So if the "set time" is longer than it's supposed to be the vehicle would appear to have travelled further, therefore at a "Higher speed" to the prosecution.
45 mph may only be 40 for example or 35 30 etc etc.
Anything that shows how f
g rediculous cameras are as a way of increasing safety is a positive in my book - good luck to the chap in question.
Phil
So if the "set time" is longer than it's supposed to be the vehicle would appear to have travelled further, therefore at a "Higher speed" to the prosecution.
45 mph may only be 40 for example or 35 30 etc etc.
Anything that shows how f
g rediculous cameras are as a way of increasing safety is a positive in my book - good luck to the chap in question. Phil
Thats exactly right Mannginger. The timing interval between flashes (open shutter times) is critical. If its set low, say 0.2 sec then itll show the car as having NOT been speeding.
The converse is true. Id not be surprised if they do this entirely on purpose to make more money. Corruption breeds corruption and the scamerships are so very very corrupt.
The converse is true. Id not be surprised if they do this entirely on purpose to make more money. Corruption breeds corruption and the scamerships are so very very corrupt.
DeltaFox said:
Thats exactly right Mannginger. The timing interval between flashes (open shutter times) is critical. If its set low, say 0.2 sec then itll show the car as having NOT been speeding.
The converse is true. Id not be surprised if they do this entirely on purpose to make more money. Corruption breeds corruption and the scamerships are so very very corrupt.
And the reason they are so very corrupt is because they think they have the moral high ground because they are there to save lives
So any underhand dealing to catch more milch cows, sorry, motorists is seen as perfectly acceptable practice. 
Hope the guy has his day in court and shows up the farce that is our road safety "regime"
"...Mr Edgar first became concerned about the accuracy of the Gatso speed camera when his requests for disclosure of how the speed cameras were calibrated for accuracy were ignored by the Police and Crown Prosecution Service in addition to Gatsometer in the Netherlands and UK, so too was his formal Application to the Birmingham Magistrates' Court to force disclosure. Mr Edgar said, "I really felt they had something to hide so I decided to investigate the critical timing accuracy..."
It's a disgrace isn't it, bordering on corruption at all levels. Good luck to him.
It's a disgrace isn't it, bordering on corruption at all levels. Good luck to him.
MilnerR said:
DeltaFox said:
Thats exactly right Mannginger. The timing interval between flashes (open shutter times) is critical. If its set low, say 0.2 sec then itll show the car as having NOT been speeding.
The converse is true. Id not be surprised if they do this entirely on purpose to make more money. Corruption breeds corruption and the scamerships are so very very corrupt.
And the reason they are so very corrupt is because they think they have the moral high ground because they are there to save lives
Hope the guy has his day in court and shows up the farce that is our road safety "regime"
Yes indeed, I agree completely. Let us hope Mr Edgar is able to do a thorough demolition job on the credibility of these people and their wretched cameras. The speed camera clowns are playing no useful part in promoting any meaningful improvements in road safety. Get rid of them and then we might see some useful action being taken, meanwhile they are nothing but a distraction from the real issues.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
>> Edited by TripleS on Saturday 8th January 18:57
Excuse me if I appear dumb (and I'm ready to get shot down in flames here) but I believe the photographic evidence is everything in the case of a Gatso. The radar is JUST a trigger to set the camera off. I believe that radar is so inaccurate (and susceptible to all kinds of 3rd party interference) that it is not used on its own to determine speed. How many radar only speed enforcement devices are type approved ? That's why it's ALWAYS worth getting BOTH pictures because some lazy-a**sed numpty will send out a NIP just because your car appears on his roll of film w/o doing the speed measurement from the two photos.
If the timing is as inaccurate as being suggested here then I think this will be a very intersting case indeed.
And how do you think it can be 'timestamped' to that kind of accuracy - do Gatso's have radio clocks ? I'd like to think they might have but somehow I don't think so. I'm sure they are designed on the principle that no-one will question them.
As stated previously I would be more than happy for someone to persuade me otherwise but until then I would ALWAYS question it unless I knew I was "bang to rights'.
If the timing is as inaccurate as being suggested here then I think this will be a very intersting case indeed.
And how do you think it can be 'timestamped' to that kind of accuracy - do Gatso's have radio clocks ? I'd like to think they might have but somehow I don't think so. I'm sure they are designed on the principle that no-one will question them.
As stated previously I would be more than happy for someone to persuade me otherwise but until then I would ALWAYS question it unless I knew I was "bang to rights'.
Excuse me if I appear dumb (and I'm ready to get shot down in flames here) but I believe the photographic evidence is everything in the case of a Gatso. The radar is JUST a trigger to set the camera off. I believe that radar is so inaccurate (and susceptible to all kinds of 3rd party interference) that it is not used on its own to determine speed. How many radar only speed enforcement devices are type approved ? That's why it's ALWAYS worth getting BOTH pictures because some lazy-a**sed numpty will send out a NIP just because your car appears on his roll of film w/o doing the speed measurement from the two photos.
If the timing is as inaccurate as being suggested here then I think this will be a very intersting case indeed.
And how do you think it can be 'timestamped' to that kind of accuracy - do Gatso's have radio clocks ? I'd like to think they might have but somehow I don't think so. I'm sure they are designed on the principle that no-one will question them.
As stated previously I would be more than happy for someone to persuade me otherwise but until then I would ALWAYS question it unless I knew I was "bang to rights'.
If the timing is as inaccurate as being suggested here then I think this will be a very intersting case indeed.
And how do you think it can be 'timestamped' to that kind of accuracy - do Gatso's have radio clocks ? I'd like to think they might have but somehow I don't think so. I'm sure they are designed on the principle that no-one will question them.
As stated previously I would be more than happy for someone to persuade me otherwise but until then I would ALWAYS question it unless I knew I was "bang to rights'.
...enters from stage right with quizical look No. 4 on face......
Takes centre stage as hubbub of PH audience subsides to silence.
Speaks: " Question: if Mr Edcar has this wunnerful machine why has he been so long in coming forward and secondly how do we know it is accurate?"
Flourish of right arm across body and departs stage left.......to a cacaphony of yah boos?
DVD
Takes centre stage as hubbub of PH audience subsides to silence.
Speaks: " Question: if Mr Edcar has this wunnerful machine why has he been so long in coming forward and secondly how do we know it is accurate?"
Flourish of right arm across body and departs stage left.......to a cacaphony of yah boos?
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
...enters from stage right with quizical look No. 4 on face......
Takes centre stage as hubbub of PH audience subsides to silence.
Speaks: " Question: if Mr Edcar has this wunnerful machine why has he been so long in coming forward and secondly how do we know it is accurate?"
Flourish of right arm across body and departs stage left.......to a cacaphony of yah boos?
DVD
Enters from stage left and takes up opposing position on stage, and addresses PH audience thus: "Cos it was calibrated with a gregorian calendar in the er prescribed manner......just like gatsos as it appens..
" Cue rapturous applause and bouquets of flowers (no you shouldnt have!
), takes a bow and returns to the wings. 
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff