VASCAR - help??
Discussion
got a summons today for driving at 102.5 on the M1, caught by
VASCAR. When I got pulled over they tried to play it back to me on
the video, the officers didnt seem to be able to, he tried to but
then said "...thats if it recorded" Anyway i was never shown it, but
on the statement i received with the summons the policeman has
written that I "saw VDU". Am I clutching at straws here and should I
just plead guilty by post, or would i have a case for taking this
further? If I kick up a fuss and still get found guilty would I
likely get a bigger fine and more points than if I plead guilty
now?? Cheers!
The fact that you did not see the video evidence does not mean it does not exist and that you were not therefore guilty of the average speed of 102 mph. It was incorrect for the officers statement to say you were shown the video if that did not happen. Did anyone else witness this malfunction of the tape equipment at the time?
If the officer is incorrect in his evidence, then again that does not mean that you were not travelling at the alleged speed. It does however give you grounds to throw some doubt on the case. You will need to go to court and plead not guilty to be able to challenge him on oath over his statement. I think you need some advice from a solicitor about how to proceed.
102 is likely to see you off the road for a short while if you are convicted.
If the officer is incorrect in his evidence, then again that does not mean that you were not travelling at the alleged speed. It does however give you grounds to throw some doubt on the case. You will need to go to court and plead not guilty to be able to challenge him on oath over his statement. I think you need some advice from a solicitor about how to proceed.
102 is likely to see you off the road for a short while if you are convicted.
Evidence still exists, whether you saw it or not. What you might want to do is challenge the reliability of the VASCAR - along the lines of asking
"was it functioning properly etc "
till he says "no"
"what was all malfunctioning" and keep pushing till he admits he knows some bits weren't working but he isn't qualified to speak in great detail about all the electronic functions etc.
Your ultimate aim is to establish doubt, no more, that either the machine was not working properly, or he wasn't operating it in accordance with the manufacturer's instruction.
The usual comeback is that "it was calibrated at the start and end of my shifts and found to be functioning properly". Your response being along the lines that if the machine was working fine, yet he couldn't replay it, did he know how to work it properly ?
As for a heavier sentence if you fail to convince the court that the evidence against you is unreliable, yes probably. Disputing evidence like this can be valid is speed is near the limit, say up to 85 or so, by claiming you did not think it was speeding. At 102 you would know you were speeding without looking at your dials, so did the cop. Everyone know's your chancing your luck, and there has to be a penalty for failure !
"was it functioning properly etc "
till he says "no"
"what was all malfunctioning" and keep pushing till he admits he knows some bits weren't working but he isn't qualified to speak in great detail about all the electronic functions etc.
Your ultimate aim is to establish doubt, no more, that either the machine was not working properly, or he wasn't operating it in accordance with the manufacturer's instruction.
The usual comeback is that "it was calibrated at the start and end of my shifts and found to be functioning properly". Your response being along the lines that if the machine was working fine, yet he couldn't replay it, did he know how to work it properly ?
As for a heavier sentence if you fail to convince the court that the evidence against you is unreliable, yes probably. Disputing evidence like this can be valid is speed is near the limit, say up to 85 or so, by claiming you did not think it was speeding. At 102 you would know you were speeding without looking at your dials, so did the cop. Everyone know's your chancing your luck, and there has to be a penalty for failure !
bobthebench said:
As for a heavier sentence if you fail to convince the court that the evidence against you is unreliable, yes probably.
GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT! As we have all said before. The courts should hang their heads in shame -just because a member of the public would like a FAIR (yes a FAIR) trial he can be further punished. What a load of crap!
The simple question is whether the cops can prove he was doing the accused speed AGAINST whether he can prove that he wasn't. If he can't prove otherwise then the penalty should be X fine, a possible ban or points. NOT on the other hand, "HOW DARE YOU CHALLENGE THE ESTABLISHMENT" and for this we are going to
you over even more. Where are the Human Rights in this country?
Oh stuff it.
>> Edited by lucozade on Wednesday 26th February 09:06
I have challenged a 100.020 mile/h vascar reading on the basis that the manufacturers data sheet ( Meggitt Controls Ltd) for the equipment in use states that the equipment is accurate to +/- 2 mile/h. I sucessfully avoided a ban since it could not be proved that I was exceeding 100 mile/h. I got a £260 fine and 5 points though in 1995 for this.
Note: The 3 figures of decimals that may be quoted on the charge is to an entirely false precision which is certainly not supported by the accuracy of the device and the limitations of the human operators who set simple switches by hand and judge actual vehicle position by eye.
Majority of lay people including police and magistrates have no understanding of this and the false precision is used to persuade others that the equipment and users are infallible and the readings are extremely accurate.
At 102.5 it may be a bit difficult to prove simply by reference to a makers specified accuracy. But get hold of the maker's name and model for the equipment in use and check with the makers about accuracy.
Note: The 3 figures of decimals that may be quoted on the charge is to an entirely false precision which is certainly not supported by the accuracy of the device and the limitations of the human operators who set simple switches by hand and judge actual vehicle position by eye.
Majority of lay people including police and magistrates have no understanding of this and the false precision is used to persuade others that the equipment and users are infallible and the readings are extremely accurate.
At 102.5 it may be a bit difficult to prove simply by reference to a makers specified accuracy. But get hold of the maker's name and model for the equipment in use and check with the makers about accuracy.
Spoke to a solicitor today - think im going to plead guilty but write an apologetic letter and hope for the best, if they are going to ban me i understand i will have to go up to court anyway - im also unemployed at the moment so hoping the punishment wont be too extreme! A quick question which I would be very grateful if anyone can help, in terms of insurance on my own car and future hiring of cars when on holiday etc, which would be better to receive points on the license or a ban for a few weeks??
Many thanks for your answers already!
Danny
Many thanks for your answers already!
Danny
DannyC69 said: Spoke to a solicitor today - think im going to plead guilty but write an apologetic letter and hope for the best, if they are going to ban me i understand i will have to go up to court anyway - im also unemployed at the moment so hoping the punishment wont be too extreme! A quick question which I would be very grateful if anyone can help, in terms of insurance on my own car and future hiring of cars when on holiday etc, which would be better to receive points on the license or a ban for a few weeks??
Many thanks for your answers already!
Danny
Depends what you already have on your license as to what kind of punishment you are likely to get. Generally speaking the magistrates are reasonable and if you can put a reasonable argument to them as to why you should keep your license, they should go for it. You have to remember tho. that it is a discretionary punishment and for over 100mph they are advised to implement a ban. However, if you are unemployed then it is going to make it harder for you to find employment without a license. Some jobs will also require a reasonably clean license, which doesn't include one with a ban on it. A ban is on your license for 5 years don't forget.
Although some on here may disagree, I would say it is always preferable to have points over a ban. I have been banned twice now, I think I would have only got points the second time if I hadn't previously been banned. Insurance is expensive and some companies will not even consider a previously banned driver. The majority of vehicle hire companies will also not hire you a car/van in this country if you have been banned as I found to my dismay when trying to hire a van to help my girlf move house. She got upset and I felt awful
Its well worth spending money on a decent solicitor. I would advise him that you want to try your best to keep your license and he should be able to construct an appropriate letter angled towards this. This way the worst that could happen is that you get banned anyway, but at least you tried!
best of luck mate.
Given the choice, which you won't really, take the points. The way things are going, most people will get points on their licence at some time. Rather than zero tolerance etc making points as unsociable as drink driving, it is doing the opposite and most folk and insurance companies look at 3-6 as so what ?
102 isn't that high, and a bit of work should easily see a ban avoided. Various previous posts outline what's required. Get a good solicitor or read these first to prepare.
102 isn't that high, and a bit of work should easily see a ban avoided. Various previous posts outline what's required. Get a good solicitor or read these first to prepare.
Richard C said: I have challenged a 100.020 mile/h vascar reading on the basis that the manufacturers data sheet ( Meggitt Controls Ltd) for the equipment in use states that the equipment is accurate to +/- 2 mile/h. I sucessfully avoided a ban since it could not be proved that I was exceeding 100 mile/h. I got a £260 fine and 5 points though in 1995 for this.
Note: The 3 figures of decimals that may be quoted on the charge is to an entirely false precision which is certainly not supported by the accuracy of the device and the limitations of the human operators who set simple switches by hand and judge actual vehicle position by eye.
Interesting - now I'm beginning to get an understanding of how Vascar works from reading this thread and MadCop's comments on the other thread (the one started by Soulpatch), I can't believe it's useable as evidence! Surely the 2mph tolerance on the equipment is nothing next to the potential human error involved, especially when (dare I suggest this?!) the copper working the buttons may not be that bothered about protecting the interests of the poor motorist he's clocking.
I did a quick calc and if the measuring distance is of the order of a couple of hundred metres (I could be out on this - I'm guessing based on my perception of how far apart those white squares on the road are typically), then at 100kmh/60mph (for ease of calculation) it would take about 7.1 seconds to cover the distance.
If the timing was triggered half a second slow then stopped half a second early you could get a reading that was out by 15% either way. Add potential equipment inaccuracy and all you can say with any confidence is the person was travelling at somewhere between 50 and 72mph?!
I must have assumed something incorrect or surely this equipment wouldn't be in use?
Chris
ok so my solicitor has told me to write the apologetic letter waffle waffle etc. Can anyone clear the following for me? ideally now I just want to get this out of the way. I was planning on entering guilty on my summons and that I was planning on going to court. As you know if you plead guilty by post, you can supply your financial information and there is space to write about mitigating circumstances on the form, to be read out in court as well as the cops statement etc. If I go to court in person will I get a chance to read out / make a statement about the circumstance too, or as soon as they see guilty on the form they just decide there and then?? Cheers for all your help.
Chris_N said:
Interesting - now I'm beginning to get an understanding of how Vascar works from reading this thread and MadCop's comments on the other thread (the one started by Soulpatch), I can't believe it's useable as evidence
VASCAR is an extremely valuable piece of equipment and has been around since the mid 1960's.
As you are aware, the system is operated by hand eye co-ordination by a Police officer.
The Police vehicle is fitted with a system that converts the revolutions of the car prop shaft into distance via magnets strapped to the prop shaft. The revolutions are counted by a sensor bolted to the car body. This is transfered to the VASCAR head in the vehicle cockpit. The distances used on pre-fed checks are vary accurate because the operator will (where possible) stop at the first point to be used and activate the distance switch. The Police vehicle is then driven to the next static point with the distance being recorded until it is stopped over or under or next to the second point to be used. The distance must exceed 2/10ths of a mile.
Once the distance is pre-fed into the VASCAR head, then the operator merely has to watch the target car pass the first point and activate the time switch inaugurated into the VASCAR head as well. In the case of white spots on the road, this is when the spot is covered by the target car. The same occurs when the target passes the second point chosen, except the time switch is de-activated. The average speed is then displayed on the digital readout of the VASCAR head.
The system deployed for checking speed of moving vehicles is exactly the same, except that the operator has to judge when the Police vehicle passes the point chosen to be used for first and second points. That is not difficult because he/she is in the vehicle and can see when they go over the spot or under the bridge or past the dead rabbit in the road. If the target vehicle is in front on a following check, then the time is entered into the equation first (chose 2 points and measure the time it takes the target car to pass both, then measure this in distance with the Police vehicle). The Police vehicle is always the distance. The target is always the time.
Police officers that are authorised to use this system have to undergo strict and intensive training. The course is run with two vascar units in two vehicles. Both the target course car with an instructor in it and the student car with an instructor in it, have radio communication between them. The target car listens to the student that is doing the specific check.
When the student calls "time switch on", he will activate the time switch alone at the word ON in the student car.This is at the point the target passes the first chosen point. At the same point the instructor in the target car hears the word ON, he will activate both time and distnce switches together. The check is then running. The target/instructor vehicle is checking its own average speed because both distance and time are running simultaneously.
When the target car reaches the second chosen point by the student, the words "time switch off" are communicated over the radio. At this point the instructor in the target car will de-activate both time and distance switches together, therefore getting an average speed reading for the distance chosen by the student. When the student car passes the second chosen point, then the student de-activates the distance switch in the student car. If the student has been accurate with his hand/eye co-ordination over the period of the check, then the speeds recorded in both student car and target car will be the same (after a few days of practice, this happens more regularly than you would think).
There are various combinations that can be used in the operation of vascar which are taught over the course to cater for varying scenarios of speed check.
At the end of the course, the student is tested. The requirements for authoristaion are a series of ten consecutive checks which are carried out in the manner above and which are chosen by the student as the vehicles are in motion. The checks are carried out at above the speed limits between 70 mph and 100 mph+
If the students average of error over all ten checks exceeds .5 of an mph or any one check exceeds 1 mph error he/she will not be authorised.
You are taught that it is imperative that you are accurate with your operation of this device. They tell you that if you are unsure of your accuary, then you should bin the check and wait for another (usually only seconds later).
In my experience, this is what happens in reality. Why bother with a dodgy check when there are so many to be had in any case? I have never worked with anyone who decided that they would pursue a suspect check and deal with it. What would be the point?
On a motorway it would be difficult to find someone to have a personal vendetta against, and in any case most checks are started when the registration of the vehicle cannot be seen as the target can be over 1/2 a mile away.
When I did my course, I was checked and my margin of error over all ten checks was found to be .2 mph
I think that most magistrates are aware of how the system works and is used as when I was on the traffic division, we used to take teams of Magistrates out on the motorways and demonstrate the device so they could see how we worked it and how accurate the device actually is.
The fact that it is usually linked into auto vision equipment in modern Police cars also helps with that picture evidence if the device is being used in a following check.
I hope that clears up your misunderstanding of VASCAR and its use and its training.
>> Edited by madcop on Friday 7th March 09:44
The distances used on pre-fed checks are vary accurate because the operator will (where possible) stop at the first point to be used and activate the distance switch. The Police vehicle is then driven to the next static point with the distance being recorded until it is stopped over or under or next to the second point to be used. The distance must exceed 2/10ths of a mile.
madcop is entirely correct in the descrption of device and procedure.
Vascar is a device that can make a precise ( I hesitate to use the word accurate ) measurement of distance by operating a simple toggle switch at a start and finish point. It can also measure a time interval both precisely and accurately. By operating the other switch in the same way the 'stopwatch' can be started and stopped. Add a simple calculator to divide the distance ( between 2 points ) and time ( between 2 points ) and you have speed. Precisely. But no more accurately than the sum of the errors inherent in this measurement.
What are the errors ?
1 Distance error - the mnanufacturers of the equipment will agree as will any knowledgeable racing driver that tyres expand with speed. Known as rolling radius or revs/mile ( always quoted at a fixed speed eg 60 mile/h) If the distance from one of the white dots is measured using the distance switch at 20 mile/h the distance will be slighly longer than at 70. Small but around 1/2 to 2 % or more depending on profile and construction.
2 Timing error. The training exercise shows that the distance errors are cancelled out by 2 cars travelling at about the same distance. And that the trainees should then achieve a consistency ( repeatability ) of operating a switch against an audio cue to better than 0.5 mile/h which is actually good about 0.15% error at 60 mile/h over 1/4 mile. and thats the sum of the errors due to the instructors delays as well as the trainee.
3 Parallax error. A vascar equipped patrol car that measures a distance between 2 points then sits half a mile away and operates the switches as the target car passes what are thought to be the same points is bound to introduce small errors. Cars are about 5 yards long. Which part of the car actually passes the point ? and 5 yards in 1/4 mile is still over 1% distance error. And shadows move many yards in half an hour especially in winter.
Add up the errors and you can easily understand why the technique is specified by the equipment makers to be no better than Plus/minus 2% or 2 mile/h.
And that assumes the operator maintains the same degree of concentration as he did on the training course.
Thats why iut is peverse to declare a speed of say 79.42 mile/h. The best any good, trained and experienced operator can actually say with a vascar is in this case, ".....the speed calculated from distance observations is somewhere between 77 and a half and 81 and a half mile/h. Or by balance of probability the speed was 77 and a half mile/h or more...". Anbd with other far more seriuos crime theres always a benefit of the doubt given
Not knocking the police, or the equipment, .... simply sayingf that without understanding the errors implicit in ANY measurement, falsely accurate results that carry bogus precision will result. And we all know that in the brave new world of speed criminality and the new single minded blind zeal for enforcement, a fraction of a mile/h may make the difference between cycling or driving for the next 6 months !!
Richard C said: Not knocking the police, or the equipment, .... simply sayingf that without understanding the errors implicit in ANY measurement, falsely accurate results that carry bogus precision will result. And we all know that in the brave new world of speed criminality and the new single minded blind zeal for enforcement, a fraction of a mile/h may make the difference between cycling or driving for the next 6 months !!
You have not explained that the further the distance of the check, then the more accurate the reading will be. Short distances checked are more likely to be less accurate than very long ones.
a car checked over a pre-fed distance of 2/10ths of a mile is more likley to have larger errors than a following check over 4 miles.
Shadows are not used on pre-fed distances as we all know that the shadow moves with the time of day and therefore can alter the distance.
Mostly reflections are used on pre-feds. Look at a car in front of you as it passes under a bridge. The rear window will flash black for a split second as it reflects the roof of the bridge. That places the car right underneath the bridge at that specific time. It is at that point that the time switch is activated.
as the car covers the white spot in the road and it is not visible, again the time switch is activated or de-activated.
It is virtualy impossible to see the reflection of a bridge roof on the windscreen of a vehicle travelling towards a pre-fed check point if the target vehicle has its headlights on! but don't tell anyone
Having recently been in this position myself after being Vascar'd at 101.3mph (.3 FFS - I got nicked in France for speeding and they knocked 10% off to allow for error!) anyway I had a solicitor who read out my guilty plea and mitigating circumstances - although I could have done this myself if I had wanted (would have saved some £££ aswell!).
My plea and circumstances were listened to and they gave me 6 points and £265 fine, they commented that as I was overtaking when nicked that this was not as "bad" as if I had just been travelling at that speed for no reason.
I am told that I got away with a "result", considering it was in a NSL 60 limit and I had 3 points at the time and that the guidelines say a ban of 56 days which is normally "discounted" by a third if pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity, personally I don't feel so lucky!
Best of luck to you mate
Edited to say: they had a video of me - I saw it! and the Cop reckoned the Vascar was calibrated prior to nicking me but strangely not afterwards/at the end of shift - which my solicitor said was breaking the "guidelines" but not likely to be enough to cast any doubt in the Mag's minds and that trying to use this as a defence if unsuccesful would result in me likely getting the full 56 days.
:ifoughtthelawandthelawwon:
>> Edited by cazzo on Sunday 9th March 00:26
My plea and circumstances were listened to and they gave me 6 points and £265 fine, they commented that as I was overtaking when nicked that this was not as "bad" as if I had just been travelling at that speed for no reason.
I am told that I got away with a "result", considering it was in a NSL 60 limit and I had 3 points at the time and that the guidelines say a ban of 56 days which is normally "discounted" by a third if pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity, personally I don't feel so lucky!
Best of luck to you mate
Edited to say: they had a video of me - I saw it! and the Cop reckoned the Vascar was calibrated prior to nicking me but strangely not afterwards/at the end of shift - which my solicitor said was breaking the "guidelines" but not likely to be enough to cast any doubt in the Mag's minds and that trying to use this as a defence if unsuccesful would result in me likely getting the full 56 days.
:ifoughtthelawandthelawwon:
>> Edited by cazzo on Sunday 9th March 00:26
DannyC69 said: ok so my solicitor has told me to write the apologetic letter waffle waffle etc. Can anyone clear the following for me? ideally now I just want to get this out of the way. I was planning on entering guilty on my summons and that I was planning on going to court. As you know if you plead guilty by post, you can supply your financial information and there is space to write about mitigating circumstances on the form, to be read out in court as well as the cops statement etc. If I go to court in person will I get a chance to read out / make a statement about the circumstance too, or as soon as they see guilty on the form they just decide there and then?? Cheers for all your help.
If you go, you will be given the opportunity to speak. On oath in the witness box is usually the place to do it even if you have pleaded guilty to the offence. If you go you will come across a lot better than if you did not and will probably be dealt with in a less formal manner (that means cheaper for you
) As has been said previously, over 100mph , the magistrates are looking at a ban but do have the discretion not to ban and penalise with points and a fine.
It`s worth going to court as the magistrates will want to here the officer give evidence if they are thinking of a ban. There is a very good chance that the officer won`t turn up, illness, holiday, wrong shift not informed by CPS etc, at the first call.Ask if the case can be heard without the officers presence as you are pleading guilty - most magistrates are amenable to this as it saves everyone time. You`ve already done them a favour which puts you in their good books to start with. They will ask you to give evidence - suggest that your true speed was less than 100mph, sy you thought indicated 95mph or so but don`t go mad disputing the evidence and you can plead its a one off, apologise, claim a ban could cause you hardship and if possible other innocent parties hardship as well, invalid parents, wife can`t get to work etc. If your licence is clean or pretty clean you`ll get points and a fine - much better than a ban.
It`s worth going to court as the magistrates will want to here the officer give evidence if they are thinking of a ban. There is a very good chance that the officer won`t turn up, illness, holiday, wrong shift not informed by CPS etc, at the first call.Ask if the case can be heard without the officers presence as you are pleading guilty - most magistrates are amenable to this as it saves everyone time. You`ve already done them a favour which puts you in their good books to start with. They will ask you to give evidence - suggest that your true speed was less than 100mph, sy you thought indicated 95mph or so but don`t go mad disputing the evidence and you can plead its a one off, apologise, claim a ban could cause you hardship and if possible other innocent parties hardship as well, invalid parents, wife can`t get to work etc. If your licence is clean or pretty clean you`ll get points and a fine - much better than a ban.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff