LTI20/20...a piece of trash!
Discussion
A motorcyclist "caught" by one of these abominations (theyre infallible remember) may well get some recompence in a very very short time.
Go here:http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=1211&sid=40e8c82be95b7573022e001cc7544983
Video is here:http://pepipoo.com/Case_Files/documents/CF11_PVA.rm click on the "link".
Watch the video. Its plain that the guy was above the speed limit at 80mph, but they prosecuted him at 107!
He disappears from view only to reappear doing 87 in a second, but with NO brake lights apparent.
Guy got £500 fine and £1000 costs, scam shites wanted £2000 costs from him and disqual for 28 days.
Goes to court tomorrow, again!
Their number is up i believe.
>>> Edited by deltaf on Thursday 11th March 18:20
Go here:http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=1211&sid=40e8c82be95b7573022e001cc7544983
Video is here:http://pepipoo.com/Case_Files/documents/CF11_PVA.rm click on the "link".
Watch the video. Its plain that the guy was above the speed limit at 80mph, but they prosecuted him at 107!
He disappears from view only to reappear doing 87 in a second, but with NO brake lights apparent.
Guy got £500 fine and £1000 costs, scam shites wanted £2000 costs from him and disqual for 28 days.
Goes to court tomorrow, again!
Their number is up i believe.
>>> Edited by deltaf on Thursday 11th March 18:20
With all that traffic around it makes me wonder how they can be sure they're measuring the bike the whole time. At the beginning when it's closer fair enough, but later after the truck passes in the foreground the policeman obviously has trouble 'getting a fix'.
Still the guy was doing 80 something. Naughty, but he appears to be in control/able to see the road ahead/on a powerful bike which can handle the speed. But the 107 reading appears to me to be wrong.
I suspect those who use this equipment (our resident BiB) won't want to comment on this since it is a case in progress ...
Still the guy was doing 80 something. Naughty, but he appears to be in control/able to see the road ahead/on a powerful bike which can handle the speed. But the 107 reading appears to me to be wrong.
I suspect those who use this equipment (our resident BiB) won't want to comment on this since it is a case in progress ...
trefor said:
With all that traffic around it makes me wonder how they can be sure they're measuring the bike the whole time. At the beginning when it's closer fair enough, but later after the truck passes in the foreground the policeman obviously has trouble 'getting a fix'.
Still the guy was doing 80 something. Naughty, but he appears to be in control/able to see the road ahead/on a powerful bike which can handle the speed. But the 107 reading appears to me to be wrong.
I suspect those who use this equipment (our resident BiB) won't want to comment on this since it is a case in progress ...
If you freeze frame it at the 107 mph mark and then look at the cross hairs, theyre not even ON the biker! Theyre actually centralised on the top left part of the cars hatch!
Why this wasnt picked up on in court is beyond me.
Its obvious the LTI is reading WRONG!
I wonder if its beam spread is so wide at that point that its getting readings from both the car and the bike and adding them together or some other conflict?
Remember, the MD of of the company that makes these cheap ass guns always goes on the defensive when someone slates his useless product.
Now we know why. Cos its bollox! Its a useless piece of electronic crap that dosent give infallible results; just like gatso's!
I really hope they get the stuffing knocked out of em this time around.
Good luck to the guys at Pepipoo.
Obviously i wont comment on this particular case until its finished but i would like to say that in my experience it is foolproof, accurate as long as you follow the guidelines to show that the device is working correctly, its a very good piece of equipment...........but not as good as the Prolaser. 
It's only as accurate as what it's being aimed at.
Try aiming a laser pen at a number plate from 200-400 yards away at night. I'm no surgeon & it shakes around all over the place ie within a 2m circle at least. I know people who have been stopped for excess speed with a handheld LT120/20 from distances like this. I for one would fight any evidence based on any handheld laser device.
The units are often van mounted, sitting on bridge or by the side of the road. All very well but what happens when a car passes said van or it's windy the van moves does'nt it. What happens to the super accurate laser beam, it moves too! & I bet by a very large margin sometimes dependant on the position relative to the vans axis.
This is called sweep error.
Try aiming a laser pen at a number plate from 200-400 yards away at night. I'm no surgeon & it shakes around all over the place ie within a 2m circle at least. I know people who have been stopped for excess speed with a handheld LT120/20 from distances like this. I for one would fight any evidence based on any handheld laser device.
The units are often van mounted, sitting on bridge or by the side of the road. All very well but what happens when a car passes said van or it's windy the van moves does'nt it. What happens to the super accurate laser beam, it moves too! & I bet by a very large margin sometimes dependant on the position relative to the vans axis.
This is called sweep error.
looked into the LTI2020 in great depth after being caught hammering along at 50MPH at 7 in the evening on an empty dual carriageway by an unmarked (contrary to the ACPO guidelines and flying in the face of david spellors governmental speech on the use of 'safety' cameras) van, and it is indeed a good piece of kit. there are a couple of things that worry me though. All it says is that the reading is good (default by giving a speed reading) but at this distance and in the circumstances depicted on the video, I don't see how you can trust the thing. Viewing the video frame by frame shows that the crosshairs are not on the bike. However, the 3mRad divergence means that (small angle rule) the spot size (I believe it's heavily astigmatised to the vertical) is quite large. Crash barriers have the same 'corner cube' reflectivity characteristics as a number plate, and this looks to me like a laser sweep along the barriers that hasn't triggered an error code.
If this is the case, which the video strongly in my opinion suggests, then it could blow the LTI2020 out of the water, which has already happened in other countries.
The shame is, as TonyRec says, it is a good piece of kit and does it's job well, but the lust for revenue is going to kill the cameras off completely, which is a shame, because used correctly they could actually have a positive effect on casualty reduction.
If this is the case, which the video strongly in my opinion suggests, then it could blow the LTI2020 out of the water, which has already happened in other countries.
The shame is, as TonyRec says, it is a good piece of kit and does it's job well, but the lust for revenue is going to kill the cameras off completely, which is a shame, because used correctly they could actually have a positive effect on casualty reduction.
bryan35 said:
looked into the LTI2020 in great depth after being caught hammering along at 50MPH at 7 in the evening on an empty dual carriageway by an unmarked (contrary to the ACPO guidelines and flying in the face of david spellors governmental speech on the use of 'safety' cameras) van, and it is indeed a good piece of kit. there are a couple of things that worry me though. All it says is that the reading is good (default by giving a speed reading) but at this distance and in the circumstances depicted on the video, I don't see how you can trust the thing. Viewing the video frame by frame shows that the crosshairs are not on the bike. However, the 3mRad divergence means that (small angle rule) the spot size (I believe it's heavily astigmatised to the vertical) is quite large. Crash barriers have the same 'corner cube' reflectivity characteristics as a number plate, and this looks to me like a laser sweep along the barriers that hasn't triggered an error code.
If this is the case, which the video strongly in my opinion suggests, then it could blow the LTI2020 out of the water, which has already happened in other countries.
The shame is, as TonyRec says, it is a good piece of kit and does it's job well, but the lust for revenue is going to kill the cameras off completely, which is a shame, because used correctly they could actually have a positive effect on casualty reduction.
I dont see how it can be used positively.
Theres nothing positive about being lasered then getting the envelope in the post.
Hows it alter anyones driving? It dosent. What it does do, is alter peoples opinions of those who operate them.
IMHO, cops should be doing what cops are employed to do: deal with "criminals", not sitting around pointing toys at people across 6 lanes of motorway. Theres nothing criminal about doing 35 in a 30 zone.
Incidentally, i believed it was against the acpo rules of operation to use it "across" the motorway like that?
I have asked this question several times over the months, and since we have a couple of defenders of the LTi20/20 on this thread, I shall ask it again.
If it's such a good piece of kit, why, despite specific legislation and several bits of case law to the effect that you are entitled to the video, is it virtually inpossible to extract one out of the CPS, even to the extent that they will lose cases for not providing the video when it has been sought?
If it's such a good piece of kit, why, despite specific legislation and several bits of case law to the effect that you are entitled to the video, is it virtually inpossible to extract one out of the CPS, even to the extent that they will lose cases for not providing the video when it has been sought?
tonyrec said:
Obviously i wont comment on this particular case until its finished but i would like to say that in my experience it is foolproof, accurate as long as you follow the guidelines to show that the device is working correctly, its a very good piece of equipment...........but not as good as the Prolaser.
The whole activity is still imoral. This is a democracy and none of us gave any government a mandate to behave in this way. All this equipment needs to be smashed and put beyond use like all terrorist weapons.
>> Edited by nonegreen on Friday 12th March 12:29
deltaf said:
...I wonder if its beam spread is so wide at that point that its getting readings from both the car and the bike and adding them together...
Wasn't this the excused used last year for the guy towing a caravan at some impossible speed? The camera added the speeds of the car and caravan together. I thought it was a pretty weak excuse for a mistake (even if we would like to see caravans off the road
). Are you saying it's actually able to happen? If so then how can you get a reading on a single vehicle on anything like a busy road?
When im standing at the side of the road using the Laser, i have full confidence in its abilities and mine.
When i stop someone for speeding, i explain the circumstances and show them the speed on the device itself.I either then, give them a warning or report them for the offence of speeding.Either way, when they leave my company they are in no doubt as to the consequences.
How people can argue that its not for road safety/does no good etc etc then it beggers belief.....unless of course its you that has been caught.
When i stop someone for speeding, i explain the circumstances and show them the speed on the device itself.I either then, give them a warning or report them for the offence of speeding.Either way, when they leave my company they are in no doubt as to the consequences.
How people can argue that its not for road safety/does no good etc etc then it beggers belief.....unless of course its you that has been caught.
jeffreyarcher said:
I have asked this question several times over the months, and since we have a couple of defenders of the LTi20/20 on this thread, I shall ask it again.
If it's such a good piece of kit, why, despite specific legislation and several bits of case law to the effect that you are entitled to the video, is it virtually inpossible to extract one out of the CPS, even to the extent that they will lose cases for not providing the video when it has been sought?
Video, what video?
Tonyrec, completely agree. That's exactly how the laser gun should be used, and when you're pulled by the police you pretty much know exactly why. It just seems to me, in the bike video, that they were desperate to get the biker. For sport perhaps?. I don't know. They did a speed check, he was within (below the asterisk indicated set speed on the gun). They did it again - still within. And again, and again, getting further and further away........then.
BINGO. 107MPH at a very dubious range. then back to 80 odd again.
This is very different from targeting oncoming motorists as you describe yourselves. These officers playing 'sniper' are discrediting the use of a very useful device, and this will see the thing being abandoned altogether on the first case that gets overthrown
BINGO. 107MPH at a very dubious range. then back to 80 odd again.
This is very different from targeting oncoming motorists as you describe yourselves. These officers playing 'sniper' are discrediting the use of a very useful device, and this will see the thing being abandoned altogether on the first case that gets overthrown
Tonyrec, thanks for your input, its mucho appreciated.
Now, dont get all offended on me mate, cos this ISNT directed towards you.
How, do i KNOW that the speed reading on the gun was indeed actually TAKEN from my vehicle AT THE TIME STATED, if theres no video evidence?
Also, if pointing it at the wrong thing gives a wrong reading, again, how do i and indeed anyone KNOW that the reading being showed pertains to their vehicle?
I'd suggest that theres an issue here with officers *possibly* not being as "honest" as theyre supposed to be.
If thats the case, and its possible to show a speed reading from a bike 10 mins ago, and then to apply it as evidence that another driver was doing that speed, then whats to stop them from doing so?
I ask this because i happen to know someone (no names ) who actually had this done to them using the old Muniquip radar gun.
Anyway, long time no see, and please, put that truncheon away now!
Now, dont get all offended on me mate, cos this ISNT directed towards you.
How, do i KNOW that the speed reading on the gun was indeed actually TAKEN from my vehicle AT THE TIME STATED, if theres no video evidence?
Also, if pointing it at the wrong thing gives a wrong reading, again, how do i and indeed anyone KNOW that the reading being showed pertains to their vehicle?
I'd suggest that theres an issue here with officers *possibly* not being as "honest" as theyre supposed to be.
If thats the case, and its possible to show a speed reading from a bike 10 mins ago, and then to apply it as evidence that another driver was doing that speed, then whats to stop them from doing so?
I ask this because i happen to know someone (no names
) who actually had this done to them using the old Muniquip radar gun. Anyway, long time no see, and please, put that truncheon away now!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff