Radar Beats GPS In Court — Or Does It? 369
TechnologyResource writes "More than two years ago in California, a police officer wrote Shaun Malone a ticket for going 62mph in a 45-mph zone. Malone was ordered to pay a $190 fine, but his parents appealed the decision, saying data from a GPS tracking system they installed in his car to monitor his driving proved he was not speeding. What ensued was the longest court battle over a speeding ticket in Sonoma county history. The case also represented the first time anyone locally had tried to beat a ticket using GPS. The teen's GPS pegged the car at 45 mph in virtually the same location. At issue was the distance from the stoplight — site of the first GPS 'ping' that showed Malone stopped — to the second ping 30 seconds later, when he was going 45 mph. Last week, Commissioner Carla Bonilla ruled the GPS data confirmed the prosecution's contention that Malone had to have exceeded the speed limit and would have to pay the $190 fine. 'This case ensures that other law enforcement agencies throughout the state aren't going to have to fight a case like this where GPS is used to cast doubt on radar,' said Sgt. Ken Savano, who oversees the traffic division. However, Commissioner Bonilla noted the accuracy of the GPS system was not challenged by either side in the dispute, but rather they had different interpretations of the data. Bonilla ruled the GPS data confirmed the prosecution's contention that Malone had to have exceeded the speed limit."
Standard Calculus (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sounds like california (Score:4, Insightful)
Radar Guns... (Score:4, Insightful)
Radar Guns aren't completely accurate all of the time. But a 40% increase is far beyond what you might expect from an incurrently calibrated radar guns. The only realistic alternative is hitting a car travelling in the other direction but since police are trained to only use a radar gun on a straight road and at a certain angle that might be unlikely too.
So in this case I would side with the police. Unless they're just flat out lying which I cannot discount.
Sgt is an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
'This case ensures that other law enforcement agencies throughout the state aren't going to have to fight a case like this where GPS is used to cast doubt on radar,' said Sgt. Ken Savano,
Well if the summary is true (and I know it might not be), it actually means the opposite since the GPS data was considered at the trial. That means others may try to present their GPS data in future. It certainly doesn't mean that people can't try that defense. There was no precedent set that the GPS data was less reliable than the radar. It's just that the GPS data could be interpretted to be in agreement with the radar data. Also, this is only applicable to one kind of GPS unit under one very limited set of circumstances.
In other words Sgt. Ken Savano is either misrepresenting the whole situation or is incompetent when it comes to the prosecution of speeding violations. Either way he's coming across as dim witted and it raises serious doubts for me about his ability to perform his duties as a police officer, since he can't seem to understand the law.
Re:Sgt is an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
I fail to see how this has anything to do with trigonometry.
Re:Sgt is an idiot (Score:2, Insightful)
On further thought, I understand why the judge allowed the case to proceed. In normal circumstances, where it is "cop's word vs perp's word", the cop's authority is sufficient to validate the radar reading. However, as soon as *anything* else is introduced to counter, it becomes (as in this case) "cop's word vs perp & gps". So now you've got to proceed to case to prove that the GPS doesn't disagree with the cop.
Still don't like the kid tho. ;)
Re:Forget the math, you're missing the point here. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, and allow me to dismiss this as some anti-The Man banter. Radars are standardised, calibrated, designed for the purpose, operated in proper condition by trained operators, etc... The log from someone's GPS is made by the software from some company which won't necessarily disclose how it gathers, processes and stores its data, furthermore those can be imprecise (how many times does your GPS show you as crossing through buildings when you're driving in city centers?), and who's to say that no one tampered with the data (in this case, edit the data in the log to make it seem impossible to have speeded).
So the decision is only common sense. If you really need an analogy, that's as if you provided a court with a written transcript of conversation when they have an audio recording done with their own equipment of the same conversation.
Re:Sgt is an idiot (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason is that you need to hear that evidence before you can come to those conclusions.
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:5, Insightful)
If the average speed is 45 mph, and he was stopped at the end (ie speed 0), then at some point he was going above 45. Especially since you can't stop instantaneously. This is like calculus you learn in High School... If the Judge ruled the other way, the future of America would be even in deeper sh*t than it already is.
Wondering where you got average speed from ?
If you had followed the first link http://tech.slashdot.org/story/08/07/18/0318228/GPS-Tracking-Device-Beats-Radar-Gun-in-Court [slashdot.org] (a bit of effort I know 2 clicks with the mouse) you would have come to the article :-
http://hothardware.com/News/Speeding_Radar_Gun_vs_GPS/ [hothardware.com]
with the quote
I personally think this article ( http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20091104/ARTICLES/911049901/1334/NEWS?tc=autorefresh [pressdemocrat.com]) does not have enough info to make any meaningful decisions from.
Re:Sounds like california (Score:5, Insightful)
I think there should be an offense known as "frivolous citation"
A cop knowingly writing a bogus ticket should get a huge fine of their own.
Too bad the cities that rely on ticket revenue won't bite.
Re:GPS speed not accurate 100% of the time (Score:1, Insightful)
So a kid with a flashlight and a broken wristwatch told to switch on the light at 8:00 AM is more accurate than our predictions for the sunrise on a given day and longitude/latitude?
what's wrong with America (Score:5, Insightful)
The actual calculation (Score:3, Insightful)
This article has important details about why the commissioner believes the GPS data supports the ticket.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20081206/NEWS/812060371/1334/NEWS
Apparently, the GPS logs position, time and speed every 30s. Regardless of how the system calculates speed, whether by averaging between each logged point or using much smaller time intervals, the data shows that the car was stopped at some t = 0 and had moved 2,040 ft after 30s. That results in an average of (2040 ft) / (30 s) = 46.36 mph.
Assuming a linear acceleration profile, he would have had to reach a speed of 92.72 mpg to run the 2040 ft in 30 s, but that's an unfair assumption. He was driving a 200 Toyota Celica GTS, which accelerates from 0-60 mph in 6.6s, thus at a maximum he can increase his velocity by 9.1 mph each second (assuming constant acceleration). Thus, the absolute minimal velocity the driver must have reached is 51 mpg, reaching this velocity in 5.6s and maintaining it for the remainder of the path to the next logged point.
The article does not specify where exactly was the police officer read the car's speed, which is crucial to understand if the 62 mpg reading is possible, but the conclusion is that the GPS data by itself does prove that the driver must have been above 45 mpg but does not guarantee that a speed of 62 mph must have been reached.
Re:what's wrong with America (Score:3, Insightful)
The parents didn't understand the math involved, you can fault them for that. But if I were in a situation where one of my kids was accused of something and I genuinely believed that they didn't do it (and had what I believed was proof too), then HELL YES they should fight it.
They might be ignorant, but they weren't wrong in a moral sense.
Cop may have been fishing (Score:1, Insightful)
Another explanation is that the cop was fishing. When the plates were clean and the kid did not turn out to be drunk or on drugs he made up a number and wrote a speeding ticket. Happens all the time.
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see...
*His parents installed GPS to report his speed every 30 seconds and download the data to their computer.
*If he hit 70 mph it would send his parents an email.
*He was on his way to the Infineon Raceway, which on July 4, 2007 was hosting the Independence Day Bracket Drags [infineonraceway.com], which is an amature/pro drag racing event that included a "High School" category.
You don't have to be Columbo to figure out that this kid probably had a propensity to burn some rubber at a stoplight.
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:3, Insightful)
People do it all the time in ONE second.
You've never owned a motorcycle, obviously.
These 5 motorcycles [transportspecs.com] can do 0-60 in 2.4 seconds, so the 0-65 in 3 seconds is a piece of cake, and 45-65 is a joke.
There are also plenty of cars that can do it. Any car that can do 0-60 in 10-11 seconds should be able to, and there are plenty on the list [albeedigital.com] including shitboxes like the Neon. Escorts and F15-s [albeedigital.com], Caddie STSs, Camaros, Vettes [albeedigital.com], Kraut Kars [albeedigital.com], etc.
Re:Sgt is an idiot (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously though, in every case like this where the defendant (the kid) lies to the court, they should be charged with contempt. If you don't want to lie, take the 5th. It sickens me daily that the majority of our courts time is wasted with dickless wonders who are too scared to accept responsibility for their actions.
Sure, but only if Police officers are fired and charged with contempt when they lie under oath. They should be held to a much higher standard.
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not the impressive part.
The REALLY impressive part about motorcycles in general is their phenomenal 60-0 time. ZERO seconds. Can you believe it?
(NB: I ride)
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not Lt Cook. But my answer would be it depends - would my not pursuing a case send a message that you can flout the law if you're rich enough to fight it? That the law only applies to poor people? That's a message I'd not want to send, especially if enough idiots adopted it.
TLDR version - if I thought it'd save me >$15,000 in the long term? Certainly.