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."
Re:Sgt is an idiot (Score:5, Interesting)
The judge who allowed the case to proceed in the first place is also an idiot. I see no good reason why the case wasn't thrown out immediately.
I can't quite fathom why the court system allowed "So what if the radar said I was going 62 at that point in time. I was going at 45 at two other completely different points in time." as an argument.
I can see how it happened though -
1. Stupid, dishonest, ignorant kid goes home and tells his parents "No, I wasn't speeding".
2. Parents get GPS data readout which shows he was going at 45 "around that time" in two different readings.
3. Parents lack basic knowledge of trigonometry and can't translate the speed over the distance travelled between readings.
4. Neither can the court. Case proceeds.
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.
GPS speed not accurate 100% of the time (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:3, Interesting)
It will make an excellent word problem in class.
Kids might even pay attention to this one. ;)
You can't beat the system (Score:3, Interesting)
The ticket that the officer gave me that day (which was missing some of the critical information such as the location where he claimed I was) had a court date on it, so I went to court armed with information on how I could not possibly have been going as fast as claimed.
Instead I was greeted by a DA for that county. I had the option to come back later to be heard by the judge, but the county was quite a ways away from home and I didn't really want to go back. The DA offered me a "plea bargain" since I had no tickets on my record prior. They said I could enter a plea of "guilty not accepted", under which they would accept a lesser fine from me than the original ticket (the DA essentially changed the reported speed from 45 to 38, still in a 30), and as long as I was not pulled over in their county again for the next 12 months the ticket would not be reported to my insurance company (I was a young man at the time so that part was important to me).
I accepted that deal, wrote them a check that day, and I haven't returned to that county since.
radar accuracy coverup (Score:5, Interesting)
I think theres a massive cover-up about the accuracy of radar guns. I think the cops and courts all know it but its a massive income generator so they wont do anything about it.
I got stopped by a cop with radar claiming he detected me doing 85 in a 65mph limit. He even showed me 85 on the radar. It was rush hour and the freeway was bumper to bumper stop-go traffic and there was no way I ever got over about 45. I was also surrounded with other cars so I have no idea how he could single me out with a radar. My wife was in the car too and told him I couldn't have been speeding but he didnt believe her either. I went to court to fight it and they made a deal before my case got heard to reduce the speed down to 78 but I still had to pay a fine. It seems to me they wouldnt have done a deal if they thought the radar was truly accurate.
It seems everyone fights based on the accuracy of the radar, but I haven't ever herad of anyone the lack of evidence that the cop was actually pointing the radar at your car and not someone elses?
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:3, Interesting)
As best I can tell, it started around 2000. When I graduated in the mid 90s, we all had shit cars. When I started teaching at a poor, rural HS (20 miles down the road!) in 2004, kids had all sorts of ridiculous cars. Vintage 60s cars, totally refurbished. Cadillacs, Audis, jacked up trucks with dual smokestack exhausts, pink mustang, etc. The "normal" kids all had newer hondas and toyotas. A good chunk of the student body had a better car than I did.
Apparently, in the last generation, parents lost all common sense. I have no clue how you come to the idea that buying your kid an expensive car is a good investment. Based on what the kids did to those vehicles, it's clear I'm the sane one here. My favorite was the kid who went mudding in his jacked up truck, with the badass chrome 350 engine block in it. He plowed through a river, managed to suck in a bunch of water through the air intake, and totally blew his engine. It was brutal, but I laughed my ass off when he told me. Apparently his parents would only spring for a normal engine to fix it.
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:3, Interesting)
It was also the wrong place to try this stunt. It seems as if a lot of people from the 60s(read hippies) decided to settle in this area and have families. And the area is known for having thousands of small self-run businesses as well as being home to HP's Northern California operations. The average level of adult education in that county as a result is almost a Masters. There just are no idiots or stupid judges, either, to be found. I'm completely not surprised that the judge knew basic Calculus and Physics - or at least enough to see through this stunt.
I got roughly 75mph since he'd have seen the officer and hit the brakes at the end to get down to the legal limit(figure ~2-3 seconds to drop to 35mph without smoking the tires and leaving an obvious set of skid marks). Figure 200ft with reaction time added to drop back to 35mph.
So that's really about 20 seconds to cover 1500ft. If we're looking at the actual driving, though, it probably was him getting up to nearly 100mph briefly and backing off quick to get back to speed before the next light(20 seconds hard throttle, 10 seconds to brake back down). The scenario appears to be his punching it hard and then dropping back down before the next light. I lived in the area years ago for a while and know that road, actually. It's very inviting and feels like a drag strip between lights. Kids used to do this stunt all the time and think the cops didn't know where to hide to catch them.
Re:Sounds like california (Score:3, Interesting)
Carla Bonilla's Reputation (Score:1, Interesting)
First: I'm a liberal. In west Sonoma County, a VERY liberal county. I feel that there is a lot wrong with the way our government and our country is running these days. I'm a cynical guy.
I have had the... yes, pleasure of arguing my case before Commissioner Bonilla. I was ticketed for the first time in 19 years for going over the speed limit on an emergency call to take a stranded friend to an emergency surgery. Please understand that vast tracts of this part of this county are extremely rural, and waiting for an ambulance for 20 minutes or more is not an option at times. I researched the case, and decided without doubt that it was an illegal speed trap and was prepared to fight it.
I was the last case called and had the opportunity to observe two hours of Carla Bonillas' judgement.
I left that courtroom heartened by the fairness, consideration and thoughtfulness the woman displayed in working through legal requirements placed upon her, yet managing to help a large number of people who were cited for perversions of logic and law. She demonstrated an awareness and a humanity about her decisions that really impressed me. I mentioned to several friends that I was relieved and uplifted to see that kind of behavior on the bench.
I'm quite certain that in this case she would have done as I witnessed in other cases and acknowledged the limitations of her knowledge on a given subject, asked for input, and ruled in a way that would provide the most reasonable solution.
Her reasoning is sound, and she explains it to the court.
Disclaimers: I don't know Commissioner Bonilla, I don't have association or knowledge of any of the parties, and I'm not associated with law enforcement or the County of Sonoma other than living here. Also know that she is an appointee, and does not run for office. She states this at the beginning of each court session.
FYI, She ruled in my favor after hearing my arguments, followed as the law stipulated and dismissed the case.
My opinion of her methods had already been formed by that point, and encouraged me to get up there and argue, comfortable with the idea that this judge would be fair.
Re:Standard Calculus (Score:3, Interesting)
Crumple zone.
Excerpt from http://www.gizmag.com/vfr1200-tourer-worlds-safest-bike/13201/ [gizmag.com]