Thank you GPS

[Lou Girardin]

Who saw the report about the driving instructor in the South Island who got off a ticket for 113 km/h when he produced evidence from his GPS system showing that he was doing either 97 or 107 depending on the report quoted.
He had to take it before a Judge though, because the JP's that heard the first charge said they were not qualified to judge the GPS evidence and found him guilty. What happened to the benefit of the doubt?
JP's, a prosecutors rubber stamp.
I bet that was one embarrassed Pleeceman in court though.
Solid evidence that some of them lie to fill the quota.

[Jackrat]

Solid evidince his radar was calibrated wrong,nothing more than that.
But pretty damning all the same.There is a huge difference between 97km and 113 when it comes to the fine,ie none as opossed to heaps + points.
I wonder how many others have been done useing incorrectly calibrated equipment.Might mount my GPS in the Mrs car now,a GOOD presedent has been set.

[Lou Girardin]

No, not calibrated wrongly. The court found that the cop did not identify which vehicle was speeding among the cars in range, including the instructors. This is par for the course now, I've seen a cop round a corner and nail the first car in a queue on passing lanes, the time span between the cop coming into view and lighting the flashers meant there was simply no time for him to identify which of the 15 cars were actually speeding. Niceties of proper radar usage aren't that important when there's money to be made.
In many US jurisdictions, the cops have to identify which car appears to be travelling at the displayed speed, then compare the patrol speed with the cars speedo, only then can they apprehend the offender. Not something that can be done in 2 seconds or less.

[scumdog]

He got off, BFD, if he had a GPS he could afford a ticket :Pokey:

[jrandom]

Hmm.

I know for sure that I would be capable of faking or modifying a GPS NMEA message data log to plausibly show whatever I wanted it to. I've often thought about that as a possibility for precisely the above circumstances. Not that I'd do anything so heinously dishonest, of course.

Still, good job.

[Jackrat]

That still only makes him incompetent.I still wouldn't call him a liar though.
It does seem the system doesn't mind incompetent as long as it's to their advantage,so point well made.
I didn't see the program,just got told about it at work today.
Definatly time my GPS came out of the sox draw.
Might even up grade,,,,Hey JR,sorry man, you is right. :calm:

[spudchucka]

Who saw the report about the driving instructor in the South Island who got off a ticket for 113 km/h when he produced evidence from his GPS system showing that he was doing either 97 or 107 depending on the report quoted.
He had to take it before a Judge though, because the JP's that heard the first charge said they were not qualified to judge the GPS evidence and found him guilty.
I cant believe it took you this long to post this thread.


What happened to the benefit of the doubt?
Didn't anyone ever tell you that is "beyond reasonable doubt" not "lets give him the benefit of the doubt".


I bet that was one embarrassed Pleeceman in court though. Solid evidence that some of them lie to fill the quota.
There isn't anything to be embarressed about if he honestly believed an offence was committed. So he lost a speeding ticket - big f**ken deal.

Its interesting that you are willing to give a driving instructor with a GPS unit "the benefit of the doubt" but when a cop loses a court hearing its "solid evidence that some of them lie to fill the quota". He could just as easily identified the wrong vehicle but honestly belived it was in fact the correct vehicle. If that is the case then your "solid evidence" is a worthless pile of pidgeon poo. Why don't you just get off your hobby horse and give the guy the benefit of the doubt??

By the way I say good on the guy for getting off, if there is any "reasonable" doubt it should go in the favour of the defendant.

[Jackrat]

Hmm.

I know for sure that I would be capable of faking or modifying a GPS NMEA message data log to plausibly show whatever I wanted it to. I've often thought about that as a possibility for precisely the above circumstances. Not that I'd do anything so heinously dishonest, of course.

Still, good job.

Hmmmm,you work with the things,but for a thick shit like me that bought the one with the biggest buttons I don't think that would be odds on of happening.
Can you still get em' with big buttons? mine's pretty old,very low mileage but :msn-wink:

[spudchucka]

No, not calibrated wrongly. The court found that the cop did not identify which vehicle was speeding among the cars in range, including the instructors. This is par for the course now, I've seen a cop round a corner and nail the first car in a queue on passing lanes, the time span between the cop coming into view and lighting the flashers meant there was simply no time for him to identify which of the 15 cars were actually speeding. Niceties of proper radar usage aren't that important when there's money to be made.
In many US jurisdictions, the cops have to identify which car appears to be travelling at the displayed speed, then compare the patrol speed with the cars speedo, only then can they apprehend the offender. Not something that can be done in 2 seconds or less.
The same guidlines for radar use are used here. Its very easy to pick the fast vehicle when one is clearly travelling quicker than the others but when there is only a slight difference, say 100 - 115 it is a lot more difficult to ID the fast driver. Thats where laser is more effective. The guidlines also state that when there is doubt as to which was the fast vehicle then discretion should be used.

[spudchucka]

Hmm.

I know for sure that I would be capable of faking or modifying a GPS NMEA message data log to plausibly show whatever I wanted it to. I've often thought about that as a possibility for precisely the above circumstances. Not that I'd do anything so heinously dishonest, of course.

Still, good job.
And it won't take long for the crown to prove that point in court as well, which will make the current decision a huge joke.

[jrandom]

And it won't take long for the crown to prove that point in court as well, which will make the current decision a huge joke.

Yup.

Still, for a mere wee speeding ticket, mebbe they'd shrug and let it go if the defendant got tenacious enough to start dragging GPS logs out.

Naturally, if a homicide or tax evasion case rested on it, it wouldn't hold water for five minutes.

[Jackrat]

He got off, BFD, if he had a GPS he could afford a ticket :Pokey:

Get real man,you on the piss again??
He didn't get off.He didn't do anything to get off from.
To anybody that's ever been convicted of something they didn't do it would be a BFD.I have a GPS,it cost less than most speeding tickets do.I can't afford real or bullshit speeding tickets.If the cops are going to issue tickets,fair enough,but they should get it right.
I'm with Lou on this,it's BS an simply shouldn't happen.
As far as I'm concerned if we know we're in the right we now don't have to put up with being walked over by a crap legal system that says we're guilty unless we can prove other wise.With a GPS we now can.
My job depends on a clean driving record,so to me it's an even bigger FD.
BTW,how much did your bike cost??more than my GPS I bet.You must be able to afford heaps of BS tickets huh. :not:

[Jackrat]

Yup.

Still, for a mere wee speeding ticket, mebbe they'd shrug and let it go if the defendant got tenacious enough to start dragging GPS logs out.

Naturally, if a homicide or tax evasion case rested on it, it wouldn't hold water for five minutes.

If it can be proven a GPS has been tampered with,wouldn't it be as easy to prove it hasn't??

[Yamahamaman]

Hmm, I would have thought that the GPS would report an average speed as it it only accesses the transponders on a fixed time rate. Dunno - could be wrong, probably am.

[scumdog]

Get real man,you on the piss again??
He didn't get off.He didn't do anything to get off from.
To anybody that's ever been convicted of something they didn't do it would be a BFD.I have a GPS,it cost less than most speeding tickets do.I can't afford real or bullshit speeding tickets.If the cops are going to issue tickets,fair enough,but they should get it right.
I'm with Lou on this,it's BS an simply shouldn't happen.
As far as I'm concerned if we know we're in the right we now don't have to put up with being walked over by a crap legal system that says we're guilty unless we can prove other wise.With a GPS we now can.
My job depends on a clean driving record,so to me it's an even bigger FD.
BTW,how much did your bike cost??more than my GPS I bet.You must be able to afford heaps of BS tickets huh. :not:

Hey, yeah I'm on the piss again!! but it's called "taking the piss :doobey:

It is also a comment on the defence that is akin to saying "my watch is a Rolex so it is more accurate than your Timex"

Jackrat, I don't care if some rich bugger gets off, Kharma will get him in the end, however GPS ain't super reliable, i.e. if on a steep down hill you could be doing 110 kmh (gps reading) but your TRUE horizontal travel could be 118kmh so in my eyes the "jury is out" when it comes to GPS reading.

[spudchucka]

Hmm, I would have thought that the GPS would report an average speed as it it only accesses the transponders on a fixed time rate. Dunno - could be wrong, probably am.
It would be interesting to know what "expert" evidence was called to prove the infalability of the device or whether the judge just took the technology on face value. Perhaps he owns the same model and just had a really good read of the owners manual?

[scumdog]

It would be interesting to know what "expert" evidence was called to prove the infalability of the device or whether the judge just took the technology on face value. Perhaps he owns the same model and just had a really good read of the owners manual?

Them old fart types are easily impressed by "technology", hope they are equally embarrassed when it is all refuted :confused2

[spudchucka]

Them old fart types are easily impressed by "technology", hope they are equally embarrassed when it is all refuted :confused2
We've had one of those types make a few horrendously embarressing boo boo's, he's working another town now.

A couple of years ago when things were really beserk we got a couple of your Sth Island types up for a while. They were like a pair of hanging judges, the sentences were actually realistic, didn't last long though.

[scumdog]

We've had one of those types make a few horrendously embarressing boo boo's, he's working another town now.

A couple of years ago when things were really beserk we got a couple of your Sth Island types up for a while. They were like a pair of hanging judges, the sentences were actually realistic, didn't last long though.

Yeah SC, the guys that come down from up north tell me the the judges here are more realistic - up north a (serious) 'ASSAULTS POLICE" gets you a "convicted and discharged" - W.T.F!! - here we shoot them (I wish). :niceone:

[spudchucka]

Yeah SC, the guys that come down from up north tell me the the judges here are more realistic - up north a (serious) 'ASSAULTS POLICE" gets you a "convicted and discharged" - W.T.F!! - here we shoot them (I wish). :niceone:
A mate of mine had a guy "Plead Guilty" to a charge of attempted burglary, the judge discharged him without conviction. WTF is up with that?

[marty]

average speed is something that i have had used on me in court - the old 'it took me 1 hour to drive 100kms your honour - i didn't break the speed limit'. fortunately the judge saw right thru that one. (although maybe in the south island where there's no corners......)
the number of instances where the *accuracy* of gps could be used as a defence is so small and wanky, it's not worth getting all excited about. it's like someone saying 'but i had my cruise set at 109.' TFB mate - the ticket is for 'exceeding 100km/h - it's only the amount over that we're arguing about. the 10km/h discretion is just that - discretion. i doubt if you'll find it written anywhere. in aussie it's 5k over. it'll be that here soon too i reckon

[vifferman]

Wish I had a reason to get off my ticket from Saturday. The cop's writing was so scribbly I hoped something would prove to be illegible and allow me an 'out'. But, in the final analysis:


I've been a persistent law-breaker for years, so I can't complain.
The $300 fine averages out at less than $10/year, so I can't complain.
Earlier in the day, I'd been going faster, so I can't complain.
It was a wake-up call to be more careful, and less cavalier about the way I ride/drive, so I can't complain.
So, I'm not going to bleat about it. The speed limits here and there are a bit silly, as is the focus on speed (perhaps to the detriment of other driving offences), but as I've said before, the problem with NZ drivers is attitude, and I've demonstrated that my attitude is not a sensible or pragmatic one in this instance (and in others), so I'm determined to be more sensible in future.

[Blakamin]

in aussie it's 5k over. it'll be that here soon too i reckon
In Victoria its 2k.

and SD, they DO shoot them there :msn-wink:

[jrandom]

I can't speak for every model of GPS, but those based on the SiRF (www.sirf.com) chipset report speed and position every second. 'Speed' is a naïve calculation based on the distance from the last position reported. So, if you were 30 meters away a second ago, it will report your speed as 108kph.

This calculation is made in two dimensions only, so as soon as a gradient is introduced, your actual velocity starts to differ from the GPS-reported speed. The reason for this is that GPS altitude is less accurate than horizontal position, so if you factored the third dimension into speed calculations you would end up on the whole with a general degradation in the accuracy of reported speed, rather than an improvement.

And re. faking GPS logs, the whole point would be that a faked log wouldn't be distinguishable from the real thing. Proving the possibility of that in Court, as Spud said, would eliminate the usefulness of GPS data as evidence. The actual question of whether a defendant modified the logs would become moot, since you could never prove that they *didn't*.

[Pwalo]

Wish I had a reason to get off my ticket from Saturday. The cop's writing was so scribbly I hoped something would prove to be illegible and allow me an 'out'. But, in the final analysis:


I've been a persistent law-breaker for years, so I can't complain.
The $300 fine averages out at less than $10/year, so I can't complain.
Earlier in the day, I'd been going faster, so I can't complain.
It was a wake-up call to be more careful, and less cavalier about the way I ride/drive, so I can't complain.
So, I'm not going to bleat about it. The speed limits here and there are a bit silly, as is the focus on speed (perhaps to the detriment of other driving offences), but as I've said before, the problem with NZ drivers is attitude, and I've demonstrated that my attitude is not a sensible or pragmatic one in this instance (and in others), so I'm determined to be more sensible in future.

Yeah I feel the same. I've only been pinged once on the bike for doing 122 last year. (I'm still not sure if it's that easy to pick a bike as a target against background traffic?)

It was probably a timely reminder. Still amazes me how fast the commuter traffic travels in Wgtn though. 110-115 on the m/ways and 35-45 on the Petone foreshore. Another crackdown coming up soon?

[rodgerd]

I've been a persistent law-breaker for years, so I can't complain.
The $300 fine averages out at less than $10/year, so I can't complain.
Earlier in the day, I'd been going faster, so I can't complain.
It was a wake-up call to be more careful, and less cavalier about the way I ride/drive, so I can't complain.
So, I'm not going to bleat about it.

Oh, come now. What's with this "accepting responsibility for your actions" and "accepting the law is what it is". You should be out there like Lou and co, flinging shit at other people!

[Lou Girardin]

The same guidlines for radar use are used here. Its very easy to pick the fast vehicle when one is clearly travelling quicker than the others but when there is only a slight difference, say 100 - 115 it is a lot more difficult to ID the fast driver. Thats where laser is more effective. The guidlines also state that when there is doubt as to which was the fast vehicle then discretion should be used.

Discretion!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.

[marty]

discretion has worked both ways for me lou - obviously cops can pick the wankers, and ticket them for all they can

[scumdog]

discretion has worked both ways for me lou - obviously cops can pick the wankers, and ticket them for all they can

Good point Marty, plus if the cop used discretion and decided not to stop you Lou, how would you know he HAS used discretion??????

BTW, I am expecting a flood of 'thank-you' letters from all the greatful motorists I 'flashed' yesterday to let them know they were going a bit faster than the speed limit. - yeah right, like that's going to happen!!!!
Never met anybody yet that says 'I was flashed by a neat sort cop coming the other way when I was speeding', more like 'I was doing X speed and the bastard gave me a ticket' (qu'ell surprise!) :wacko:

[spudchucka]

Discretion!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.
Like Marty said, the cap fits in your case I reckon.

[rodgerd]

discretion has worked both ways for me lou - obviously cops can pick the wankers, and ticket them for all they can

Well, I've been stopped and given a "slow down, on your way" once in the last year, so it certainly seems to.

[dhunt]

Good point Marty, plus if the cop used discretion and decided not to stop you Lou, how would you know he HAS used discretion??????

BTW, I am expecting a flood of 'thank-you' letters from all the greatful motorists I 'flashed' yesterday to let them know they were going a bit faster than the speed limit. - yeah right, like that's going to happen!!!!
Never met anybody yet that says 'I was flashed by a neat sort cop coming the other way when I was speeding', more like 'I was doing X speed and the bastard gave me a ticket' (qu'ell surprise!) :wacko:
I have been flashed on numerous occasions and have been quite thank full and much prefer that method of telling people to slow down than the "I'll give you a certificate method often used"

[marty]

when someone told me they were running late i would often say - 'here's a late note from mum then'. no-one seemed to mind, except the overweight mid forties business owners from smallsville who thought they were above all that

[NC]

Uh oh!

Ah well, I guess he is ment to be setting an example?

[Jackrat]

Hey, yeah I'm on the piss again!! but it's called "taking the piss :doobey:

It is also a comment on the defence that is akin to saying "my watch is a Rolex so it is more accurate than your Timex"

Jackrat, I don't care if some rich bugger gets off, Kharma will get him in the end, however GPS ain't super reliable, i.e. if on a steep down hill you could be doing 110 kmh (gps reading) but your TRUE horizontal travel could be 118kmh so in my eyes the "jury is out" when it comes to GPS reading.

Riiiiiiiight,Forgot about that :Oops:

[scumdog]

Riiiiiiiight,Forgot about that :Oops:

Sorry, led you astray, I should have left out the word "horizontal" after 'TRUE' but I figure you know what I mean :niceone: