Does ecilop radar have to have speed locked to issue ticket?

**KX500** · 9th February 2012, 15:36

Got pinged doing 67 down gasson st ch-ch, was traveling north in left hand lane, 2 lanes head north and one heads south - cop was parked opposite side.

There was a ute travelling beside me slightly back and cars heading south. Said to cop how did ya know it was me when i was in far left lane and he said radar can pick up lead vehicle, asked if i could look at radar and he said yes but speed was not locked. Didnt have licence on me so thought best not to push things to far and have another fine added.

Thinking now but prob to late - how can they issue a ticket if the alledged speed is not locked and displayed on the radar dash unit ? What can ya do if you do look at the dash unit and the alledged speed is not showing ?

Cheerz

**SMOKEU** · 9th February 2012, 15:56

Originally Posted by KX500

Thinking now but prob to late - how can they issue a ticket if the alledged speed is not locked and displayed on the radar dash unit ? What can ya do if you do look at the dash unit and the alledged speed is not showing ?

It's their word against yours. Just ask yourself who you think a judge would believe in court.

**KX500** · 9th February 2012, 16:16

True, heard people have gotten off when they have asked for the current radar calibration certificate and it can not be produced, then there's this other side of the coin when its not even locked but you have to take the officers word on it

**bikaholic** · 9th February 2012, 16:24

Bad news bro, they don't have to show you the speed on their radar.

They either saw you speed and confirmed it with te radar, or te radar blipped a speed and the orificer looked and confirmed you as the sacrifical lamb.

Pay as you learn.

**KX500** · 9th February 2012, 16:41

Front forks taking a dive might been give away

Sheks akin to nazi germany if no proof needs to be shown, accuse you of any speed and take ya licence. $120 wont break the bank but surely a lawyer worth their salts would be able to get you off the fine with no proof or the young failed german art student has been reincarnated as the transport minister somewhere along the line

**Jantar** · 9th February 2012, 16:55

Originally Posted by KX500

...There was a ute travelling beside me slightly back and cars heading south. Said to cop how did ya know it was me when i was in far left lane and he said radar can pick up lead vehicle, ...

The radar can pick up the fastest AND the strongest signal. The fact that you were in front of the ute doesn't make you either.

**sil3nt** · 9th February 2012, 17:14

It's only $120 and lets face it you were speeding (and probably going a fair bit more 67!).

Just put your rego on hold to compensate

**davereid** · 9th February 2012, 17:25

Originally Posted by sil3nt

It's only $120 and lets face it you were speeding (and probably going a fair bit more 67!).

Just put your rego on hold to compensate

I can't find it right now, but is been published on the site already. There is a High court precedent, thats if you are not shown a locked reading when you request it, the ticket is junk.

Use search and requote it.

Of course they often get a confession and that will sink you ie "why were you speeding sir ?" any explanation is a confession.

Radar should not be used with more than one vehicle in the beam. For technical reasons its bad man to do it.

**FJRider** · 9th February 2012, 17:29

Originally Posted by SMOKEU

It's their word against yours. Just ask yourself who you think a judge would believe in court.

I agree .... (must be a blue moon)

**KX500** · 9th February 2012, 17:29

Cheerz

Not even 3 months to compensate, was suprised fine was so little, yeah like compensation idea

Bit taken back though that we live in such a lack luster society where many quite happy to take officers word on the situation, they not god - could have been a plumber 6 months prior

**davereid** · 9th February 2012, 17:35

found this

http://www.fastandsafe.co.nz/Pages/M...ce18Feb05.shtm

Police need evidence for speed tickets
18 February 2005

By ANNA CLARIDGE

Motorists who are pinged for speeding by police radar might have a complete defence if the officer taking the reading cannot produce it in court.

The issue has been highlighted after Christchurch man Peter Fiddler was given a ticket for allegedly driving at 113kmh while heading south of Christchurch on December 22 last year.

He disputed his speed at the scene and when he asked the officer to produce evidence from his radar-gun, the "clocked speed" had been wiped.

Fiddler complained to the Police Infringement Bureau, saying there was no evidence he was travelling beyond the speed limit, but the police refused to waive his ticket saying: "There is no legal requirement for you to be shown a readout or even for the readout to be locked".

Fiddler said this week: "I didn't think it was fair and I tried to discuss it with the officer but he didn't want to know. I tried to challenge it ... (but) I weighed up the costs and I just couldn't afford a day off work to go to court and defend it."

Exasperated, Fiddler paid the fine but contacted The Press, concerned at what he claims are unfair police rules.

"They could just make up a speed and write the ticket. It's ridiculous," he said.

Recent decisions show the courts are backing motorists such as Fiddler, waiving fines for those who challenge police unable to provide evidence of speeding.

Christchurch man Bryan McHerron took the matter to court in September last year after police were unable to produce radar evidence at the scene of his ticket.

An officer allegedly clocked McHerron travelling 121kmh in a passing lane near Amberley, but lost the radar record seconds after the incident and was unable to show McHerron any evidence as he wrote out the ticket.

McHerron went to court, admitting he was probably travelling at more than 100kmh, but denied it was 121kmh.

The Rangiora District Court ruled in McHerron's favour, with two Justices of the Peace saying: "This issue for us is whether there has been a burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt regarding the excessive speed ... to cast light or doubt on the actual speed under consideration and in the interests of justice we think it is not unreasonable for the driver to see the actual locked-in radar speed.

"In this instance it was not available and does create an element of doubt to the actual speed for the defendant."

The decision was based on a similar High Court ruling in 1996 when a motorcyclist on the West Coast successfully defended an alleged radar reading of 126kmh after the officer could not produce evidence of the speed quoted on the ticket.

McHerron now claims his ticket was the result of a Government-pushed, revenue-grab which is forcing police to become "quite unethical".

"It borders on harassment what they do. It's a recipe for fraud because at the end of the day, the average person just accepts what the police have said. Motorists have got some rights and I believe the police are taking those rights away."

Canterbury Road Policing manager Derek Erasmus reiterated the police stance, saying an officer did not have to lock a speed in.

"Best practice indicates that we do it because it removes those arguments further down the track but sometimes ... it's not physically possible to lock it in."

An officer may have to act quickly if a driver was coming around a corner and would not have time to lock the speed in, Erasmus said.

"If a person doesn't like it, you can dispute it through the court process. It's no different from the vast majority of police cases disputed in court.

"It comes through to an issue of credibility. At the end of the day (motorists) have the recourse of taking it to court and the evidence is weighed in an independent forum."

A senior police official said complaints over lack of evidence "presupposed police were liars".

"These are sworn officers who gain no benefit from making things up."

A police spokeswoman said police stood by their legal stance and any appeal against a ticket was a decision for the court, not police.

and this from KB

Jantar
24th January 2011, 14:48
This is a decision from a JP's court and sets no precedent at all.

The required case would be the one from the High Court, as they can set precedent, or case law is the correct term.

I believe that the case law has been set in the high court.

The decision was based on a similar High Court ruling in 1996 when a motorcyclist on the West Coast successfully defended an alleged radar reading of 126kmh after the officer could not produce evidence of the speed quoted on the ticket.

but cant find 1996 case yet

**KX500** · 9th February 2012, 17:38

Originally Posted by davereid

I can't find it right now, but is been published on the site already. There is a High court precedent, thats if you are not shown a locked reading when you request it, the ticket is junk.

Thought what you are saying would be common sense

wouldnt they just send ya the ticket if ya rode away after arguing the toss and then how do ya prove there was no locked reading ? Or hook the old phone camera out and take photo of the dash unit showing naah na ?

**FJRider** · 9th February 2012, 17:41

Originally Posted by davereid

I can't find it right now, but is been published on the site already. There is a High court precedent, thats if you are not shown a locked reading when you request it, the ticket is junk.

Use search and requote it.

Of course they often get a confession and that will sink you ie "why were you speeding sir ?" any explanation is a confession.

Radar should not be used with more than one vehicle in the beam. For technical reasons its bad man to do it.

The precedent had it's own conditions ... not always repeated. The matter CAN be taken to court ... (tell it to the Judge situation) Good luck with that ...

**FJRider** · 9th February 2012, 17:44

Originally Posted by KX500

Thought what you are saying would be common sense

wouldnt they just send ya the ticket if ya rode away after arguing the toss and then how do ya prove there was no locked reading ? Or hook the old phone camera out and take photo of the dash unit showing naah na ?

On the ticket is two boxes, locked on microwave ... NOT locked on ...

Check which was ticked ...