what happens when an EE goes to court to fight a speed camera ticket?

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

i received a speed camera violation in Iowa (civil fine - goes to car owner).

Speed Limit: 45 MPH

Fines:

0-10 MPH over = $0

11-15 MPH over = $75

I noticed my vehicle's speed was noted as 56.00 MPH

I thought that was conveniently equal to the 11 MPH limit to get a fine.

I know I pass that intersection with cruise control at 45-46 MPH.

I decided to fight it... which requires 3 visits to that jurisdiction.

Trip 1 is to meet with two officers, who can let you off for any reason (i.e. friend, lawyer, cop, etc). most people make excuses. I asked questions and told them my calculations prove I was going slower. I mentioned looking at wheelbase in the two photos and using trig to calculate distance. They didn't listen to me and couldn't answer my questions.

Trip 2 is to go in front of a judge to ask for a trial. At this point you either pay $75 or the cost jumps to $180 (court fees).

Trip 3 is to have a formal bench trial... which I had on Thursday...

Click to read more...

 

[subzero 5,000+ posts]

And then???

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

I'll start by saying that it cost me more than $75 in gas and expenses to print my evidence (40 color pages).

It took me more than 20 hours of effort.

It is cheaper to pay the $75.

But it was a matter of principle.

Their evidence is two photos of the car at two different times. The photos indicate a distance traveled (10.0 m), a time elapsed (.40 s), and a speed (56 MPH). There is also a video (at 25fps) of the vehicle passing by. The video is primarily used to validate you weren't in a funeral procession or moving out of the way for an ambulance, etc.

I noticed that if you divide the alleged distance by the alleged time (indicated in the photos) you got 55.923 MPH. less than what is required for a fine.

I re-recorded the video at 30 fps and exported every frame to .jpg. I compared which frames correspond to each photo. I saw that it meant 14 frames occurred between photos which puts the time at .4667 sec which puts the speed at 48 MPH.

 

[Flex68 10+ year member]

I love this guy!!

Now, be like Paul Harvey.... I gots to know rest of story!

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

I show up at 9:30 am for court, with three copies of my evidence (photos, video frames, and pages with narratives and calculations proving speed). I also had a page with photos to prove the reflection in my tail lights wasn't braking, but a flash reflection.

They moved me to the front due to flying in an "expert witness". This was a formal trial. Prosecution would call witnesses and examine them. I could cross examine and only ask questions, i could not talk or make statements. I could offer evidence and if no one objected, get it admitted.

Prosecution's witnesses were the police Captain, police Sherriff (that I met with in Step 1), and the "expert" - the technical director and founder of Gatso USA (company that imports and installs the camera systems).

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

It took 2 hours and 15 minutes. I cannot type out everything in detail...

I did not have counsel.

I have never done this before.

I did not have any cross-examination questions prepared (i didn't know i would have to).

However, I was the smartest, most educated, most knowledgeable, most familiar, and most prepared person in the room.

I quickly realized that I needed to get my evidence admitted, reviewed and approved by each witness, BEFORE i revealed why I had them or what they proved.

Prosecution asked generic questions. Nothing special.

I got both officers to agree my photos were accurate, my video frames were accurate (legit), and that the vehicle was not braking during the video or photos. They admitted they don't confirm speed with the distance and time values. They just believe the number.

Now came to the "expert"...

 

[Flex68 10+ year member]

This is better than drugs, lol.

Hurry, mayne: On the edge of my seat, and I gotta head to work soon!

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

this guy has a background in "electronics and business". he was not an engineer. he was a glorified installer and business man.

i got him to admit several key factors.

1. their software truncates decimal points. (i.e. it uses Int and not Float or Double in the programming).

2. their system uses a radar (with 5 deg. beam) pointed at each lane to identify the speed.

3. the distance reported in the photo is field-verified upon install.

4. the time is calculated.

5. the speed output from the radar is converted from KPH to MPH.

6. the self diagnostics in the system do not include radar aiming.

7. over a dozen people have remote access to any camera and, at any time, can adjust the limit for sending fines.

calibration was Dec 6, 2011.

the "expert" did not know what affect temperature had on the system.

he did not know how the program calculated anything.

when I asked him what happens if you truncate the decimal points in the denominator - what happens to the overall value? "I don't know"

I explained the relationship is inverse. by truncating decimal points in the denominator, the result is higher.

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

the only preparation he did was to prove that you cannot use wheelbase to calculate distance in the photos.

that was my original approach that i shared with the sheriff. but i deemed that inaccurate so i abandoned it and attacked time instead.

the "expert" was not prepared to talk about time. and he proved the system makes calculations that render the result inaccurate.

 

[Kangaroux 5,000+ posts]

Lol, awesome. And why the hell would they use int? That's dumb as hell...I can see if you wanna save space or something but even then

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

finally, after moving through all three witnesses, and having each one verify my evidence was valid before i pointed out that it meant the speed was 48 MPH... i got to talk.

ya'll don't know me... but i like to talk. i can talk for 5-10 minutes straight, no pauses, no stutters, no slips, and speak coherently and formulate intelligent thoughts, prove points, and convince anyone of just about anything.

at each of these points, the prosecution sighed in agreement:

1. i explained that the radar is inadmissible since we have no photo or proof it was aimed at my car.

2. i explained that the time and speed are calculated using inaccurate math (rounding errors)

3. i explained that the only useful variables are the distance in the photos and the time elapsed in the video.

4. i explained that i learned how to analyze video to calc speed by reading law enforcement papers on training officers for calculating speed of a vehicle with a video (i.e. dash cams or security cams or these traffic cams)

when asked my profession: Electrical Engineer and Acoustics Engineer

prosecution sighed.

when asked my degree: Bachelors of Science in Electrical Engineering

prosecution sighed.

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

I also pointed out that while the radar was aimed before the photos, it was not possible for the vehicle to reduce speed from 56 MPH to 48 MPH without obvious braking or deceleration. All witnesses admitted the vehicle's speed was constant.

So I finish.

"Prosecution, your witness"

pause

"Uh, no questions your Honor"

nothing. they had nothing to come back on.

 

[srb 10+ year member]

Hahahahahahaha you killed em!

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

Then the judge explained to me that this was a first. No one does what I did. Everyone just argues they weren't driving (which doesn't matter - read the code!)

The prosecution thanked me for an enlightening experience.

Judge said she required 3-4 months to review my 40 pages of evidence and calculations, as well as review 2 hours of testimony.

so, we'll see what happens.

i lose: i pay $180

i win: i pay nothing

at this point, i have cost that court several times more than that!!!

i mean, they flew the "Expert" in from NYC!!!

 

[05trailblazer 10+ year member]

i wanna be like you when i grows up //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif on a serious note... you did good by going thru all that trouble by just defending yourself. but honestly did you really have it on cruise? or did you really exceed the speed limit?