Teenager beats speeding ticket with GPS

Captain Slow IRL

By Iain Thomson in San Francisco VNU Net -
Saturday, July 19 01:00 am

A teenager has successfully defended himself against a speeding ticket by convincing the court that his GPS was more accurate than a police radar gun.

Shaun Malone, 18, was issued a speeding ticket after a police radar gun tracked him as going 62 mph in a 45 mph zone. However, he appealed the ticket because his GPS, which was installed by his parents to monitor his driving, showed he was driving within the speed limit.

The court originally ruled against the ticket, as a court expert said GPS was not accurate enough to give a precise reading. But after examining the particular system, installed by Rocky Mountain Tracking, he decided it would be suitable.

"This case has caught the attention of the nation, and it will set a precedent on how police departments use speed traps in the face of an increased GPS presence," says Brad Borst, president of Rocky Mountain Tracking, and who is also a former Police Officer.

"The accuracy and reliability of GPS has helped bring this important issue into the limelight."

The device measures real-time speed every 30 seconds and can also be configured to send out an email message to the owners if the car reaches speeds of 70 mph or over.

source

colm_mcm

it is possible to be doing say 40mph, then speed up to 70mph, then slow down to 30mph and then back up to 40, your average speed could still be 40mph.

Is it implied that speed gun used by the police was inaccurate?

cyclopath2001

Captain Slow IRL wrote: »

"The accuracy and reliability of GPS has helped bring this important issue into the limelight."

It's also an argument for fitting 'black-boxes' to cars. The hardware is becoming quite cheap. It's just a matter of ensuring that the data cannot be tampered with. Then, the data could be used by a motorist to defend himself against a wrongful speeding charge or requisitioned by the police as evidence in the event of an accident.

Rowley Birkin QC

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's also an argument for fitting 'black-boxes' to cars. The hardware is becoming quite cheap. It's just a matter of ensuring that the data cannot be tampered with. Then, the data could be used by a motorist to defend himself against a wrongful speeding charge or requisitioned by the police as evidence in the event of an accident.

I would definitely not want one of these "black boxes" in my car.

Stealdo

I've often wondered whether the gradient of the road affects the accuracy of a GPS speed reading. On a road with a 30 degree gradient (which is quite severe) the speed of a car measured against the road as it would be by a guard with a radar gun at the top or the bottom of a hill would be 15% higher than if it it was measured against a theoretical flat surface of the earth looking down from directly above as it may be by GPS systems. Anyone know whether GPS takes this into account? At 20 degrees the diff would only be 6% and at 15 degrees it would be 4%, so not really significant, but interesting when it comes to cases like this.

thehomeofDob

AFAIK GPS does track altitude but not with the same level of accuracy as horizontal movement. So there is some inaccuracy with speed levels on a steep incline or decline.

Steve

There are too many things wrong with that report.

Shaun Malone, 18, was issued a speeding ticket after a police radar gun tracked him as going 62 mph in a 45 mph zone.

There is no possible way a law enforcement radar (do they still use radar in SFO?) is that inaccurate. Thats a 37% error.

The court originally ruled against the ticket,

The device measures real-time speed every 30 seconds

OK, so if the guy took off from a set of lights say 3/4 miles before the speed trap and 30s before he was nabbed...

e.g.:
0-5s stopped
5-10s 30mph
10-15s 50mph
15-20s 62mph
20-25s 62mph
25-30s 62mph

A GPS working on a 30s average will say his speed is 44.3MPH

Normal GPS's don't work that way, the speed update usually less than 1 sec.

Don't know about telltale trackers though, they might indeed only log the speed every 30s. This would reduce the chances of them making errors and leading to unjustified prosecutions - i.e. there would have to be a continuous 30s timeframe in excess of the limit before it would trigger a damning email - or whatever they do.

It still doesn't make any sense in the context of that article though.

Seth Brundle

In an Irish context the entire case is irrelevant due to the legislation protecting the integrity of the speed detecting equipment!
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1991/en/si/0050.html

Steve

kbannon wrote: »

In an Irish context the entire case is irrelevant due to the legislation protecting the integrity of the speed detecting equipment!
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1991/en/si/0050.html

Ah yes, the (yet to be tested) law that makes it illegal to have a GPS with camera locations....:pac:

Seth Brundle

Aplologies, I had meant to link to this one: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0044/sec0015.html#partii-sec15
"It is not necessary to prove that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order.”,"

djimi

Can someone explain this to me please? Some muppet is caught doing 17mph over the speed limit; how on earth did he use his GPS to get off the charge? Surely the polices speed camera would have more say in court than his GPS device would, no...?

Seth Brundle

I don't know the details of that case, but in other countries you can question the accuracy of the device and demand to see maintenance records. If there was any blip in the maintenance of the police equipment then the accuracy could be questioned.
In ireland you are forced to presume that the garda equipment is in perfect working order!

moleyC

I don't think the system works on an average speed over the 30s, it takes an instantaneous reading every 30s.

I get the feeling from this quote that they are talking about police officers stichting people up(wheter by tampering with the equipment to fudge results or otherwise) rather than inherant inaccuracies in the equipment.

"This case has caught the attention of the nation, and it will set a precedent on how police departments use speed traps in the face of an increased GPS presence," says Brad Borst, president of Rocky Mountain Tracking, and who is also a former Police Officer.

4JayZee

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's also an argument for fitting 'black-boxes' to cars. The hardware is becoming quite cheap. It's just a matter of ensuring that the data cannot be tampered with. Then, the data could be used by a motorist to defend himself against a wrongful speeding charge or requisitioned by the police as evidence in the event of an accident.

Y'know, Cyclo, I'd almost consider it so long as you agree that all road users be similarly monitored. I'd enjoy the experience of cyclists being prosecuted when breaking lights, travelling against the flow of traffic etc.

Or even (whisper it) speeding. I doubt I'd be able to break one of your beloved 30kph limits on a bike (its been a while) but I suspect you might. And possibly a lot nearer a pavement than an average motorist - where (if the RSA and Hibernian are to be believed) - its curb-to-curb with vunerable disabled babies.

Maybe we could extend the scheme to include an intoxiliser for cyclists to unlock their bikes? I'd hate to think a cyclist would have to carry the burden of causing an accident while under the influence.

X

--
This post does not endorse the mowing down of disabled babies.

Seth Brundle

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's also an argument for fitting 'black-boxes' to cars. The hardware is becoming quite cheap. It's just a matter of ensuring that the data cannot be tampered with. Then, the data could be used by a motorist to defend himself against a wrongful speeding charge or requisitioned by the police as evidence in the event of an accident.

1. data can always be tampered with!
2. why does this mean that a car should have a black box? This thread is about simple technology has been shown to be more accurate than police (and given that we buy UKs old equipment) and garda equipment. If anything it means that the law enforcers should not be using erroneous equipment. However, this does not justify in any way the introduction of a big brother style box in everyones car.

You tend to come across as trolling and it does become wearysome. Cyclists do cause traffic incidents due to their wrecklessness but I acknowledge that it is not all cyclists. In the same manner motorists do cause accidents (which can have more significant effects) but you cannot tar them all with the same brush!

peasant

kbannon wrote: »

Aplologies, I had meant to link to this one: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0044/sec0015.html#partii-sec15
"It is not necessary to prove that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order.”,"

Say what now?

So they could actually go out with a hairdryer and do you for speeding ?

Only in Ireland ...

Steve

moleyC wrote: »

I get the feeling from this quote that they are talking about police officers stichting people up(wheter by tampering with the equipment to fudge results or otherwise) rather than inherant inaccuracies in the equipment.

It does seem a bit 'sun'esque alright.

The same topic was raised recently as well - Guards 'doing' motorists for exceeding 50kph when actually it was an 80kph zone.

My reply was - why would a Guard (or American cop) do that? They don't get paid any more and they risk their career for what? - Catching a few speeders? No sense there.

Steve

peasant wrote: »

Say what now?

So they could actually go out with a hairdryer and do you for speeding ?

Only in Ireland ...

They're now considering using fortune tellers - you will get the ticket the day before you speed...:D

Minority report act 2009...



*this post may contain elements of fiction