GPS vs. Radar: Teen's Parents Use GPS Tracker to Contest Speeding Ticket

And it's from the Christian Science Monitor. Aren't Christian Scientists the ones that refuse medical treatment?

GPS is definitely not infallible but it is much more reliable than a human operated radar gun. A similar case has occurred in Australia where GPS data was used as corroborative evidence in overturning a speeding ticket. However, it still cost the defendant $23,000 in legal fees and expert testimonies to reach that verdict.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/father-and-son-stick-to-guns-to-prove-radar-wrong/2007/03/11/1173548023012.html

GPS is also slow to react. If the kid had just sped up it likely would not show it.

I would say a trained radar operator would be more reliable then some toy.

I actually believe the officer in this case. And that radar is more sensitive. It could be that he was temporarily accelerating to pass rather than cruising at that speed. Or maybe he was but no one was around.

They should've just argued using the two relatively unknown CA laws detailed in a blog post earlier where speeding does NOT automatically imply guilt. Technically, if you contest the ticket, CA law requires a judge to decide if the speed was unsafe in the conditions at the time, and/or if the posted limit was justified.

But to honestly decide you need a video camera setup at the exact location and to monitor traffic at the time of day he was ticketed for, then monitor traffic over a period of time. If it turns out that the average speed is about 60 mph, with a fair amount of space between the cars, then it would satisfy the rules to overturn the ticket (if not overturn the posted limit).

It would've set a greater precedent, be beneficial to other people and would've been better for the money spent; rather than waste time forming legal strategies on convincing the judge of gps vs radar.

This could be a big win for citizens. The problem with most GPS units, however, is that the refresh time is so prolonged. As some alluded to, he could have sped very briefly and the GPS might not have picked it up.

Still, these days a lot of vehicles have integrated black boxes. If this is a newer vehicle, that'd be a better source of data.

It would help his case if not for the fact that daddy has a vested interest in the GPS. I love the part where the city of Petaluma has reportedly spent $15,000 already on this speeding ticket.

"By firstwagon on September 10, 2009 10:25 PM
GPS is also slow to react. If the kid had just sped up it likely would not show it.

I would say a trained radar operator would be more reliable then some toy."

I bet you wouldn't be saying that if you were tapped in traffic. My Magellan takes 2-3 seconds tops to react to my speed changes. Even abrupt ones. As long as you are in the clear with at least a mid-strength signal. GPS technology is very accurate and now very compact. The only thing toy-like about them is their size. I would hedge bets on the GPS vs. a cop pointing radar down a busy six lane road in town.

The *defense* has a conflict of interest? Spare me. That says that the prosecution is not confident in its case and is just grasping at straws.

IF you've ever gotten a ticket you didn't deserve, you would understand the plight of these people. It can happen, another almost identical vehicle can be clocked, and your vehicle pulled over. Mistakes can happen, and if more people fought speeding tickets that were not deserved, maybe the Cops would be more careful, instead of just following orders to raise revenue.

When I used to sit in traffic court I was amazed at how little so many of the so-called "certified" radar operators knew about their equipment and how it operated.
And don't get me started on the state's Intoxilyzer 5000 "experts"...

Remove Speed Limits !!

The judge should have sided with the defendant as soon as the GPS evidence was verified. Radar guns can be very fallible for many reasons: calibration, distance, aim, etc... It's not worth fighting to keep a speeding ticket with solid evidence for the defendant.

There is no way he could have gotten from 45 to 62 and back down without the GPS updating. It's just not possible. I will admit though that as soon as I read it was a Rocky Mountain GPS that threw up a red flag for me. That company makes pure garbage.

Was the GPS unit state certified for speed verification? Where are the calibration records? Have the parents been through the proper training and received the up-to-date certification?

I'd ask the same questions about the radar gun, but I know the judge would have already.

Is this another case of a kid screwing up and parents refusing to believe their child could do anything wrong?

I really hope there's more to the story. If not, it's a complete waste of the court's time.

Thank you brn. If it's not calibrated or doesn't have an up-to-date calibration, then its data is in question. Even more so if it has never been calibrated.

I find it very convenient that the GPS shows that he was traveling EXACTLY 45 in a 45 zone. Who drives the speed limit anyway?

Forget about using GPS to read your speed, they have devices that can record from the cars computer the speed of the car. This should be an easier case to win then when using GPS data.

Example - http://www.amazon.com/Lemur-Autovision-TSDM-001-Driving-Monitor/dp/B002JRBVGE

or

http://www.smart-driver.com/

ther are more I think.

hopefully the gps turns out the victor far tooo many dirty cops out there get away with things like this....i.e friends of my family. basically told me they are tought to give out fraud tickets like that...not hard to believe

Everyone in this case has a conflict of interest, but I'd rather side with the little guy. Radar guns only give a reading on the strongest radar signature; the operator must determine which vehicle produced it.

BTW, the Christian Science Monitor is a respected publication, regardless of the beliefs of Christian Scientists, and there's no prerequisite to belong to write for it.

If you know what you're doing, radar is quite accurate. You do have to know what you're doing. It involves more than just reading the number produced.

According to the article, they're not trying to discredit the radar, but the radar operator. This isn't a case of radar vs GPS, but a case of radar operator vs GPS. Interesting.

"If you know what you're doing, radar is quite accurate. You do have to know what you're doing. It involves more than just reading the number produced."

Correct. But as I said, many so-called trained/certified officers simply don't have a clue about the function and limitations of the unit they use. BTDT for 22 years...

roadburner, you seem to be missing the point of certification. It means they do have a clue.

While more than reading a number, it's far from rocket science.

"roadburner, you seem to be missing the point of certification. It means they do have a clue."

Certification does not mean they have a clue. It means they took a course/studied material and remembered it long enough to take a test on it. What happens to the information after that is anyone's guess.

Regardless, I simply can't believe a cop would give out tickets under anything less than the most honest and accurate grounds. Its not like governments need these things for assumed revenue and therefore encourage police to write enough tickets to fulfill that assumption. That would be a conflict of interest, and the police are clearly above such ethics violations.
(I'm being sarcastic, in case that wasn't clear).

Maybe I'm just a bit suspicious since I got a ticket for going over the safe speed for conditions, a speed the cop determined based on the rain, rain which didn't start until after he pulled me over. Shenanigans like that just do that to you.

"Certification does not mean they have a clue. It means they took a course/studied material and remembered it long enough to take a test on it. What happens to the information after that is anyone's guess."

Exactly!

Here's something to think about. The Cops in your neighbourhood are just people from your neighbourhood... and in the vast majority of cases they are the most honest people in your neighbourhood.

If you can't trusts the cops, think about what thay says about your city.

From my experience, the police do the best they can to enforce the law and the vast majority of people who fight speeding tickets are just refusing to admit they screwed up.

But then I don't live where you live.

Good luck.

"Certification does not mean they have a clue. It means they took a course/studied material and remembered it long enough to take a test on it. What happens to the information after that is anyone's guess."

They take what they've learned and they apply it. They continue to apply it every day.

If from that, you assume they don't have a clue then they can do nothing to make you happy. That's really too bad.

You can't just assume they apply what they learn. Some will apply it. Others will forget it. You don't know who does what.

Firstwagon, the problem is the police may start out as normal people, but like politicians the power corrupts. I can't begin to count how many times I've seen cruisers traveling in the carpool lane with one occupant, then cross the double solid yellow lines to get in and out. No turn signals. Speeding. Cutting people off. If I did any of those things, they'd ticket me, but because they don't ticket themselves they brake the rules with impunity. I also see them approach a red light, turn on the red and blues, cross against the red, and turn the red and blues off as soon as they're across. They are not just normal citizens.

I've worked in the court system for over two decades, and I'll be the first to admit that the good cops vastly outnumber the bad cops. That said, there are a lot of good cops who are certified to operate radar equipment who have forgotten everything that they were taught in the certification course. On top of that, there are administrative pressures such as Federal Overtime(FOT)- which require officers to issue a minimum of four violations per hour. You should see some of the citations that the cops on FOT write...