Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- From: "Alan Holmes" <alan_holmes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:20:21 GMT
"PC Paul" <urd2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:vptOi.27845$c_1.25981@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Brimstone wrote:
Rob wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
They would have believed the data from the police mobile camera if theBrimstone wrote:
Dr Tann said: "The mobile cameras used are not 100% accurate.So they'd have believed a cop's word over GPS data ?
"My system can track a GPS phone within half-a-meter of where it
is, whereas devices currently on the market can, at best, only
track a phone within five metres."
A spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said: "The
officer who operated the camera has since retired.
"Without his verbal evidence, we could not prove the case to the
required standard."
So the copper had retired, convenient or merely convenient?
operator had given verbal evidence. The scientist's invention, and the
claimed accuracy of its data, is a red herring. The CPS simply
offered no evidence and dropped the case.
And if he hadn't had that data?
When you get the NIP, you know where and when the camera 'got' you.
But if you ask to see the 'evidence' the case often gets dropped at that
point.
Given an hour, I could produce GPS data (NMEA) to prove I was doing
whatever speed I liked along that road...
.
- References:
- inaccurate speed cameras
- From: Brimstone
- Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- From: Eeyore
- Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- From: Rob
- Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- From: Brimstone
- Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- From: PC Paul
- inaccurate speed cameras
- Prev by Date: Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- Next by Date: Re: Go Hamilton!
- Previous by thread: Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- Next by thread: Re: inaccurate speed cameras
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|