Safe Speed Forums

from the SMH
(registration may be required)

Ticketed driver lands police radar traps in a fine mess
By Robert Wainwright
November 5, 2005

When Jerry Simotas challenged a $160 speeding fine in May last year he had no idea it would cost him $15,000 in legal fees or that it might make him the champion of everyone who has copped an "unfair" fine.

Evidence before his landmark case held at Goulburn has cast doubt over the accuracy and maintenance of all hand-held radar guns used by NSW Police and, potentially, the validity of thousands of speeding tickets issued in the past 12 years.

A "voir dire" examination of evidence last week challenged not only the competence of the police officer in charge of maintaining the radar guns but also whether the guns' annual tests met national standards.

In the wake of the hearing, and its adjournment to February, the magistrate, Roger Prowse, suggested Mr Simotas's lawyers "make representations" to police to drop the charge he was doing 133kmh in a 110kmh zone on the Hume Highway at Jugiong, 40 kilometres north of Gundagai.

But the ramifications of the case may be too great for the police to be found wanting.

At the centre of the argument is not how often police recalibrate their radar guns for accuracy (at least once a year, according to the manual) but how rigorously they check and whether the process even passes scientific scrutiny.

According to documents and evidence presented in court, police have certified the US-made Kustom Silver Eagle gun as accurate each year even though half of the possible 18 tests - which cover issues such as temperature, vibration stability, noise and phone interference, and humidity - were never done.

The problems, which police will not concede, have the potential to shake the validity of all tickets issued on the basis of the guns.

The traffic services commander, Chief Superintendent John Hartley, said he could not answer questions put by the Herald because the case had not finished. However, he had full confidence in the guns' accuracy, insisting they were certified properly every six months.

Mr Simotas's barrister, Michael Maxwell, said the testing procedures of the radar engineering unit fell short of standards required by the National Association of Testing Authorities. It meant they could not prove the radar guns were accurate.

Documented evidence also showed that the radar guns emitted radiation, or power density, above the legal limit and were a potential health hazard to those who used them. "I'd be very concerned about the radiation emissions. I understand that it was the reason that Queensland police refused to use these units in 1994," Mr Maxwell said.

"In terms of accuracy, our expert, who is an electronics engineer, showed that police had only ever done half the tests required by the manufacturer. In at least one instance, he wasn't even aware of the test."

Mr Simotas admitted to having copped a few fines - "nothing too serious" - but said he was a victim of inaccurate equipment: "It's not the cost of the ticket because you wouldn't spend $15,000 to save $160. I know I wasn't speeding because I was watching the odometer."

Bloody 'ell, are Aussie speed limits now in kilometers per day?

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Not sure if he's being daft or if he's referring to the "speed checks" they have at odd intervals along that road which are basically just distance markers from 1-5km. If your odometer ticks along at the same rate as the distance markers then you know your speed is accurate. If you're really bored (and you will be if you're forced sit on 110 on a perfectly straight road highway with empty fields either side) then you can time yourself between the posts as well although it's easier if you're doing 120 for that test.