Parents of a teen driver use data from a GPS vehicular tracking device to fight a speeding charge based on radar guns.
Los Angeles - A California speeding ticket case to be decided in coming weeks puts a new twist on the age-old cops versus drivers battle, pitting police radar against personal GPS tracking devices.
The case, which is drawing national attention, revolves around 17-year-old Shaun Malone, who in 2007 was clocked by a Petaluma, Calif., police officer going over 62 m.p.h. in a 45 m.p.h. zone. He was found guilty and fined $194. But Shaun's parents contested the ticket, citing data from the satellite tracking device they had installed in their son's car and expert testimony.
The tracking device showed that Shaun was traveling at 45 m.p.h. when the officer stopped him. The data were automatically downloaded into the parents' computer.
"The speeding ticket – fear of getting one, how to fight one – is such a ubiquitous concern in American culture that this case is extremely interesting and could produce a compelling outcome," says Daniel Filler, senior associate dean for academic and faculty affairs at Drexel University's Earle Mack School of Law in Philadelphia.
Radar versus GPS
By all accounts, the legal case has been a war of experts and technologies. Petaluma police produced their radar evidence. The defense argued that the readings could have been derailed by human error or interference from road signs and passing trucks.
The district attorney countered that the distance between the stoplight and the police radar position couldn't have been covered in the time it was unless the car was traveling faster than 45 m.p.h.
"Since it is impossible to cover that distance going from a full stop to 45 m.p.h. where the officer was, this shows infallibly that Malone was speeding," says Sgt. Ken Savano of the traffic division of the Petaluma police. "We think he sped up to 62.5 m.p.h., then saw the police car and slowed down."
Petaluma police have spent a reported $15,000 on the trial. Sergeant Savano says, "We don't want this [radar] technology to be discredited. We think it helps save teenagers' lives."
However, defense attorney Andrew Martinez claimed that Shaun's stepfather, Roger Rude, recreated the incident 12 times and proved it was possible to have driven that distance without speeding.
According to Rocky Mountain Tracking, which sells the GPS device software, the system registers when the car begins to accelerate and registers the car's speed, direction, and location every 30 seconds after. In Shaun's case, his parents ensured that they would receive an e-mail if his car ever hit 70 m.p.h.
Mr. Rude says, "The issue is not whether radar works, but rather human error in using it." The stretch of highway in question is three lanes and moves around a curve, he says. "It's very easy for radar to lock in on the wrong vehicle. The issue is one of refining the beam so that it doesn't take in such a wide swath of cars and trucks."
Conflict of interest?
But Petaluma's Savano has questioned Rude's motivation because of his appearance promoting the GPS tracking device on the company website.
In a telephone interview, Rude countered that the company contacted him after the case started, and that he receives no money for his appearance. As a former enforcement officer and ambulance driver, his motivation comes from having "seen too many times how teens are killing themselves all over this country [by] being irresponsible behind the wheel," he says.
Drexel University's Mr. Filler says Rude's appearance in the company website video does call into question the motives of the defense. But he also notes that the police have an interest in not having radar challenged because speeding tickets are a major source of revenue for small towns.
Some experts say no legal precedents will be set in the case, but that attitudes about the two technologies could be affected.
"This seems to me to be a battle of credibility, radar versus GPS," says Norman Garland, a law professor at Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles.
Speed Cameras Going Green? Redflex is considering Solar Powered Cameras.
Sometime in the not-so-distant future, the photo-enforcement camera that snaps a picture of you speeding along an Arizona freeway may be powered by the sun.
Scottsdale-based Redflex Traffic Solutions Inc. is in the process of developing a photo- enforcement camera equipped with a solar panel that would allow it to operate independently of the power grid.
Redflex, which has a contract to supply the state's traffic cameras, is evaluating a bid from a solar-engineering firm to design the new technology. But company representatives are tight-lipped about the project.
"Until it is tested to our satisfaction, we're not going to media comment on it," said company spokeswoman Shoba Vaitheeswaran.
A Department of Public Safety official acknowledged that solar photo-enforcement cameras have been discussed; however, the agency is not making any plans until the state's budget battle is settled.
"Right now, it's really difficult to do long-term planning," said Lt. Jeff King, who oversees photo enforcement for DPS. He said the agency cannot sign off on any expansion until it knows whether it will have the manpower needed to handle additional cameras.
King said that because there have been a number of fatal collisions on U.S. 93, it is among several stretches of highway where DPS hopes to expand photo enforcement, though he said several areas in metro Tucson are the most immediate safety concerns for DPS.
In the past three years, a high number of people have been injured or killed on the highway between Wickenburg and Interstate 40 toward Las Vegas, with at least eight fatal collisions and about 60 injury-causing crashes annually, according to DPS.
Vaitheeswaran said Redflex has no immediate plans for the cameras.
"We have investigated the use of solar power around that area (U.S. 93) . . . but there's no plan to go forward at this time," she said.
She said the cameras are "not roadworthy" yet, and emphasized that Redflex is exploring the solar option along with a host of other green innovations. She said Redflex has used solar panels before on some of its fixed cameras in California.
"Until it becomes very clear who our partner would be and what the technology would be, we're not going to be rolling anything out (in Arizona)," she said.
Tempe-based Arizona Solar Concepts has an agreement with Redflex to design and possibly assemble the solar cameras, said owner Clint Taylor, who would not discuss the program in further detail due to a "non-disclosure" contract with Redflex.
When asked about plans to install as many as 50 cameras on U.S. 93, Taylor said, "That's exactly what I'm not supposed to be disclosing."
Taylor's company has contracted a portion of its design work to Solar Engineering Group, an ASU-student-run venture.
David Spotts, student president of Solar Engineering Group, said he could not talk specifically about the Redflex project.
But he said that in general the idea of putting them along U.S. 93 makes sense.
"That's a high-speed freeway, so why not put cameras out there to bust everybody?" Spotts said.
Using solar power would allow more cameras to be installed and operated more cheaply, because they would not have to be connected to a power source, he added.
In its agreement with the state, Redflex receives up to $28.75 out of every $165 paid to the state by motorists photographed speeding on highways. Redflex, in turn, pays costs associated with installing and operating the machines. The contract is estimated to be worth about $20 million a year to Redflex.
Redflex also has contracts with cities and towns throughout the state, including Peoria, Tempe and Chandler.
American Traffic Solutions, a competing photo-enforcement company based in Scottsdale, has contracts with many of the Valley's larger cities - Mesa, Scottsdale and Glendale. A spokesman would not disclose if it is doing similar research.
Several people involved with Redflex's solar research say efforts to develop new cameras could be complicated by the controversy surrounding photo enforcement.
Legislators first approved the statewide camera program in July 2008 and gave DPS a mandate to install 100 fixed and portable cameras. But the program was suspended by DPS in January following anti-photo- enforcement protests and efforts by legislators to ban the cameras.
At the time, only 36 fixed locations and 42 mobile cameras had been put in place. DPS has since restarted the program, and it installed two additional cameras in February, said Bart Graves, a spokesman for DPS.
New to Australia Flash2Pass Garage Remote Controls for Cars and Motorcycles. Used by Harley Davidson dealers in the USA. Tired of fumbling around for the remote control? Flash2Pass transmitter sits under the hood and is activated by 2 quick flashes of your headlights. No more batteries to go flat in your remote. Visit the Australian dealer distributor at
What on earth is wrong with Victorians allowing a State Government to do what they are doing to the general population? A small Australian state with 5 million residents, where 2.86 million warrants and Court orders exist for unpaid speed camera fines and tollway fines. Are Victorians so distracted with football that there civil liberties no longer matter? WAKE-UP!!!
The down side of nabbing the majority of drivers with a speeding fine is the inevitable rise in disqualified drivers and a steady rise in the road toll.
Concern has been raised by both supporters and opponents of speed cameras that the exponential growth in speeding offences detected will lead to a large increase in the number of people disqualified from driving, which causes severe economic consequences for those involved and may also encourage unlicensed (and therefore uninsured) driving.
Come to Victoria - The Speed Camera Mugging State of Australia. "If you come to our state with a drivers licence, we'll make sure you leave without one."
Do Speed Cameras save lives? Statistics from around the world and Australia suggest not! Why? Because speed cameras target the vast majority of law abiding citizens who travel a few kms over the speed limit, not the true causes of road fatalities! Speed Cameras are "fools gold" for governments looking for a quick fix solution to road deaths, but prove a bonanza for cash strapped governments looking to reduce police manpower and raise revenue. Add to this mix speed detection technology that is inaccurate, low speed tolerance limits and a court system that is blind to these problems and you have a recipe for disaster.
Road Patrol Cops Replaced by Cameras
Why do you think speed cameras are so appealing to governments? Simple, speed cameras are cheaper to run than real police. Speed cameras don't ask for pay rises or let off drivers with a warning - Real cops do! It's based on a false economy to save money and raise revenue. What the community gets is a rise in road deaths and a bunch of young road hoons running the streets like a scene out of the movie "Mad Max" Don't believe it? I live in Western Australia where the Police Traffic Branch was amalgamated with the local suburban police stations. So who looks after the streets now? Basically, its a free for all.
Microwave Radar Perimeter Protection - Infrared Perimeter Barriers - Surveillance Cameras - Surveillance Gear - Digital Video Recording Systems Available in Australia
The Editor of The Observer wrote (17th July 2005):
"Last week, the government announced a three-month moratorium on further speed cameras. This was partly in response to the work of engineer Paul Smith [Safe Speed's founder], who has spent 5,000 hours finding out why, though the number of cameras has risen exponentially, there has been no corresponding reduction in traffic fatalities. He concludes that, far from acting as a deterrent, speed cameras take responsibility for safe speed away from drivers, and their concentration from the road. Cameras are as likely to cause an accident as to prevent one." (link)
