REAL TEST OF SPEED RADAR GUN BEING PROPERLY CALIBRATED:
Ken writes:
However, the real test of certified calibration, is the record of when the antennas were last sent to the lab for testing, and when the lab’s test rig was also tested. It’s interesting to see what happens when this evidence is asked for in trial, because a typical cop won’t think to bring a copy of either of these documents, or even know if and when his department sent the antenna out for testing. If the rules of court require testing of “scientific measurement devices,” and you as the defendant openly challenge the admissibility of the evidence, then the onus is on the cop to prove it meets the state’s standard.
COP MUST ALSO ESTABLISH PROBABLE CAUSE
Even if this paperwork is good to go, national standards for speed measurement training require the officer to be able to visually estimate the speed of a vehicle to establish probable cause (which requires initial training and then ongoing refresher training) prior to using a measurement device. NHTSA has a radar training standard which is obtainable with a simple FOIA request form and a small fee for the copy. For the same reason the police cannot wantonly take blood samples from members of the public to find out if they’re using drugs, a speed measurement device is a secondary means of taking evidence after the officer already has suspicion that the law is being broken.
This probable cause is based on something called a tracking history, or basically, the officer’s assessment of the speed of the suspect vehicle and an evaluation of whether anything might interfere with the measurement. If the officer’s training does not meet state standards, or more commonly, the officer hasn’t received refresher training in the appropriate time frame from a certified instructor, the officer’s tracking history cannot be used to establish probable cause, no matter how much experience the officer has or how wonderful and calibrated the RADAR device is.
Without probable cause, the officer has no foundation to use a scientific measuring device.
A COP is NOT SUPPOSED TO JUST SIT BEHIND A BUSH WITH RADAR GUN AIMED AT PASSING CARS: NEED PROBABLE CAUSE
A cop cannot legally leave the RADAR on and then just wait until a big number appears as a reason to throw on the lights and sirens – they have to suspect it was your car and estimate it is travelling at a certain speed (typically within 5 mph of actual speed), and then and only then can they measure your speed with a device. It’s harder to challenge, but asking the police about this process can occasionally result in the officer admitting they haven’t established probable cause prior to using the radar, or else they may claim to have done it in a way that makes it circumstantially questionable (like they claim to have estimated your speed in their rear view mirror while in freeway traffic when your car was just a quarter inch blob among dozens of others).
http://skattertech.com/2011/02/how-my-smart-phone-got-me-out-of-a-speeding-ticket-in-traffic-court/
------------------------------------------------------
Chris Edwards writes:
As a former law enforcement officer in the State of Florida, I can tell you that the GPS information did not really play a major part int he decision. You were however smart by listening up and calling the officer out. When I was on the road, I kept detailed records of every radar training school I went to along with a calibration log. If I did not calibrate my unit, and I stopped a car with it, I would mmediately let them off with a verbal warning (mostly because the unit was calibrated the day before so I would be sure they were speeding but due to my laziness, they get a free pass). The key s, you proved the officer had no evidence. You also showed that he also does not take care of his equipment and may not even know how to use it properly since he can not recall the school he asted attended. This means his unit could have been defective, or he could have had the system on the wrong setting causing it to look like you were going faster than you were. The Google tracks did throw out there that you had done your own homework and had come up with some form of proof that you were not speeding. If you did not have the GPS data, you most likely would have still gotten off due to his lack of evidence.
