|
Speed
Camera Law
Mobile
Speed Cameras
Mobile
speed cameras are usually mounted in
cars which are parked on the side of
the road. A radar beam is directed at
an angle across the line of traffic to
detect the speed of vehicles passing in
either direction. If it detects a
vehicle travelling over the threshold
speed, the device will take a
photograph of the offending vehicle.
The registered owner of the vehicle
will then receive a traffic
infringement in the mail. The owner has
the option of paying the fine,
objecting to the fine, nominating a
driver or explaining that the driver is
unable to be nominated.
Because
mobile speed cameras operate on radar,
they are prone to the many of the
typcial problems that hand-held radar
devices suffer. If another vehicle is
in the picture, it is possible that the
other vehicle may have interfered with
the radar reading. Same applies for
large reflective objects such as metal
signs or large metal objects like
trucks.
See
also: How
mobile speed cameras
work
|
Fixed
Speed Cameras
Fixed
speed cameras are mounted on
poles, bridges or other
structures by the roadway.
Most fixed speed cameras
operate using piezo strips
which are imbedded in the
roadway. The strips of
chrystaline material react to
the pressure of the passing
vehicle and measure the time
it takes for a vehicle to pass
between two points on the road
surface. If the vehicle's
speed exceeds the threshold, a
photo is taken of the
offending vehicle.
Piezo
strips are able to determine
which lane the offending
vehicle is travelling in, so
the fact that other vehicles
are on the road or in the
photo is not usually a problem
for the
prosecution.
See
also: How
do fixed speed cameras
work.
|
|
Defences
|
Important
Update: Speed camera
cases
If
you are facing licence
suspension for any offence
detected by a speed camera,
you may not have to lose your
licence. In most cases I can
save your licence.
Click
here.
|
If
your licence is at risk, then it is
usually worthwhile to take the case the
court because it is always possible to
avoid licence loss if the case is
properly handled.
In
many situations it is not easy to
defend speed camera cases. Sometimes
expert evidence is relied upon to cast
doubt on the accuracy of the speed
reading. In almost every case it is not
necessary for drivers to prove what
speed they were travelling at. The
police have the obligation of proving
the case against the defendant. Many
cases are won because the police fail
to achieve that. If you are wondering
if it is worthwhile taking your fine to
court, you will find the answer by
asking yourself if you can afford not
to take it to court. Unless you can get
around happily without driving a motor
vehicle, then generally you will need
to take the matter to court to achieve
a better outcome.
Mobile Speed Camera Set-up Guidelines.
Paragraph 2.2.1 of the Mobile Cameras Policy Manual states:
To maintain community confidence in the speed camera initiative, it is
important for the operational use of the devices to be seen as fair and
reasonable. Under no circumstances are speed camera vehicles,
tripods or flash units to be disguised by signs, logos, breakdown of
vehicle (eg. boot open or spare wheel / jack visible etc), tree
branches, lamp posts, dust bins or any other means that would generate public perceptions of sly operations.
I am
sometimes asked if a breach of the above guideline will afford a good
defence to a speed camera charge. The short answer is that it
will not. Bonnet open.
When
prosecuting a speed camera charge, the police must prove that it has
been operated according to law. The relevent law is regulation 303 of
the Road Safety (General) Regulations 1999.
The only provision that touches on the issue of compliance
with guidelines is regulation 303(b)(i) which states that certain
devices (i.e. mobile speed camers) must be used in accordance
with operating instructions approved by a testing officer.
The testing officer's operating instructions for the Gatsometer MRC System mobile speed camera can be downloaded here.
The law says the testing
officer's operating instructions must be complied with. However, they
do not adopt, refer to or incorporate any of the matters mentioned in paragraph 2.2.1 of the Mobile Cameras Policy
Manual.
The operating
instructions relate to matters concerning accuracy of the device and
correct data collection. They do not relate to the fairness of its operation.
There is no
law which requires the police to comply with paragraph 2.2.1 of the
Policy Manual. When the police prosecute a person for a speed camera
offence, they do not need to adduce any evidence in court that
paragraph 2.2.1 or any other paragraph of the Policy Manual has been
complied with. The policy manual is never tendered in evidence by the
prosecution. Compliance with it is irrelevant to proof of the
offence.
Even if a
defendant satisfies a court that paragraph 2.2.1 has not been complied
with, this does not prevent the police from proving the speeding
offence occurred. The driver would need to go further and show that
non-compliance with the Policy Manual or any owners' manual or
operators'
manual might have caused the speed measurement reading to be
incorrect. See Ozbinay v. Crowley (1993) 17 MVR 176, Supreme Court of
Victoria, where the court held that non-compliance with the
manufacturer's operators manual was not a ground for dismissing charges
unless there was further evidence to show that the non-compliance
caused an erroneous reading for this defendant. In speeding cases
defendants may adduce evidence to show that there is reasonable doubt
as to the accuracy of the speed measurement, but they will most likely
be wasting their time if they rely solely on the police failure to
comply with the policy manual without linking that failure to a
possible error in the measurement.
If your
vehicle was photographed at a time when you believe guideline 2.2.1 was
not being complied with, you might decide to complain to the Traffic
Camera Office and see if it will withdraw the fine. The TCO probably
won't help you because the camera operator is unlikely to agree that
they
operated the camera in breach of para 2.2.1, and the TCO never
withdraws a fine if there is a dispute about the facts of the case.
Don't be too disheartened though. There are often better ways to win a speed camera case.
|
