Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Prolaser III, Prolaser IV, Prolite+
andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:47 am

Hi Guys,

Can anyone tell me what the situation is when a officer tags someone driving past while stationary, with obstructions between the alleged speeding vehicle and the Prolaser III? Does the situation change if light-medium traffic at night was introduced?

Below is my current situation.
Google maps link
http://g.co/maps/wfvtv

Allegedly shot on princess highway heading east, at a distance of 215m while stationary in the service lane between garden rd and princess highway. My concern apart from the entire thing being a fairy tale was the obstructing trees in between.

Thoughts?

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8242
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Hardy » Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:33 am

You are absolutely right that obstructing trees will interfere with the operation of a laser speed measuring device. So the police will need to say that they measured your speed without any such interference.
Where were the police when you first saw them?
And where were you when you first saw them?

andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:56 am

The vehicle was parked exactly where point A is via as google maps link. I saw them as soon as i came over the hill from the west.

The preliminary breif says that he detected my speed as i was departing his location at 215m. Jusging by this story i find it difficult for him to have had line of sight due to the trees and other vehicles as i was in the very right lane with vehicles to my left and behind me.

If the officer gives evidence in the form of just simply saying "no there was interference" will this simply be taken by the court as the truth?

What do you think sean?

rustyone
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby rustyone » Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:56 am

sorry andrew, your screwed, if the officer stands up in court he will say that he had no obstruction in he's field of veiw when your vehical was targetted, he will also then go on to explane that the device had a good lock and speed display reading. Even if a tree is in the way the pro laser compensates and waits for the 0.01 of a second of clear signal to give its reading.
:(

Boki
Posts: 918
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 3:52 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Boki » Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:16 pm

Has anyone tried the "it wasn't my car" trick (with 3 witnesses) when getting caught >350m going 60km/h on a non-consistant road with medium traffic?

andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:20 pm

Ive kicked myself in the butt by putting this off for so long (court next week)

Im just so frustrated because im being pinned for something i didnt do. The story is that there was a pair of cars to mu my left speeding and i suspect the police officer couldnt catch up and pinned me for it. The strangest thing is that the officer pulled me over some 5mins later, going the other direction after i had u-turned.

I know the officer will simply say he had yo catch up to me and thats why it took so long but i know truthfully its a lie.

Im running out of options and dont know what to do. I feel as though im (or my lawyers) are missing something because i wasnt speeding and theres no way out.

Forgive my rant i am quite overwhelmed

andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:22 pm

Boki wrote:Has anyone tried the "it wasn't my car" trick (with 3 witnesses) when getting caught >350m going 60km/h on a non-consistant road with medium traffic?


I suspect the word of a officer > anyone elses. Sighs

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8242
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Hardy » Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:32 pm

If the laser reading was interrupted by a tree or something, the police would have no reading. Police allege a reading because they got one, not because they make it up. You will get nowhere by claiming they must be lying - unless you have clear proof they are lying. You might get somewhere if you claim they have made a mistake.

Sounds like you are trying to show that you were not speeding. That tactic doesn't need a lawyer - you can just stand in the witness box and explain that you weren't speeding and see how that flies. A lawyer is not going to be useful unless they are planning something a bit more complicated than that.

andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:46 pm

Hardy wrote:If the laser reading was interrupted by a tree or something, the police would have no reading. Police allege a reading because they got one, not because they make it up. You will get nowhere by claiming they must be lying - unless you have clear proof they are lying. You might get somewhere if you claim they have made a mistake.


My aim here is to indeed find proof to prove they are lying. Whether thats possible is the big question im trying to get at. I know youve heard it a million times when ppl say they wernt speeding but its the honest truth! So there must be something im missing to prove this! But i know its not what i know Its what i an proove. sure But its not what i know. its what i can prove.

The officers has a statement and a laser reading. I only have my own statement which as you pointed out here. its not going to do very much.
Hardy wrote:you can just stand in the witness box and explain that you weren't speeding and see how that flies.


Hardy wrote:A lawyer is not going to be useful unless they are planning something a bit more complicated than that.


This is really what im trying to find out as well. Does anything jump out to you in this situation Sean?

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8242
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Hardy » Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:08 pm

You have it back the front. Perhaps you should read my website. It is not your version of events that really matters. Unless you are seeking vindication, it is futile trying to prove you are innocent. Most Magistrates have a poor track record of dismissing a charge because of "reasonable doubt". I always start on the assumption that my clients have nothing to say that will help their case and from that point I work out how to win. So we are not considering the relevant information. Because you are not used to defending traffic matters you are looking at the problem from your own point of view, so you won't recognize the important information in the brief or the charge and summons which are relevant only when you look at the problem from the correct perspective.

rustyone
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby rustyone » Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:06 am

wait a minute, you say he didn't stop you when he detected you? but stopped you some 5 minutes latter when you where returning via the same road. how did the officer know it was the same car that he pinged before, or did you admit to some thing he asked? where you speeding on the return trip which is what made him pull you over? I'm going down the parth of possible wrong identity here, you could say that bob drove your car to the shop and you drove back leaving bob at the shop. how sure is the officer that it was the same car or same diver is my question?

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8242
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Hardy » Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:55 am

Rustyone, you need to see the police brief to find out what the case is that the accused person has to defend. So it's useless trying to work out how to defend a case when you don't know what the case is or whether the proceedings are even valid. There are all sorts of possibilities as to how the police identified the driver of the vehicle they say they detected speeding. But if they lost sight of the car even for a 20 seconds that could cast doubt on their evidence.

andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:27 pm

rustyone wrote:wait a minute, you say he didn't stop you when he detected you? but stopped you some 5 minutes latter when you where returning via the same road. how did the officer know it was the same car that he pinged before, or did you admit to some thing he asked?


You are correct. I was driving east, and spotted the police vehicle parked on my left in the service lane next to gardens rd (please refer to googlemaps link in OP) and continued driving east. 2 cars flew past me and continued forward. at this stage there were still no sirens or "red&blue" lights in my rear view mirror. I do quite alot of rear view checks when i drive. I proceeded to do a u-turn and had come back up the same strip of road passing where i had originally saw the parked police car. He was no longer there.

About 2minutes later, I noticed red and blue lights behind me. Thats when i pulled over and he started questioning me about what happened. my responses were "i dont know", he kept repeating the questions in different ways and i responded with "you can keep asking me but i honestly dont know"

He asked me why i was racing and i responded with You got me going down that way? (indicating east, the opposite direction we were facing). I questioned the officer on who he thought i was racing? he didnt choose to answer and responded with a SIGH. All this is included in the "Statement made by accused".

Under "Statement of alleged facts"

All he has simply included was "the accused vehicle was speed checked on prolaser III and intercepted. Nothing about going which direction nothing.

rustyone wrote:how sure is the officer that it was the same car or same diver is my question?


He cant be sure, because it wasnt me! But this is also why im frustrated because im not stupid, i know to a degree how this works. He has a statement saying it was me, he also had a speed reading (even though its not time stamped or directly references my vehicle in anyway. Which i also know legally he dosnt even need) but all i have is a statement saying it wasnt me. But the court will side with him because his a honest cop (yeh right).

Ultimately it sounds like i have to challenge the accuracy of the laser which includes expert testimonies and that is big $$$$ and i honestly dont have that much to throw. It just paints me that it seems like im at a ultimatum here.

rustyone
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby rustyone » Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:14 pm

Hardy wrote: But if they lost sight of the car even for a 20 seconds that could cast doubt on their evidence.

but like you have said here Sean, this is what i was trying to convay, this thing along with others would raise doubt if the storey is told right in court would it not?

andrew
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby andrew » Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:33 pm

rustyone wrote:
Hardy wrote: But if they lost sight of the car even for a 20 seconds that could cast doubt on their evidence.

but like you have said here Sean, this is what i was trying to convay, this thing along with others would raise doubt if the storey is told right in court would it not?


Hypothetically, If the informant said he didnt pull me over on the other side and he pulled me over straight away. What case do i have since the brief dost mention any of this either? Even though its the honest truth?

rustyone
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby rustyone » Fri Apr 27, 2012 4:11 pm

you put it to him in court, and if he says yes that is possibly what happen, then you keep shooting holes in his statement made to the court.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8242
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Hardy » Fri Apr 27, 2012 4:31 pm

He is likely to have a corroborator at court who backs him up on everything he says. So getting them to contradict one another would help you - on the other hand if they back each other up 100% then that doesn't help.

BN2
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:18 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby BN2 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:21 pm

Prolaser III or Lite will not lock on and give a reading if there are visual obstructions.

Slattery
Posts: 352
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:24 pm

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Slattery » Wed May 02, 2012 6:16 pm

That's correct and the position you are saying the police car was in and where you were travelling, there is easily enough gap between the trees to check your speed for quite a significant time.

Smiling Assassin
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 8:11 am

Re: Prolaser III with visual obstructions?

Postby Smiling Assassin » Fri May 11, 2012 11:17 am

Was it marked police car or unmarked police car?
How did you see the police car in the service lane on the opposite side of the road?
There's always coppers down on Princes Hwy on Fri & Sat nights!


Return to “Lasers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest