Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Yes it was a mobile van
for Alex Hughes
Yes a mobile van
In the photos concerned the speed of the vehicle and distance is shown only on 1 of the photos. But the car is on a rise and you can't see the wheels on the road of the photo where the speed is indicated, so there is no way that I can measure / verify the distance of the vehicle.
Can I argue that the evidence is therefore not admissible evidence on the basis that there is no way of verifying the accuracy of the equipment ?
The NOIP mentions a LTI 20.20 UltraLyte 1000 laser speed measuring device and the Lastec recording system
The LTI 20.20 UL1000 is notoriously difficult to use and the operator has to ensure that it is properly calibrated, checked and operatored. The operator has to take into account such things as a clear line of sight, break in the beam and cosine effect. These things can determine whether or not the speed reading is reliable. In the event that an unreliable reading is provided the court could be persuaded to dismiss the charge. The only way you will really know whether the operator has taken the correct steps is by pleading not guilty, raising the issue of unreliability as part of your defence and calling the operator to give evidence about the device. You will have to cross-examine the operator about the use and if you can undermine his/her evidence then you could argue that reading should not be admitted as evidence. Additionally you should lodge a Defence Case Statement raising the issue and asking for calibration, operating and engineers reports to ascertain whether the machine was functioning properly. Once you obtain this information you can decide whether there is any merit in your argument or not.
Thank you for your advice and guidance.
I think I have the basis for a defence which whilst costly to me in terms of time, to pursue, and potentially costly to lose, but the court may well drop the charge before it gets to court as it is costly to pursue as well and such a waste of public funds. I have committed to defending myself on principle, in that I see this as just a money making scam. I currently have a clean licence and am seeking to preserve that.