How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Alice H Your Own Question
Alice H
Alice H, Solicitor/Partner
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 2850
Experience:  Partner in national law firm
Type Your Law Question Here...
Alice H is online now

With regards ***** ***** where a laser camera in a vehicle

This answer was rated:

With regards ***** ***** where a laser camera in a vehicle is being used , is it the case that the officer must be able see 400 metres in order to judge whether a vehicle is likely to be speeding or can they just scan for vehicles and hoover up whatever comes in ?
My name is***** and I'm happy to help with your question today. I need to ask you some preliminary questions to be able to help you.

Is this a mobile van?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

Yes it was a mobile van

Customer: replied 3 years ago.

for Alex Hughes


Yes a mobile van

The guidance on 'targetting' can be found in the Association of Chief Police Offices Guidance 2011 - 2015.

Unlike other criminal offences there is no requirement to form 'reasonable suspicion' that a car is speeding. A camera can be pointed at any moving vehice to see whether it is breaking the speed limit.

I can see the point your making and you might be able to challenge the reliability of the recorded speed - but the need to form a view about the speed of the vehicle beforehand is a moot point.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

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 ?

Do you know what type of device was used?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

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.

Alice H and other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

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.





My pleasure - good luck with this. Alex