Which is exactly why it's so important to follow through. You are not doing this just for you but for all of us and I for one am very grateful.
framtech,
Aug 10, 7:05am
Deny the offence and ask for a full disclosure from the cop, don't pay the fine what ever you do and go to court with your eroad.
fungles,
Aug 10, 7:11am
No, do it yourself, a lawyer wouldnt likely touch it, and even if, hes too expensive. Judges are helpful to you and will overlook anything you do wrong. I have gotten off seatbelt and speed camera offences, purely because the system is under resourced and really want to be rid of you as quickly as possible. Lawyers understand valuable court time, but we dont. so ramble on as much as you can get away with. they will dismiss it.
fungles,
Aug 10, 7:20am
Also, calibration speed gun data is an internet fantasy. The police calibrate them before each shift with a tuning fork. this is the accepted method to prove the radar is fit for purpose. These radars are very clever, I used to repair them. They have a self test routine as well, so if they say you are speeding, and you werent, its down to operator error, this you cannot prove unless your paper work/video is up to snuff, and will create enough doubt. DNA tests are similar, as in they are also accepted without question, but can also be false through human processing errors, and also difficult to prove.
utwo,
Aug 10, 7:26am
The weight of the truck has no bearing on its speed down the hill.
fungles,
Aug 10, 7:29am
For the technically inclined, The transmit frequency that is directed at traffic is the same frequency used to demodulate the received doppler shift, therefore, any drift in base frequency cancels, but the doppler shift, ie the speed of the target remains the same, so theoretically, there is nothing to claibrate. Reflections, fog and rain can cause false readings by virtue of the radar being unable to compute the speed of the patrol car at the instant of capture, therefore wrongly adding/subtracting the net speed.
fungles,
Aug 10, 7:34am
This unfortunately, makes it almost impossible to jam these things, as any jammer will never be on the same frequency as the radar to transmit an interferrence signal within the very small range that the unit will accept as a valid signal. I have spent considerable time trying to do this.
fungles,
Aug 10, 7:43am
You could try "stealthing" your vehicle, by coating it with a graphite layer as they do the air force with fighter planes. Graphite absorbs microwave energy, and reduces the reflective properties. the Hawk and Stalker machines are set to their minimum sensitivity in NZ to reduce false capture. so this is perhaps the better option. Considering they can reliably detect a small motorbike at over a kilometer, they are still very sensitive.
fungles,
Aug 10, 8:14am
And here is the operators manual for the Stalker obtained under the freedom of Information act.for anyone interested.
Thats becasue a radar is a far more accurate measure of speed than GPS. Your story about the Cop that did a u turn in front of you 25 years ago is much better.
klrider,
Aug 10, 5:51pm
Cop using equipment to do his job and he’s apparently a psychopath, yup, now about that cop that did the u turn in front of you.
esky-tastic,
Aug 10, 6:18pm
The bush lawyer force is strong in this thread.
flack88,
Aug 10, 8:24pm
Hamish you have to fight the fkers then.Tony Bridgeman was the hiway troll that did the U turn in the Buller Gorge and took out a couple of bikers on Ducatis it was not Jazz!
tamarillo,
Aug 11, 3:02am
Per snoopy, it will be traffic court which has no lawyer prosecutor merely a copper and you're talking to JP not a judge. Think of it like a small claims hearing. Idea is to keep lawyer out so they are very used to people representing themselves.
harm_less,
Aug 11, 3:30am
The problem still remains with the vehicle's headlights. They are designed to focus rays so give a great return to microwaves, unless you have flip-up ones like the older RX-7s had.
hamishcookie,
Aug 25, 3:46am
Update for those that were interested, requested a court date which I have now received but going to have a day off work and a 4 hour round trip just to put in a not guilty plea then will have to take another day off for the hearing. they don't like to make things easy do they!
msigg,
Aug 25, 4:20am
You reap what you sow.
esky-tastic,
Aug 25, 4:36am
Yes, I did warn you of the issue with (unfortunately) having to travel some distance to the relevant court
fungles,
Aug 25, 5:43am
They make it difficult in order to actively discourage people to have defended hearings, its also to do with their lack of resources. if more "offenders" did this, the whole system would need to be revamped, and police would need a much higher standard of evidence too.
supernova2,
Aug 25, 8:13am
Check with the Court - your local one will do - as you may be able to enter the not guilty plea in writing so not have to attend for that part of the process. If you are permitted to do it in writing make sure you send it by email so you have a trail as you can almost guarantee that a posted letter will get lost in the system.
jantar,
Aug 25, 9:35am
The tuning fork test merely establishes that the unit is operating. It is not a true calibration.
If the police try to use a tuning fork as a method of calibration then you have a defence right there that the radar is not working properly. It measured a tuning fork that had no absolute motion and showed a speed of whatever. That in turn means that if there is something near the front of your vehicle vibrating then it will affect the speed reading.
fungles,
Oct 17, 3:12am
No you dont. you are talking nonsense, read the operating proceedures i have linked to above.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.