‘Cops Pulled Me over for Going 132 in a 110’

Tekon on 19/02/2023 - 09:20
Last edited 19/02/2023 - 09:34 by 1 other user

Please note this is NOT my own post or situation. Posted here to prompt discussion

“Cops pulled me over for going 132 in a 110

However, I had the cruise control set at 110 and my dashcam clocked me at 107 is it possible their scanner is incorrect? because I don't speed. And the cops indirectly called me a liar.

Added video

https://reddit.com/link/115cr02/video/k5nj3nk9nxia1/player “

Just reading this post on Reddit. Brings up interesting questions regarding the validity of dashcam speed measurements and the admissibility of dashcams as evidence in court against a speeding fine.

As an aside it’s a bit terrifying that a copper can charge you with speeding and, if you don’t have some sort of video evidence yourself, you have to accept it. 132 in a 110 is an immediate 3 month suspension in Victoria at least.

Automotive

Comments

  • Tekon on 19/02/2023 - 09:21
    +1

    Please note this is NOT my own post or situation. Posted here to prompt discussion

    Full post available here - https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/115cr02/cops_pul…

  • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 09:28
    -2

    And? This is obviously some sort of anomaly. We don’t often hear of speeding fines with driver EVIDENCE of not speeding, not just the driver saying “no I wasn’t”. You have the right to contest a fine in court for a reason.

    Maybe the cop go the car behind, maybe it was out of calibration. If you are unsure, get a couple of GPS devices to ‘calibrate’ your own speedo so you can be reasonably certain that whatever speed you are clocked at is correct.

    • Waltervp on 20/02/2023 - 21:01

      I had similar happen and provided evidence, digital and in writing, printed and downloaded from cam, complete with raw data and Police just said very nice but we only trust our officially calibrated devices! I was booked doing 58 in 50 ….. unjustly imho about 10 years ago in Tasmania. Not a huge amount but i felt very cheated.

      • Aliensf on 22/02/2023 - 16:33
        +1

        You should have challenged that in court.

      • kiwiyonip on 18/03/2023 - 21:07

        same with me, I was in cruise control, most probably around 115 but not even reaching 120, but I got clocked 123, so either my dashboard is faulty or QLD's shitty cameras. pretty sure the car I was following got penalised too, damn QLD revenue office!

  • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 09:30
    +14

    Since you have dashcam video from the time of the alleged offence, your speed can be calculated definitively from the broken centre line. They have a certain spacing. It is possible to measure the spacing, and the rate they are going past, and determine with confidence whether your speed was 107 or 132.

  • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 09:36
    +6

    If I was a judge or jury I would find a person who had a dashcam of the alleged incident showing a GPS-derived speed of 107 not guilty. Its pretty hard to rig that.

    • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 09:53
      +2

      It’s not that hard to doctor video footage.

      • Tekon on 19/02/2023 - 10:01
        +1

        This was the other thought my pessimistic side had. For example on Blackvue dashcams the speed reading is contained within a rectangular black border at the bottom of the screen. I do not think it would be too difficult to transpose that rectangle from x point in time to another one, basically making it look like you weren’t speeding. Literally would just need to cut and paste the video with basic editing tools.

        That said, this dashcam has a transparent background over the speedo so it must be much more difficult, especially with the lane markings running underneath the numbers.

        • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 10:06

          Slow the video by whatever percentage. Shouldn’t be too obvious if you do the transition to slow well enough and don’t go too silly with the alteration. Transition to regular speed as you slow down to be pulled over etc. Then crop out the offending numbers completely. Do the maths on the line on the road to determine speed instead.

          • Tekon on 19/02/2023 - 10:14
            +1

            @Euphemistic: Oh yep didn’t think of that one. Have to be a brave person to risk changing a speeding fine to a tampering with evidence offence though!

            • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 10:19
              +1

              @Tekon: Ooh yeah, I’m definitely not doctoring video footage to get off a speeding fine. Just after all the green screen/video edits you see on social media it’s pretty obvious it can’t be that difficult.

        • singlemalt72 on 20/02/2023 - 08:49
          +1

          That being said, the dashcam is an uncalibrated piece of equipment whereas the police device is calibrated (though it may not have been used properly). The distance/time method as used however, is a reliable approximation if the magistrate accepts the dashcam video footage.

    • serpserpserp on 19/02/2023 - 13:50
      +2

      You would also think that the cop car would have dash cam rolling that could be used as evidence to test if the speed camera is working properly.

    • bhubb18 on 20/02/2023 - 09:12

      On my older dashcam, the GPS data is just recorded as a .txt file which is then added to the video (after I guess the software does calculations?), so definitely able to be played with.

  • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 09:41
    +2

    Please note this is NOT my own post or situation. Posted here to prompt discussion

    Well that's boring.

    As an aside I always thought that 110 zones were on dual carriageway. TIL.

    • pegaxs on 19/02/2023 - 09:44
      +4

      Come on mate… you know it's always "a guy I know/friend/dad/sister/wife/son/etc…" that commit offences. Never OP.

      • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 09:45
        +5

        My bad. I missed church this morning and now this. Might go back to bed.

      • Tekon on 19/02/2023 - 10:02
        +7

        It was my dog’s girlfriend

    • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 09:46
      +2

      The all-knowing internet says the default country road speed limit in WA is 110.

      • Nugs on 19/02/2023 - 09:49

        Same in SA
        .

        • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 09:53

          No, its not. In SA its 100.

          • Nugs on 19/02/2023 - 10:12

            @GordonD: ah crap, it was 'a while ago'
            "Within South Australia (and in fact throughout Australia) the
            maximum default speed limit outside a built-up area is 100 km/h. "
            good thing I haven't been outside the metro area for a while
            .

    • boomramada on 19/02/2023 - 10:29

      It is 110km/h, that's Brand Hwy, https://www.google.com/maps/place/31%C2%B004'26.3%22S+115%C2…

  • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 09:43

    WA, eh?

  • Tomcruise on 19/02/2023 - 09:44
    +2

    Take it to Court.

    The offender could go directly to the Cop Shop and Speak with the Officers superior and show/advise of the evidence and they may not wish to proceed.

    The HWP crew are a C**!! of a Unit and do not like being questioned even pushback to Superiors.

  • Leadfoot6 on 19/02/2023 - 09:44

    Just another example of speed NOT killing.

    • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 09:55
      +4

      Bit a good example of speed ReVenUe RaISiNg!

  • JimmyF on 19/02/2023 - 09:45
    +7

    Cops pulled me over for going 132 in a 110

    Based on the video, that vehicle wasn't going anywhere near 132 kmh.

    I rarely say this….. but they should fight it!

  • pegaxs on 19/02/2023 - 09:48
    +15

    Copper running around with a reading of 132km/h he got 4 cars ago and using it to randomly book other drivers… "Quotoas not gonna fill themselves"

    Done goofed on this one though, with the car having a dash cam in it.

    • brendanm on 19/02/2023 - 09:56
      +12

      Repercussions for the cop? Zero.

  • Brian McGee on 19/02/2023 - 10:04
    +1

    If you were going on a steep enough downhill when caught then your ground speed could be vastly different to the GPS speed. I know with Waze and my dash cam if I go 80 on a flat level road clear of trees the GPS data says 77-78, but if going down a hill I can get to speedo reading 90 yet GPS still says around 77-78.

    • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 10:07

      How odd.

      • bowlsup on 19/02/2023 - 11:38
        +2

        This is not particularly odd. Satellites are way up high and can only measure point to point - they cannot take account of contours. The same thing exists with land measurements for lot titles etc. A block recorded as 1000 square metres assumes flat land. If the land had an actual (unrealistic) slope of 45 degrees the actual land area would be 1414 square metres.

        • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 11:40

          I'm not disputing the science just the speed variation for road use.

          • pegaxs on 19/02/2023 - 14:10
            +7

            @Muzeeb: We have a GPS speedo calibrator at work and yeah, the list of things we have to do to get accurate readings. Has to be a dead flat, dead straight road. No humps, hollows or corners. Open sky and no buildings or trees. We use it to set the ECU in trucks to get exactly 100km/h on the speed limiters and to make sure they don’t go over.

    • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 10:08
      +3

      Thatd have to be a pretty steep downhill to make 10km/h difference. Maybe someone can do the maths on that.

      Any chance it’s the GPS speed lagging? It does take a few seconds to catch up to changes in speed. Does it work the other way? As in, you maintain the same speedo reading of 80 while the GPS reading drops 10km/h

      • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 10:56

        That'd have to be a pretty steep downhill to make 10km/h difference. Maybe someone can do the maths on that.

        It takes about a 36 degree downgrade to make 132 ground speed read 107 via GPS.

        • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 11:04

          Brian must live in the hills.

      • p1 ama on 19/02/2023 - 12:07
        +4

        Thatd have to be a pretty steep downhill to make 10km/h difference. Maybe someone can do the maths on that.

        Depends on the initial speed because the relationship is not linear.

        Basically, projecting a velocity vector - the "ground component" is adjacent to the descent angle, so you'd need arccos(107/132) = 0.62 radians = 36 degrees (dividing by pi * 180).

        • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 12:16

          This is what I was thinking also but I noticed you rounded up whereas I rounded down.

        • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 12:22

          Cheers. I don’t have a fancy calculator. How’s it work out for 77-78 but 10km/h more on the speedo?

          • p1 ama on 19/02/2023 - 12:29
            +9

            @Euphemistic: arccos(77/87) = 0.48 radians = 28 degrees

            In other words, it's impossibly steep. The steepest street in Australia (possibly the world - there's some debate) is Baldwin St (https://www.drive.com.au/news/the-worlds-steepest-road-20110…), which has a gradient of 1:2.86 at its steepest point. This would be an angle of arctan(1/2.86) = 0.33 radians = 19 degrees.

            This just means that the original proposal is ludicrous.

            • Euphemistic on 19/02/2023 - 14:50
              +1

              @p1 ama: You’re doing great work, it didn’t sound right to me.

            • wisdomtooth on 18/03/2023 - 19:12

              @p1 ama:

              The steepest street in Australia

              Dunedin NZ "in Australia"??

  • oscargamer on 19/02/2023 - 10:19

    Moving mode radars suffer from an effect called double bounce (and other anomalies). You can google it.

    The dash cam footage is very good evidence of a speed different to that detected by the radar and is very admissible.

    Absolutely object to the ticket

    • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 10:49

      Can't see any road signs or buildings for it to double bounce off. There's a couple further up the road, but not where the speed measurement was done.

      No, in this case this is serious fault with the speed measuring device, serious incompetence on the part of the operator, like not realising the screen was displaying a locked-in previous reading, or dishonesty on the part of the police officer. Simply fighting this one in court isn't enough, because any of those would mean other people would be being wrongly booked too.

      • oscargamer on 19/02/2023 - 12:47

        The speed detector reading is deemed to be prima facie evidence of the speed, UNLESS evidence to the contrary is produced to the court.

        The dash cam footage, can and should be produced and the court can work out what speed the driver was doing

  • p1 ama on 19/02/2023 - 12:01
    +1

    As an aside it’s a bit terrifying that a copper can charge you with speeding and, if you don’t have some sort of video evidence yourself, you have to accept it.

    You don't have to accept anything, a cop can charge you with whatever the hell he wants to. The magistrate / judge determines your guilt, not the cop.

    • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 12:37

      The magistrate / judge determines your guilt, not the cop.

      Not for serious traffic offences these days. You get an instant suspension. The penalty applies immediately. Then later you get to argue that you weren't guilty to a magistrate.

      • p1 ama on 19/02/2023 - 21:50
        +1

        It's very concerning that it violates the basic presumption of innocence, however, the reality is that the offences which lead to an immediate suspension are quite rare. E.g. in VIC, it's only if you're driving > 45 km/h above the limit, driving under the influence, or if you try to kill someone with your car.

        All very reasonable to take them off the road immediately as a public safety precaution.

        • Tekon on 20/02/2023 - 15:26
          -1

          Above 25kmh is an immediate suspension in Victoria. 3 months.

          I’ve wondered about this ‘presumption of innocence’ thing with traffic fines. For instance, a cop sees you on your phone scrolling OzB while driving past in his own car. He fines you but doesn’t have any evidence other than his own testimony.

          Clearly in this case it would be a ‘he said she said’ sort of thing in course, and presumably the defendant should be presumed innocent of using their phone unless the cops can provide evidence beyond a pinky promise? How can any phone usage violations be upheld in court unless there is video evidence?

          • Euphemistic on 20/02/2023 - 15:37

            @Tekon: Traffic fines have a different classification, can’t remember what it’s called. As such, the law says you are guilty to streamline the process and prevent a huge number of trivial things wasting magistrates time.

            You can of course elect to go to court, but a police officers word holds more sway than a citizen as they are bound by rules. Yes, that does mean you are screwed if the cooper lies and you have no other evidence. It if the cooper lies (and caught) he gets in big trouble so is suspect not many of them are willing to lie for trivial things for ‘regular’ people they don’t have any beef with.

          • p1 ama on 20/02/2023 - 22:54

            @Tekon:

            Above 25kmh is an immediate suspension in Victoria. 3 months.

            Source?

            • Euphemistic on 21/02/2023 - 05:48

              @p1 ama: Maybe you could check the vicroads website to confirm it.

              • Tekon on 21/02/2023 - 09:35

                @Euphemistic: ^ not difficult

                • p1 ama on 22/02/2023 - 15:06

                  @Tekon:

                  ^ not difficult

                  It's up to the person making the claim to provide the evidence, not vice versa. In any case, the reason I asked is because you are blatantly wrong.

                  https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/licences/drink-driving-drug-…

                  Immediate licence suspension will apply to: a person caught driving 45 km/h or more over the speed limit or 145 km/h or more in a 110 km/h zone

                  • Tekon on 22/02/2023 - 23:21

                    @p1 ama: I feel like you’re either deliberately missing this or are on a phone and haven’t noticed the fourth column.

                    https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-r…

                    Automatic license suspensions are enforced from speeds above 25kmh except in 110 zones where a 3 month suspension applies for speeds above 124kmh.

                    Refer to examples in this post from Hume Police on how these suspensions are applied.

                    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02FuW6ahZRK…

                    • p1 ama on 24/02/2023 - 00:19

                      @Tekon: An "automatic license suspension" is not an immediate suspension.

                      When you get an "automatic" license suspension, you are given a fine by the cop and a set amount of time to pay or contest that fine. You are allowed to continue driving until you either pay the fine, or elect to contest the fine, in which case you can continue driving until you are in court.

                      In other words, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

                      • Tekon on 24/02/2023 - 10:43

                        @p1 ama: If that is the definition of 'immediate suspension' you've been running with, you'd still be wrong. You'll notice none of the drivers in the above FB post who were speeding >45kmh were given a suspension, only an impound and summons. Speeds above 45kmh+ fall into the hoon legislation area of the law and are dealt with differently to normal speeding fines. Only the Magistrates' can hand down the appropriate punishment.

                        Anecdotally, I know of an individual caught going 55kmh over the speed limit in mid-2020 who received an impound and court summons. Except with COVID delays his Magistrates' hearing was not held until late last year. Within that period of time he was legally allowed to continue driving.

                        More recently another person was caught going over somewhere in the 60s and is awaiting a Magistrates' date. Still legally driving around until that date is set where he can be formally suspended.

          • trapper on 02/03/2023 - 13:15

            @Tekon: A cops testimony is evidence though.

  • GordonD on 19/02/2023 - 12:30
    +7

    Anyone who wants to look at the whole conversation on reddit, not just the video, its here:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/115cr02/cops_pul…

    I have written to the WA Police Commissioner saying I think this matter requires investigating. Its not enough for the police to simply drop the charge because the evidence its dodgy is compelling. The equipment, or police officer - whether its his competence or honesty that's the problem - could be doing the same to other innocent members of the public.

    • oscargamer on 19/02/2023 - 12:50
      -7

      Mate…. Really? Speed tickets have been given out due to operator or machine error for ever. Once that error is highlighted, the ticket/charge is withdrawn. End of matter.

      Why are you sooooo concerned about something that you are not directly involved with? What's your agenda?

      • bhubb18 on 20/02/2023 - 09:15
        +1

        Because these claims have immediate negative repercussions and an 'oops sorry haha x' isn't adequate?

  • Frank Murphy on 19/02/2023 - 12:56
    +1

    How do we know the reddit OP is even telling the truth? All we see is a dashcam video of someone doing 107kph. After being asked to post his ticket showing 132kph, that request was conveniently ignored. I'll believe it when all the evidence is presented.

    • AdosHouse on 19/02/2023 - 14:30

      How do we even know Reddit OP was even pinged during that video clip? Only a minute from start to being pulled over. Could easily have been pinged before that start, cop gets back onto road and catches up to them.

  • serpserpserp on 19/02/2023 - 13:47

    You can never overrule a speeding fine. Off to the worst hard labour Gaol on the south western coast of Tassie for this driver.

    • oscargamer on 19/02/2023 - 13:50

      Sarah island is now very pretty and well worth a visit.

      • Muzeeb on 19/02/2023 - 13:55

        That's not SW Tassie though.

        • oscargamer on 19/02/2023 - 17:25
          +1

          How would you describe it's location?

  • leelemon on 19/02/2023 - 16:38
    +2

    The footage you linked doesn't seem like you are going 130. The trees and shrubs would be whipping past you a lot quicker. Here is footage on the autobarn - if you put them side by side, you can see the difference.
    Your dashcam is also clearly working - it picks up when you slowed down and stopped pretty quickly.
    All this in conjunction with your good driving record would look good in court - if it came down to that.

    Cops get stuff wrong sometimes. This one sounds like a prick. Good thing you had a dashcam.

  • cashless on 19/02/2023 - 21:14
    -2

    Get your mate to sue the cop for wilful negligence

  • WT on 20/02/2023 - 15:35
    +2

    Pretty straight forward to take that to court and he will win

    I went to court as a witness, charge was "driving manner of speed: dangerous" which is a pretty significant charge, I believe 12 month is the min suspension + fines. Im not an expert but I do have some relevant experience that is different to regular people which did carry weight

    The cop couldnt get a lock on so couldnt/didnt issue a speeding fine, so had to "trump up a charge". His video basically showed friend flash past out of a corner, cop do illegal U turn and give chase. If the procecutor was smart/had teh time he could have worked out the average speed after the cop did the U turn but you cant go arguing a lesser charge or one that is not being charged.

    Friend walked out of court with a not guilty but had a pretty expensive lawyer bill. Worth it? I dont know, it was about 10k but he needed his license, he was happy to pay it

    We all like to think that our justice system is like on TV, where they do their research and are prepared. In this case the "DA" got caught with his pants down and couldnt even think of much to cross. I have also been on the other end where our barrister didnt ask the right questions that I was prepared for (lost that one), it was going to appeal but we wernt required to go to that

    If I were in this position I would balk at the lawyer fee knowing how much they cost and how straight forward this is. I would represent myself:
    - Verify dash cam speed with phone and another stand alone GPS
    - Go and measure the white lines or road marker distance to verify calculated speed and if its within 1% of the dash cams speed I would represent myself. Present all facts gathered, answer any questions the prosecutor or judge asks and let the judge decide

    Other things I would bring up is your clean driving record (even 5 years is considered enough, the more the better though). Cruise was set and on and you were in no rush, car is 100% standard including wheels and tyre sizes etc and be prepared to question the cop on when/how his radar was last calibrated and if its possible that the speed wasnt reset or of someone else. Just keep in mind youre only needed to prove reasonable doubt

  • skillet on 24/02/2023 - 22:27

    Question is how do you make a calibrated speed gun to read 132 when the target is moving 110?

  • Hackney on 19/03/2023 - 07:00

    Another cop on a ‘power’ trip it seems.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join