Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: ProLaser 3 Camera Stills
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Karl46
Hi all,

I received my NIPS for an alleged 62mph in 50mph by a ProLaser III Light Beam Speed Meter back in November 2010 and duly asked for the matter to be dealt with in court, as i'm adament that I wasn't speeding.

My summons arrived today and included with all of the forms is the letter stating that it is approved by the Secretary of State and the PC in question has stated that it was operated in accordance with the ...... blah blah

and two picture stills showing my vehicle.

My first question is how clear does the picture have to be for me to realistically query it and ask for either a better quality picture or better still the whole video? I know I am not likely to be granted this wish, but I cannot even make out my number plate in the first picture, surely this would make it unreliable evidence?

My (albeit limited) knowledge of the ProLaser guns are that they send a beam to the vehicle in question and the beam then helps determine the speed of the vehicle by its size? The beam in the first picture is so big it covers most of the car, is this normal?

Is there an agreed distance that the beam is deemed accurate at, I have read several distances on this forum and others, but 1000ft seems to keep popping up. Is this information correct? and where on the stills provided to me can I find or determine this information, as knowing the road and where they where on the day I seem a fair way back.

Thank you in advance for any responses, I appreciate all the advice I can get!

Karl
Pete D
From the Prolaser III manual
Target Range 10 feet min., up to 6000 feet.

Post up your two still with the ID and VRN removed so we can see the quality of the ping.

Pete D



The image is to identify your vehicle not you. You have a legal responsibility to identify the driver at that location and time. You were unwise to opt for court before you had the facts and some advice before doing so. However lets see if we can help you out here. Pete D
captain swoop
QUOTE
My (albeit limited) knowledge of the ProLaser guns are that they send a beam to the vehicle in question and the beam then helps determine the speed of the vehicle by its size?


It sends out a pulse of light, then it times how long the pulse takes to return. This gives the distance to your vehicle. It does this a second time and gets another distance measurement. It knows the time interval between the two pulses so it knows how far you have gone in a known time. That gives it your speed.
3phase278
Also just to confirm, is your summons just for speeding?

Did you positively identify yourself as the driver?
Karl46
The summons is only for speeding and I did positively identify myself as the Driver, as at the time I was under the impression that they take 'not knowing who the driver was' as no excuse and this can potentially be a bigger offence than the speeding. I was so sure that I wasn't speeding and therefore wanted to see all of the 'evidence' against me, to do this I opted for the 'matter to be dealt with at court' box.

I have attached a scanned picture of the 2 camera stills, I deleted the reference number and reg from the top of the page and the second still, I haven't edited the first picture at all, as there was no need!

Thanks for the replies so far

Karl
Logician
If the registration was clear enough for you to have to delete it from the second picture, I am not sure on what basis you are saying it is not reliable evidence? The idea is that the first picture shows the speed of the vehicle and the second is a close up of the number to identify it. You are not saying these are or might be two different cars are you?
The Rookie
You deleted the referance and reg yet left on the time/date qand site location code, so you may as well have left the first two on as well, they now know who you are.

Looks a good ping on the face of it, not sure what defence you think you have.

Can you complete the NIP wizard (link top right) and have the output added here so we can look for other options.

I assume you agree the limit is a 50, you dispute the 62, not the other way round.

Simon
norahl
You say the evidence you have received seems unreliable; what evidence do you have that shows that?

What independent evidence of your speed do you have that is reliable and is taken at the same time as this speed was measured?

Unless you get some evidence you have no reasonable defence.
Karl46
I didn't realise what the numbers on the bottom of the still were in reference to, hence not deleting them... my mistake.

You say that they determine the speed in the first picture, but if the number plate isn't clear then how can it be identified as my car? Regardless of the second still or not, if thats the one they use to determine my speed then thats the one they need to identify the car? If this is the only evidence available to me then this is all I have to go with - if they have better quality stills am I entitled to them?

Also any comments on the beam in the first picture, is this normal? Is looks like it is covering the whole car and close to car on the inside of me??

Cheers

The Rookie
The law requires the operator to form an opinion of excess speed and corroborate it via the approved device, this he has done and they have all the evidence they need, the video merely acts as a notebook, no difference to him writing your reg number down, so unless you can show (reasonable doubt) its not the same car, your 'hypothesis' its not the same car will be irrelevant, the video will almost certainly show a continuos view and you'll be found guilty either which way.

The red square is an aiming device, not the beam at all.

Simon
Logician
QUOTE (Karl46 @ Wed, 23 Mar 2011 - 10:49) *
You say that they determine the speed in the first picture, but if the number plate isn't clear then how can it be identified as my car? Regardless of the second still or not, if thats the one they use to determine my speed then thats the one they need to identify the car? If this is the only evidence available to me then this is all I have to go with - if they have better quality stills am I entitled to them?

You do not have to accept you were speeding or that this evidence proves it. The offer of a fixed penalty is to avoid the matter going to court, but it is your option. If you want to take it to court and go NG, then they will have to prove everything to the criminal standard. They can get the operator there to say he took the pictures of the same car, and answer any questions about the procedure. On the basis of what you have shown us here, they are likely to have a watertight case. The penalties in court will be higher and you will have to pay costs, but it is your choice.
The Rookie
Log', he states he already is up for the larger penalty as he has a summons.

I would suggest he opts for a 'Free man' defence as its no less likely to fail than what he plans now!

Simon
Logician
Oh dear, failed to appreciate that!

Edited version:

If you opt to go NG, then they will have to prove everything to the criminal standard. They can get the operator there to say he took the pictures of the same car if you do not accept his statement, and answer any questions about the procedure. On the basis of what you have shown us here, they are likely to have a watertight case. The costs of getting witnesses to court will make the costs you will have to pay higher, but it is your choice.
Pancras
QUOTE (Karl46 @ Wed, 23 Mar 2011 - 10:49) *
You say that they determine the speed in the first picture, but if the number plate isn't clear then how can it be identified as my car? Regardless of the second still or not, if thats the one they use to determine my speed then thats the one they need to identify the car? If this is the only evidence available to me then this is all I have to go with - if they have better quality stills am I entitled to them?

In all likelihood, the stills will have been printed from a video which is constantly recording. The first 'still' you have is the actual 'ping' of your speed. The video will then have shown your car travelling towards the camera to a point where the number plate becomes clear enough to read, which is the point where the second still is taken from. So in court there will be continuity of evidence to prove that the car in the second still is the same as the one in the first.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.