Post by Administrator on Feb 18, 2018 11:12:13 GMT
This is the shorter version..
Here is the front grille again.. I still think on this video he goes into it exactly before the reading is completed
And its quite deep recess so i do think it did have slip effect on the reading.
Also vehicle was in acceleration so every laser pulse would be a different time and only average speed could be measured not actual speed. In addition to this the speedometers are mostly set higher than actual speed so driver cannot give evidence in a court quoting true speed as it would be wrong so every defence is set up to be a lie. And this camouflages any errors from the police weapon 🔫 which is also very difficult to test as they don't give the exact speed on the speedo increments unless you have a digital speedometer.. And i have driven behind cars with those at same speed and their speedo was different by a couple MPH. Only recently.
I believe this is all set up to make it extremely difficult to prove the police wrong.
Ok, so i have tried to get the timing aligned up as accurate as possible and its looking like speedometer is at 78mph when he gets his 75mph reading. The van speedo is +2mph so... should be actual speed 76mph. and 75mph is -1mph to that.... which (if this video is legitimate) i believe is from the grille recess. But i think he went under and was trying for a +reading from under/up sweep.. like in the Steve Callaghan video. Same motion. But the Zoom is a lot more in this one....
Quite interesting he did not get me on, or at least not use the 2nd drive-by as i got a clean 80mph pass... i wonder why he used the lower speed pass? that would have been a lot more stable speed for the accuracy comparison
Post by Administrator on Feb 19, 2018 12:38:10 GMT
I have been talking to a guy from Northwich who works around the Winsford area.. he got caught alledgedly speeding in Northwich recently.. just dealing with it at the moment..
But there is no video evidence as it was a PCSO using a hand held laser.. and there is no video of the event..
And as you know by my testing you can get slip effect easily with the Home office devices.
So its impossible to see any evidence from the hand held device.
You only have the statement of one officer which you cannot be convicted with... Supposedly unless he has a record or reading obtained from a device.. but there is only a reading noted in that situation.
Unfortunately the police train all PCSOs with these devices.. its like a passing of rites.. an initiation ceremony where every officer will get their hands dirty using the devices..
So later on as officers.. everyone has potentially abused the devices and used them so it reinforces the police staff having intent and reason not to ever investigate the misuse of the devices...! Crazy eh?
Human Rights arguments are eligible for free legal aid, under group litigation, for dual proceedings & Jeopardy of law, by article 4 of protocol 7 European Convention of Human Rights.