Slashdot Mirror
Speed Tickets Challenged Based On Timestamped Photos
SEWilco writes "A businessman has challenged automated tickets of his vehicles by calculating the vehicle speed based upon the tickets, which include timestamps of two photos." Maybe more word problems should be on the police academy curriculum.
Mr. Foreman’s tickets were all issued in Forest Heights, a town of about 2,600 where officials expected $2.9 million in ticket revenue this fiscal year, about half the town’s $5.8 million budget.
Couldn't get people to pay taxes for that new community pool there? Sheesh.
I got a ticket from one of those things 2 weeks ago; when it flashed, I looked down. I was doing 48. I've checked my speedometer using a GPS, and it's accurage. They aren't supposed to take a picture until 10 miles over the limit (the limit there is 40, so it shouldn't have taken a picture until 50). The ticket that came in the mail said I was doing 52.
I talked to a lawyer, and was told to just pay the bill, less trouble and less expensive in the long run.. so, that was $218.
The real kicker on the ticket was that each offense must be reviewed by a real cop with a badge number. The cop's name? Officer Dollar.
Bastards.
Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
From the article:
Optotraffic representatives said the photos are not intended to capture the actual act of speeding, and are taken nearly 50 feet down the road from sensors as a way to prove the vehicle was on the road.
How does proving that a car was on the road prove that it was speeding?
A lawyer with some spare cash can rent an instrumented "bait car" with certified-instruments that will be admissible in court and prove once and for all that the cameras lie, then sue the city on behalf of all who were convicted or who plead guilty under what amounts to duress.
The city can then sue the vendor for the 40% cut it paid back.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I'm at work, so I can't look it up, but do a google/youtube search on "atlanta speed limit 55" or something like that.
TL;DR: Some college kids decided to go the speed limit on Atlanta's 295 loop, which is posted at 55mph, but traffic travels around 70+ mph. They got five cars and blocked all lanes, and went 55 mph. The video editing is atrocious, but the point is very good.
The government intentionally posts low speed limits so everyone is guilty. Once everyone is guilty, they are free to pull over anyone, at any time, for any reason, and cite "speeding" as the reason.
There's a tradeoff involved with red-light cameras: they increase rear-end collisions, which have a low injury rate, but decrease T-bone collisions, which often result in major injury or death. Total collision rate at the intersection goes up, but the injury and death rate goes down.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
No, they are saying he was able to decelerate 15 MPH in the ~50 foot distance between where his vehicle was when it was supposedly clocked, and where it was when its photo was snapped.You RTFA.
Optotraffic representatives said the photos are not intended to capture the actual act of speeding, and are taken nearly 50 feet down the road from sensors as a way to prove the vehicle was on the road. ... “Their speed is not measured by the photos. The speed is measured before the photos are taken.”
Of course, that does bring up the question of why they need 2 photos if they aren't using them to determine the vehicle's speed.
The photos are clearly intended to prove that the vehicle was at that place at that time. If the vehicle was not at that exact place at that exact time, they are inaccurate and should be inadmissible in court.
I don't think that's right. A time stamp on disk might be placed in the image as it gets written out, but that's only accurate with 1 second granularity anyway, making those time stamps useless. This is talking about a time stamp that contains much more precise time stamping information, likely burned into the (possibly non-digital) image by physical hardware in the camera, which almost certainly means that it is generated at the same time the picture is generated.
If it is being burned into the image after the fact, then the camera vendor is being dumb, particularly since the whole purpose of those photos is to prove that an infraction really occurred, and burning in the time stamps after the photo is taken is basically tampering with evidence.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Going from 50 mph to 20 mph in 0.363 seconds means he would have had to been decelerating at about 3.7Gs.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
which almost certainly means that it is generated at the same time the picture is generated
No. That's exactly my point. The time stamps are generated AFTER the picture is taken.
In order for the time stamps to measure EXACT time the picture is taken you need a realtime clock running in the focal plane.
NASA does this.
Off the shelf CCDs do not have this.
The time stamp is inserted at processing time. Its not in the raw image.
If you take any reasonable camera that offers time stamping AND a three-shot mode, you can replicate this yourself.
Put it in three shot mode, and select RAW image. That image is exactly how it comes from the CCD. Offload that
image to computer and it will not contain a time stamp (because its raw).
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
So they're tampering with the evidence by putting false timestamps on the photos.