Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,175

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    Those surfaces don't work just as well.
    OK, if you say so...

    Good luck!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    That's not what I say...it's what the manufacturer says. No idea why you had to throw in the veiled insult.

    I'm sure there is some loophole that allows them to shoot LIDAR at the moon and say they were targeting your car.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,276

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post

    How do I request discovery? And..is there any information I have to disclose when I do that could hurt my case?
    What type of discovery would you plan on doing (if allowed): written interrogatories, request for documents, request to admit, deposition ? Plenty of discovery request examples on the internet... the only one you have to co-file with the court is a motion to admit...

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    This is why I would rather write a letter and try having this dismissed. Iowa is also a "correctionist" mentality state, meaning you can't even question law enforcement in the eyes of most.
    This is where objections work out best - to limit testimony & evidence even being admitted at trial. And all states could care less what a traffic case defendant says that is counter to the cop's testimony. Unless you have an affirmative defense to present, you should not have to testify at all. You would rather just write a letter...this may be but this is not how it works + you cannot prove your innocence (and you don't have to !) so why bother?

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post

    Let's say...I request discovery. They don't give me anything. Then I specifically request "the distance I was clocked at".
    Well lets say you get no response at all, then what? Well, if its a request to admit , then the statements listed are admitted & thats good for you. If its a written interrogatory then you call the prosecutor and ask that they answer the questions -- if they refuse then you could, if you want, file a motion to compel -- the the court grants your motion then they would be under a court order to answer & failure to do so would result in a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss as a sanction for not complying with a court order. If it is a document production request then you call the DA ~ if they have no documents responsive to you requests then this is OK, an acceptable reply since they have no documents (and if they try to introduce such requested docs into evidence or reference them at trial an objection should be raised on the subject); if the DA says they have documents but refuses to provide them for whatever reason then you can file a motion to compel (its best if they say they have no documents to provide --- then they cannot introduce any documents that you requested --- so I just ask the prosecutor "so, you have no documents responsive to the request?".

    So discovery can be helpful. See what is available. I would also do a FOIA request with the police and see when they purchased their LIDAR units (I have had an officer testify that he was trained in 2005 but his LIDAR unit was designed & manufactured in 2007 so I asked him "you did not receive formal training on this LIDAR unit officer, is this correct?" He answered "correct" Judge ruled he was not trained with the specific LIDAR equipment used. Always use leading questions with the cross examination I always do a little background set of questions "you did not gradutate college, correct?"..just to show that his education is not that great, hurting his appearance in front of the court when he speaks to any scientific information regarding LIDAR.

    The goal (or perfect goal) is to not argue with the officer's testimony but to place doubt on his equipment (keeping out supporting documents); show that his training is lacking & may be the cause of the erroneous reading; and to require that the state show that the specific LIDAR unit is given judicial notice; and show that the officer did not use the suggested methods of use of the instrument (if he does not say specifically that he followed the suggested methods I generally just leave his testimony as that but others like to point out specific errors but ? the cop along these lines allows him to "fix" his testimony so there are pros & cons in doing this type of cross ~ to each their own, just be aware). And to win with a motion for aquittal or summary judgment before I present any defense case. And hey, if you lose this type of motion then get the kitchen sink out during your defense presentation of the case. If I don't have to testify, its best ... (open mouth, insert foot lol) + it allows them to cross the defendant (and hey, almost every time I have been to traffic court I did exactly what they said I did .... they still have to prove it, right?)

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    That's not what I say...it's what the manufacturer says. No idea why you had to throw in the veiled insult.

    I'm sure there is some loophole that allows them to shoot LIDAR at the moon and say they were targeting your car.

    OK, if you really really really want to get into the manual information at trial then you will need to get the manual via such a method to make it admissible evidence. How? Via a FOIA request is best or via a motion to admit (give them a copy & ask if it is an accurate copy of the LIDAR unit used by the officer during your speed measurement) & it they admit yes, then it will be admissible.

    If you don't have a copy that you can admit, the copy will mean nothing .. the judge will not look at it. Do not expect a copy gotten from a website will be admissible ~ any DA with 1/2 a brain would object & well they should..


    All FOIA requests & responses (all the documents related to the request must be included as a document to be admitted) are admissible in any court. You just have to lay the foundation for their admittance (I filed a FOIA request on this date to this agency, I received a response on this date, these documents are the complete request & response produced and received).

    I know what the LIDAR manuals say & I always have a copies ready at trial (obtained through a FOIA request) .. never had to admit one though as officer's have never said that they actually followed the suggested methods for the manual for whatever they do. They say "I did this test, this test, this test" and "I did this , that, and the other during my measurement". And they may state line for line from the manual what they did but they NEVER say they actually followed the manufacturer's method .. and I make a point that they never say this (otherwise the judge will just assume he did~it human nature to "fill-in-the-blanks" --- its my job to highlight those "blanks" to the judge)

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,175

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    No idea why you had to throw in the veiled insult.
    A "veiled insult"? Where? You obviously came here looking for cheerleaders, not answers. Just because I disagree with you does not mean I'm "insulting" you, but you're free to interpret my posts however which way you want.

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    I'm sure there is some loophole that allows them to shoot LIDAR at the moon and say they were targeting your car.
    And to use YOUR description (from your first post), that is just as "ridiculous" as your other claims. My guess is you're wrong about that too...

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Just so you are aware - infrared LIDAR does not LOCK ON anything. Rapidly pulsed beams of infrared light are reflected off of the moving target back to the instrument. The difference in the amount of time the pulses take to reflect back to the instrument is calculated to determine SPEED and DISTANCE. It only takes about 1/3rd of a second to get a reading. The aiming reticle allows the operator to see which target he is aiming at. There are many highly reflective surfaces on a motor vehicle, the license plate usually being the most desirable target due to its reflectivity. A car's headlights are also very reflective, along with chrome trim and bumpers. Because a plate is missing does not mean that a reading cannot be obtained.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    I'm not looking for cheerleaders of any sort. I made a point about LIDAR that is factually true. It is supposed to be aimed at the plate for maximum accuracy. Page 9.

    www.stalkerradar.com/pdf/lidarmanual.pdf

    I'm not big on tit-for-tat arguments, so I'll leave it at that.

    The last point I made, when contesting a ticket, absolutely everything is skewed in their favor. They even have free representation from the state. A civilian does not on traffic tickets. There is no distance on the citation (wonder why that is), no plates were present, LIDAR was used through the windshield (not supposed to be done according to manufacturer)...well, LIDAR doesn't ever "lie", it is the most high-tech speed capturing device in history and anyone who challenges that is completely wrong and just trying to get out of the ticket.....you get the point.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    It does seem skewed and it is to a degree. You are free to represent yourself or obtain legal representation. If there is no distance or exact location of the officer in relation to yours on the ticket that may help your case. The no license plate argument is likely going to get you no where. Shooting the LIDAR through the cruiser windshield will need more than just your word. You'll need to get the officer to make that statement under oath. Good luck with whatever you try.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Quote Quoting lurkertom
    View Post
    Just so you are aware - infrared LIDAR does not LOCK ON anything. Rapidly pulsed beams of infrared light are reflected off of the moving target back to the instrument. The difference in the amount of time the pulses take to reflect back to the instrument is calculated to determine SPEED and DISTANCE. It only takes about 1/3rd of a second to get a reading. The aiming reticle allows the operator to see which target he is aiming at. There are many highly reflective surfaces on a motor vehicle, the license plate usually being the most desirable target due to its reflectivity. A car's headlights are also very reflective, along with chrome trim and bumpers. Because a plate is missing does not mean that a reading cannot be obtained.
    Again, it is greatly diminished. The point is to raise reasonable doubt to the judge. Not try to get into some discussion of the exact pulse-diode frequency of LIDAR.

    Read about LIDAR vehicle detection, LIDAR tracking. Some even bill themselves as working both ways, having a non-lock vs lock mode. There's several different kinds of LIDAR guns. That's why I said earlier it would be beneficial to know the exact model, and my questions about discovery were partially regarding that.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    Again, it is greatly diminished. The point is to raise reasonable doubt to the judge. Not try to get into some discussion of the exact pulse-diode frequency of LIDAR.

    Read about LIDAR vehicle detection, LIDAR tracking. Some even bill themselves as working both ways, having a non-lock vs lock mode. There's several different kinds of LIDAR guns. That's why I said earlier it would be beneficial to know the exact model, and my questions about discovery were partially regarding that.
    Did that...and I am familiar with not only how they work but how they can be misused. It all boils down to which testimony the magistrate believes is more reliable. Dazzle him with brilliance, don't baffle him with bullshit. As I said good luck with whatever defense strategy you choose to use.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,276

    Default Re: LIDAR Defense.if There is One

    Quote Quoting lurkertom
    View Post
    Did that...and I am familiar with not only how they work but how they can be misused. It all boils down to which testimony the magistrate believes is more reliable. Dazzle him with brilliance, don't baffle him with bullshit. As I said good luck with whatever defense strategy you choose to use.
    I can explain how they work (its quite simple):

    The LIDAR shoots out a beam of light (if fact a pair of pulses--this is for the first light): it bounces off the target back to the LIDAR unit. From the time of flight (and assuming the speed of light is constant at 186,000 mi/sec) then the distance is calculated .. call this DISTANCE 1

    The LIDAR shouts ot a 2nd beam of light (the 2nd in the pair); it bounces off the taget back to the LIDAR unit. From its time of flight then DISTANCE 2 is calculated.

    The time between the 2 beams of light is measured by the LIDAR unit... TIME X

    Speed is calculated from the measured values of distance and time: (DISTANCE 1 - DISTANCE 2) / TIME X = MPH

    Ta-Da ! People use laser range finders (using similar flight-of-time & return calculations) that is based on similar technology....

    This is not to mean that the errors involved cannot be hugh .... heck, the speed of light is not even constant (only in a vacuum) .. you can find patents online too that detail the methods they use.

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    I'm not looking for cheerleaders of any sort. I made a point about LIDAR that is factually true. It is supposed to be aimed at the plate for maximum accuracy. Page 9.

    www.stalkerradar.com/pdf/lidarmanual.pdf

    I'm not big on tit-for-tat arguments, so I'll leave it at that.

    The last point I made, when contesting a ticket, absolutely everything is skewed in their favor. They even have free representation from the state. A civilian does not on traffic tickets. There is no distance on the citation (wonder why that is), no plates were present, LIDAR was used through the windshield (not supposed to be done according to manufacturer)...well, LIDAR doesn't ever "lie", it is the most high-tech speed capturing device in history and anyone who challenges that is completely wrong and just trying to get out of the ticket.....you get the point.
    I have seen people cross the officer and ask if he can see the location of where the beam hits the car (of course they can't - its colorless) and then say that the beam could hit the windshield and then the bumper and a reading will be obtained. This is, of course, a panning error .. and I think these errors are very common. Go to youtube and search out this aspect. If the OP wishes to explore this then just get the beam information from the cop's cross & during the defense's presentation ask "do you think the accuracy that the cop testified to was realized in your measurement?" "answer: no and then Explain .. and discuss the panning error that appears (from the cops own testimony, so you are not arguing against the cop) to have been present. (assuming you lost your motion for acquittal/summary judgment).

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Speeding Tickets: LIDAR Ticket in California
    By grejen in forum Moving Violations and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-23-2011, 02:49 PM
  2. Speeding Tickets: Speeding Ticket Using LIDAR
    By lbporscheguy in forum Moving Violations and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-17-2010, 01:24 PM
  3. Speeding Tickets: LIDAR Ticket in Mass
    By jcomensk in forum Moving Violations and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-08-2010, 12:00 PM
  4. Speeding Tickets: CA Lidar Ticket 91 in 65, What to Do?
    By evd00 in forum Moving Violations and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-01-2008, 10:06 PM
  5. Speeding Tickets: LIDAR Speeding Ticket
    By SynX in forum Moving Violations and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-21-2005, 10:11 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 
Forum Sponsor
Find A Lawyer - Free, confidential referrals.
Legal Forms - Buy easy-to-use legal forms.




Untitled Document