Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    Speeding ticket in Clark County, Washington

    WSP Trooper standing next to his motorcycle, shooting hand-held laser from the center median. I was southbound on the inside lane in moderate - heavy traffic. The freeway curves slightly to the right at MP27 (SR14 exit). As I approached the curve I saw the trooper wave me into the center median. The trooper was about 50' south beyond the apex of the curve. I stopped about 50' beyond him.

    I requested a contested hearing.

    I got my discovery materials yesterday.

    NOI was filed (4/2/10) the day after it was issued (4/1/10).

    SMD (Lidar) was calibrated on 3/18/10 by Steen R Nicholson. {Kustom Signals Pro-Laser III PL20623}

    WSP affidavit (fill-in-the-blanks) salient points;
    Laser SMD L-1313
    S/B I-205 @ MP27 on 040110 @ 1035
    "at a speed which appeared to be in excess of the 60 mph posted speed limit. The defendant's speed as visually estimated at 70+ mph. The defendants vehicle was (X) approaching in lane (#3). The LASER-SMD showed a visual display of 71 mph at a distance of 906 feet. The target vehicle was in the direct line of sight of the SMD.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    The LASER-SMD #L-1313 was used stationary. The unit was checked at the beginning and end of the Trooper's shift and found to be in proper working order. The proper working order of the unit was checked by internal and external tests. three function checks were completed including distance, sight alignment, and self check. The Trooper operating the LASER-SMD has recieved instruction and is a qualified operator of the unit."
    .
    .
    .
    The officer signed and dated the front of the affidavit which references my NOI, but the back side(?) of my photocopy is completely blank except for the FILED date and time stamp. There is no other info, report, or notes as to traffic, weather, street, or light conditions. I'll try to post scans from a different location later.

    I believe I was not the car he tagged due to his location (just beyond the apex of the curve to the right) and the distance at which he allegedly got his reading (71 mph @ 906 ft). He would have to shoot across at least one and probably two lanes all of which had traffic.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Rec'd - Opinions on My Best Approach

    WOW! "The trooper"? Who was that? And why did this officer sign a form that talks about what "the trooper" did?

    Also, there are two different references to the SMD ("PL20623" and L-1313). Is one the "tag" number and the other the "serial number"? Is there a document (possibly the IRLJ 6.6 certification at the courthouse) that ties those two together?

    Yes, please scan and post the actual documents.

    "The Trooper operating the LASER-SMD has recieved instruction and is a qualified operator of the unit." Hmmmmm. I smell a "hearsay" objection coming....

    Barry

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Rec'd - Opinions on My Best Approach

    Yes the two SMD numbers are from the document they sent me. They reference the same device calibrated by SRN on 3/18/10.

    The affidavit reads as follows;

    "Trooper Olson was operating LASER SMD (speed monitoring device) L-1313.

    The Trooper observed the defendant's vehicle (N/B) (S/B) circled (E/B) (W/B)

    On INTERSTATE 205"

    It was all pre-printed, except for the bolded stuff which was filled in, as was his signature and the date.

    Looking at the Google map and satellite pictures (kind of) proves my point about him having to shoot across 3 lanes of traffic to single me out in the center lane over 900 feet away. Even fudging his location it seems incredible to me that anyone with a handheld device could get an accurate sighting. I think he was just waving people over into the center median because he could. before I departed the scene he had waved another car over which stopped in front of me about 25 yards.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    That's because you don't understand the technology. A laser SMD takes only 1/3 of a second to "clock" you. That's NOT very long -- about the time it takes to "double-click" a mouse. I don't think your argument will get you ANYWHERE -- besides, if another car crossed between you and the laser during that 300 milliseconds, the unit would have indicated that and NOT shown a speed or distance.

    As I said, please scan the documents. I won't waste any more of my time responding to "pieces" of the evidence.

    Barry

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    I do understand the technology. I also understand that the tech can be misused. I know it will boil down to my word against the affidavit.







    The trooper was not in the "direct line of sight" until I was a hundred feet from him.
    How can one estimate the speed of an oncoming vehicle that is over a thousand feet away, coming around a bend with traffic in front and beside?
    The trooper used that estimate as the basis for probable cause then allegedly lasered me. He was just waving cars over from the center median and handing out tickets.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    Things I see as possible points of contention;
    1) I did a visual check and my car at 906 feet is about 1/4 of the width of my thumb held at arms length.



    2) At a speed of 70 MPH it would take 8.8 seconds to travel 906 feet. (102.6 FPS). I was moving at a speed of 60 MPH or 88 FPS. It takes 10.3 seconds to travel 906 feet.

    3) The curve of the freeway, the traffic to my right and in front of me prevented the trooper from direct line of sight until I was within 200 feet of his position.

    4) The boiler plate lines in the affidavit "(At) a speed which appeared to be in excess of the 60 mph posted speed limit. The defendant's speed (w)as visually estimated at 70+ mph." Also "The target vehicle was in the direct line of sight of the SMD."

    These statements do not make sense considering my distance from his position and the amount of time it takes to observe, estimate, and then actually aim the LIDAR unit. I contend the trooper was "just casting a net" and using his SMD to back his story, knowing full well most victims would just roll over and pay the fine.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    832

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    900 feet IS NOT that far! A majority of my LIDAR citations are 1500' - 1800'. The farthest was a smidge over 3300'.

    US Marines are taught how to shoot a man sized target at 500 METERS (1640ish feet) with an iron sight. Put a car in front of that man sized target and even an Air Force officer can shoot it.

    Attacking the device I think will get you no where.

    Speed estimation is an aquired trade. If you spend 8-12 hours a day doing ANYTHING, you get pretty good at ANYTHING. Your car rapidly passing slower traffic is one clue The Trooper may have seen.

    Last point is sure, tech can be misused. I guess it will come down to your word vs. The Trooper's word. Your argument of, "...prevented the trooper from direct line of sight until I was within 200 fet of his position." only shows YOU saw the trooper when YOU were 200 feet away from him. You were not standing where he was so you have no idea what he saw.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    Quote Quoting sniper
    View Post
    900 feet IS NOT that far! A majority of my LIDAR citations are 1500' - 1800'. The farthest was a smidge over 3300'.

    US Marines are taught how to shoot a man sized target at 500 METERS (1640ish feet) with an iron sight. Put a car in front of that man sized target and even an Air Force officer can shoot it.

    Attacking the device I think will get you no where.

    Speed estimation is an aquired trade. If you spend 8-12 hours a day doing ANYTHING, you get pretty good at ANYTHING. Your car rapidly passing slower traffic is one clue The Trooper may have seen.

    Last point is sure, tech can be misused. I guess it will come down to your word vs. The Trooper's word. Your argument of, "...prevented the trooper from direct line of sight until I was within 200 fet of his position." only shows YOU saw the trooper when YOU were 200 feet away from him. You were not standing where he was so you have no idea what he saw.

    I'm not planning to attack the device, only the fashion in which it was used. My car was NOT rapidly passing anyone it was being passed by someone in the #2 lane. I am quite positive I was only traveling at 63 MPH. Does the trooper actually possess the skills that allow him to 'accurately' estimate a 10MPH speed differential at one thousand feet or more?
    Can you hit a moving target at 1000' with your sidearm? That would be analogous I think.
    True that I have no idea what he actually saw but based on his sworn statement, the facts really don't add up to a slam dunk either way...somehow I will need to sway the judge with enough reasonable doubt and a preponderance of evidence. I suppose it all boils down to whether I should subpoena the trooper and ask these questions?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,383

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    Good argument with the sidearm. Not taking sides or anything- if it was a Prolite+ it would be EXTREMELY hard to take that measurement at the distance. Granted, the manual says: "The Pro-Lite+ Lidar uses the HUD technology for range applications up to 2,000 ft." I highly doubt that anyone could use something that small, with a weight of 1.2 lbs, and "clock" someone 900 feet away.

    In fact, the prolite+ wouldn't even be a sidearm. That's more like saying, "can you hit a moving target at 900' with a blow gun?"

    But it might not even be the prolite+. I'm just using that model for the sake of argument.

    Anyway, at the end of the day, the case is still pretty weak. I'll have a look in a couple of hours when I have more time.

    Brendan

    Oh. And for the record: SMD is not Speed Monitoring Device. It's Speed MEASURING Device. When was the last time Trooper Olson received his training... he would have remembered what SMD stands for.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    238

    Default Re: Discovery Materials Received - Opinions on My Best Approach

    I wonder if I should consider a subpoena for the trooper? Perhaps question his ability to track a moving object at 1000 feet, on a curve, with other traffic impeding his view?

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Speeding Tickets: Received Response to Discovery Request Materials
    By Spikele in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-17-2011, 10:01 PM
  2. Speeding Tickets: Discovery Materials Review Requested
    By Dizzyhawk in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-04-2011, 01:21 PM
  3. Discovery: When Am I Supposed to Receive Discovery Materials
    By surfjade in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-20-2010, 01:36 PM
  4. Speeding Tickets: California 22349(A) - Help with Discovery Materials Received
    By PJMarx in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-13-2010, 10:47 AM
  5. Speeding Tickets: How to Evaluate Discovery Materials
    By Frank Cho in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-02-2010, 12:40 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources