Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 64
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Over 2,000ft LIDAR Reading.finally Know Distance

    This is like a bad train wreck waiting to happen. You know its gonna be disastrous, and yet you still stand there and watch!!!

    I couldn't stay away.... Hahahaaaa....

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    The license plate is a particularly effective target because it has a reflective coating containing tiny glass spheres (having the interesting property that a sphere will reflect a light ray back along exactly the same path as it arrived, regardless of the direction from which the ray strikes the sphere).
    That truly is an amazing find.... Wow!!!!






    BtW, have you ever heard of Headlight REFLECTORS? From what I understand, every vehicle has two of them. One on the left and one on the right!

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    "The range of the instrument is dependent primarily in the reflectivity of the target. For example, because the reflective segments that are part of the taillights on the back of a vehicle are more reflective than anything on the front of the vehicle, the maximum range to the back of an automobile is over 4,000 feet, while the typical maximum range to the front of a vehicle is only about 2,000 ft".
    So you'd buy into the theory that taillight reflectors would do just fine, and yet when you were told about headlight reflectors in your other thread, you simply dismissed that idea as invalid?

    Heck, even those British guys from that U.K. Forum told you that "headights" are a prime target for a Lidar beam. But no, that doesn't fit within the details of your plan.... So "out of the question"!!!!

    Seriously, your mere mention of the word "reflectors" even in association with tail lights, will negate your entire "no front plate" theory... Not that it had any chance of success to begin with!

    Also, your mere mention that "taillight REFLECTORS TEND TO ENHANCE THE RANGE FOR A LIDAR BEAM", you're refuting your claim that 2000 feet to the front of headlight reflectors is too far!

    Heck, with a defendant like you, who needs a prosecuting attorney!!!!!!!




    By the way, do you know a member by the name of "styleguy"!!!!!!!

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    Again, this is from a legal resource, and I have proof of it.
    Aaahhhh, yes, as soon as you say "Nolo book the judge will bow his head and say "dismissed"!!!!

    Quote Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    If it changes in court to a smaller number, I will then get an attorney.
    So, let me get this correctly.... You pleaded "not guilty" your case is scheduled for trial. On your trial day, you're going to wait until AFTER the officer starts to testify, and if you don't like what he has to say, you're going to say "hold on your honor, I changed my mind I want a do over, I'll be back with an attorney".....

    This **** is not funny anymore!
    [QUOTE=lostintime;528624]Again, this is from a legal resource, and I have proof of it.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: Over 2,000ft LIDAR Reading.finally Know Distance

    The headlights were very dirty when I got the car. Also completely faded. I can PM you a picture with a link if you don't believe me. You're thinking of the fancy, shiny, reflective headlights that newer cars come with. Both of mine looked foggy as well from condensation. I removed it myself eventually by cleaning out the lights manually.

    Again, that's what LexisNexis has said. If you think their claims are stupid and uninformed contact them and explain they are giving out misguided information.

    The front plate is made specifically to work with LIDAR. There's also information about shape of the car, mine fits the category of a car that wouldn't be considered reflective (color also factors in). A lower, curved car is harder to get an accurate reading off than a square shaped car.

    In all honesty, I actually hope he went after my headlights. Given the beam is 6ft wide at 2,000ft using this particular gun, this could work in my favor. That would mean, if he did, and there were cars passing me - at 6ft wide beam, it could have been the headlight of the car next to me, causing him to get their speed. Very possible.

    The bad thing about posting here, some of you seem to enjoy watching people try their hardest at this. You simply take whatever I say, twist it around in a comedic fashion ex. (The book said so! I know it did!) and try turning it into fodder for others on this board. My main point involves distance, and leaving the distance off intentionally. Let's say for a second, he admits that distance is "out of recommended range from his training". Or if he usually includes the distance on citation...but just 'forgot' this time. If he says the distance with LIDAR can span up to mile, that will look hard to believe as well. I plan to extract a threshold one way or another - because one has to exist. If they divert the question entirely, I'll point out how it's unregulated and that creates danger for the public. Even if I lose, I plan to make that point. It's almost impossible to win anyways everywhere besides California. The midwest/south are extremely difficult because it's seen as controversial to even challenge a speeding ticket. There's still a 1950's view here that they are always right, and you are always wrong.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,530

    Default Re: Over 2,000ft LIDAR Reading.finally Know Distance

    lostintime;528651]

    Again, that's what LexisNexis has said. If you think their claims are stupid and uninformed contact them and explain they are giving out misguided information.
    It's not that the information they are giving is wrong, it's that you are interpreting it to mean what you want it to mean.

    The front plate is made specifically to work with LIDAR.
    In the state I live in, we have not used front license plates for as long as I can remember. We do use LIDAR in our state. There is no problem ticketing a car from the front.

    the reflective plates have been in use much longer than LIDAR has. It provides myriad benefits. None of which were so LIDAR was usable.



    There's also information about shape of the car, mine fits the category of a car that wouldn't be considered reflective (color also factors in). A lower, curved car is harder to get an accurate reading off than a square shaped car.
    and if the LIDAR unit does not get an adequate reflection, it gives an error code, not an inaccurate speed.

    In all honesty, I actually hope he went after my headlights. Given the beam is 6ft wide at 2,000ft using this particular gun, this could work in my favor. That would mean, if he did, and there were cars passing me - at 6ft wide beam, it could have been the headlight of the car next to me, causing him to get their speed. Very possible.
    right now that is about your only defense that is worth anything but if you do not present it properly, it will be discounted as meaningless.

    My main point involves distance, and leaving the distance off intentionally.
    but what does that mean? Anything? Everything? Unless you can show why it makes a difference, if it does, simply stating it means something means nothing.

    Let's say for a second, he admits that distance is "out of recommended range from his training". Or if he usually includes the distance on citation...but just 'forgot' this time.
    So what? Unless you can why the distance makes any difference, again, it is meaningless.

    If he says the distance with LIDAR can span up to mile, that will look hard to believe as well.
    why? He actually has some training on the thing. All you have is some very limited information and so far, I have not found anything that says it isn't functional up to a mile.

    I plan to extract a threshold one way or another - because one has to exist
    .You have to prove there is a threshold. Nothing the cop says is going to define the limitations of LIDAR.
    If they divert the question entirely, I'll point out how it's unregulated and that creates danger for the public.
    Really? How is that? Not only do you not have any support for that claim, tossing things like this out will tend to anger the court if you do not have any support for your statements.

    So, do you have that New Jersey case where the state limited LIDAR to 1000 feet?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    State v. Abeskaron.

    One thing you are ignoring repeatedly, and I don't really know why, is using LIDAR at such great distances. If it not typically used at that distance, that does some raise some doubt as to the accuracy. There should be an explanation as to why most readings are kept at a certain range. Also, if he does usually include the distance on his tickets, but didn't on mine, that should help as well.

    They treat LIDAR no different than shooting ducks in Iowa. I don't understand why that would anger the court. Just showing up should be enough to anger the court then, correct? After all, just an appearance and choosing to fight the ticket is implicative that law enforcement did something wrong.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,530

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    lostintime;528709]State v. Abeskaron.
    that isn't even the same piece of equipment. Hell, they aren't even made by the same company.. Again, this is the problem with what you are doing. You want to take bits and pieces of what somebody says and apply it to your case. You keep comparing apples to oranges though.

    Now, there are some underlying principles discussed here http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=2,23&as_vis=1

    that could be utilized in your case but you would also have to know the technical aspects of the Stalker device and how it deals with the possible problems that are discussed in that document. Without knowing the technical specs of the Stalker unit, again, all you are doing is making a statement without any support showing it is correct.

    One thing you are ignoring repeatedly, and I don't really know why, is using LIDAR at such great distances. If it not typically used at that distance, that does some raise some doubt as to the accuracy. There should be an explanation as to why most readings are kept at a certain range. Also, if he does usually include the distance on his tickets, but didn't on mine, that should help as well
    . ]No, what you are ignoring is: what difference does the distance make? Simple stating that 99% of all tickets are for distances less than 100 feet and you are the only one ever ticketed at 2000 feet in itself does not prove, or even suggest there is a problem with the ticket at 2000 feet. You seem to think it does. Until you have some reason a reading from that distance is less accurate or reliable than a reading from 100 feet, all you have is: "but there must be a reason they don't clock people 2000" away". Well, there might be but the prosecution is not going to argue your case for you. Unless you argue your case and introduce evidence as to why a reading from 2000' should be suspect, the courts aren't going to care. It is not up to the court to determine the technical aspects of the LIDAR system. The courts job is to listen to the evidence presented and make a ruling based only on that.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    In New Jersey, all LIDAR speed detection has to be used at 1000 ft or under - not just that particular gun (you want annotated footnotes, too?). You're starting to reach for straws now to discredit any solid point I make. If it does come out that the overwhelming vast majority of LIDAR citations are within a certain range, and I ask the beam width at 2000ft, he should know its 3ft at 1000ft and be able to come up with the 6ft width at 2000ft. If he knows nothing about beam width proportionally widening with distance, then he shouldn't be using LIDAR to begin with, and I'll point that out. A beam that wide produces suspicion, especially given the headlights are a target - it may have been the car next to mine. I also plan to ask if the red dot shows this on the heads-up display. Then I'll ask him if staying at a lower distance means great accuracy - which it does as the beam is narrower. The red dot may have gotten larger (to reflect the widened cone) and have crossed with other another vehicle - especially if aiming at the headlights. Unobstructed line of sight to the vehicle target is also important. In traffic given the hills on this stretch of interstate, it seems very difficult. Of course, he can also say he aimed at the middle of the vehicle (even if he didn't and there wasn't anything reflective there - my grill is not) and he knows it was my vehicle and the distance doesn't matter (even with the widened beam width), even if it's the first ticket written in state history this far. Like I said, besides California, you really don't have much of a shot, but it's commendable to stand up for what you believe in, even if you lose.

    My personal idea is that he pulled me over for no license plate and just decided to give me someone else's reading at the moment. I even saw his partner laughing like he was watching the funniest movie of his life while the particular trooper was writing the ticket. Maybe it's funny to them, but it's not funny to me. Now knowing it was over 2017 feet, it could have been banter about how I won't even know any better, was the car next to me, etc. Obviously I can't prove any of that to the court, but it is a big reason as to why I feel so passionate about this.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,530

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    lostintime;528737]In New Jersey, all LIDAR speed detection has to be used at 1000 ft or under - not just that particular gun (you want annotated footnotes, too?). You're starting to reach for straws now to discredit any solid point I make.
    I'm reaching for straws? You are the one that keeps getting a bigger bucket for more crap to throw with absolutely no idea what you are doing.



    If it does come out that the overwhelming vast majority of LIDAR citations are within a certain range, and I ask the beam width at 2000ft, he should know its 3ft at 1000ft and be able to come up with the 6ft width at 2000ft. If
    no, he doesn't have to know. He might know but he doesn't have to know.


    he knows nothing about beam width proportionally widening with distance, then he shouldn't be using LIDAR to begin with, and I'll point that ouy
    all he knows is he has to use it as he was trained to use it. He does not have to be a technical expert on the device.

    . Like I said, besides California, you really don't have much of a shot, but it's commendable to stand up for what you believe in, even if you lose.
    Unless you intend on making it a value to somebody, it is not commendable. In fact, it is simply a waste of time and taxpayer dollars.

    My personal idea is that he pulled me over for no license plate and just decided to give me someone else's reading at the moment.
    then allege that but unless you have something to support that, his statement is going to be considered valid. I asked you long ago about the traffic and you ignored it. From that I presume it offered you no defense.

    I even saw his partner laughing like he was watching the funniest movie of his life while the particular trooper was writing the ticket. Maybe it's funny to them, but it's not funny to me.
    If you acted anything in person like you do on the various forums you have posted to, I can see why the cop would be laughing.

    Now knowing it was over 2017 feet, it could have been banter about how I won't even know any better, was the car next to me, etc.
    or it could have simply talking about how silly you acted.

    Obviously I can't prove any of that to the court, but it is a big reason as to why I feel so passionate about this.
    You're sounding a bit paranoid now.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    409

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    I had no idea regarding the distance, or that it was LIDAR until I got home and read the ticket. I was very polite the entire time. If you read my original topic on this, the first thing I did was grab the title and I apologized for not having a license plate and told him I would get one soon. Then explained I had just gotten the car, and that is why I didn't have one yet. I bought the car from a private party so dealer plates were not available. I was completely, across-the-board certain that is why I was stopped. There is nothing silly about telling him that. According to him I was going this alleged speed, and I knew I wasn't and I did tell him that. At the time, I didn't know what to think. I saw various cars passing me as I entered the 65mph zone and I knew to watch my speed in that area as I've traveled that route hundreds of time.

    You've confirmed and verified what I feared from the beginning. They don't have to know anything, you can have a solid case regarding distance. If 99/100 tickets included distance, but at this great length, mine was left off, and I believe that is intentional given the majority of LIDAR tickets do include it - that's irrelevant.

    If the state has recommended guidelines (which I cannot find, even at the law library) for using LIDAR within a certain distanced as specified to me by another trooper - that's irrelevant.

    If the beam was wide enough at that size to have targeted the car next to me (which it was) - that's irrelevant. A 6ft beam on 12ft lanes (from the Iowa DOT). The average car in America is 6ft wide. Assuming both were perfectly in the middle of their respective lanes, equidistant from both medians, that leaves 3ft of space either direction, if you combine them both, that totals 6ft (same size as beam). To be hit by an invisible beam over 2000ft away. Room for error, obviously...but that's irrelevant.

    If he doesn't know anything about the LIDAR beam widening with distance - that should mean he isn't well-trained in the system..once again, that's irrelevant.

    If he doesn't know that not having a license plate affects LIDAR's accuracy, once again, that's irrelevant.

    Your replies remind me of that Fresh Prince of Bel-Air episode when the basketball team is told "Give it to Will", no matter what. Replaced with "that's irrelevant" when I bring up any point that should be in my favor. There's really nothing you can do, because they don't require any understanding or knowledge of it. It's always their word vs yours, combined with the fact it is controversial to contest speeding tickets in this region, you don't have much chance.

    LIE-DAR has given Midwestern states a new cash crop...and it doesn't even require harvesting.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,530

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    ostintime;528992]

    If the beam was wide enough at that size to have targeted the car next to me......that's irrelevant.
    again, you chose to either ignore what I said or have somehow misconstrued what I said. I said nothing of the sort, In fact, I suggested just the opposite but I also warned that not presenting the supporting proof properly will get the claim ignored.

    If he doesn't know anything about the LIDAR beam widening with distance....that should mean he isn't well-trained in the system..once again, that's irrelevant.
    all he has to know is what he was trained to do. If a person charged believes the actions were improper, it is upon them to prove why what the cop did was not enough to prove the readings are dependable.

    If he doesn't know that not having a license plate affects LIDAR's accuracy, once again, that's irrelevant.
    again, you choose to ignore the facts. It does not affect the accuracy. It can affect the ability to make a proper reading.

    Your replies remind me of that Fresh Prince of Bel-Air episode when the basketball team is told "Give it to Will", no matter what. Replaced with "that's irrelevant" when I bring up any point that should be in my favor. There's really nothing you can do, because they don't require any understanding or knowledge of it. It's always their word vs yours, combined with the fact it is controversial to contest speeding tickets in this region, you don't have much chance.
    again, you ignore what I said and use some twisted interpretation to come up with whatever you want. Certain points you have posted are irrelevant. There are some points that are very good but you refusing to either properly support an allegation or understand you have to properly introduce the evidence actually makes those points irrelevant since they are not going to help you.

    LIE-DAR has given Midwestern states a new cash crop...and it doesn't even require harvesting.
    No, it just makes a person charged with a ticket work harder to prove their innocence.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,273

    Default Re: Maximum Distance for LIDAR Accuracy

    Measuring a Moving Vehicle
    Refer to the instructions below to use the UltraLyte LR B to measure the
    speed of a moving vehicle.
    1. Ensure that the UltraLyte LR B is powered ON and that the
    Speed Mode is active.
    2. Use the sighting scope to aim the instrument at the target
    vehicle's license plate area and press the TRIGGER....



    This is from the Lasertech manual for thier LRB LIDAR instrument. From this manual it appears as if the license plate is the target to aim to. A headlight reading would not be according to the manufacturer's instructions. The OP should not allow the DA or judge to claim it does not matter - they are not experts.

    So one could examine with the court that the officer (if he did not target the license plate) did not follow the manufacture's test method for obtaining a reading from a moving vehicle. Now, the officer cannot testify that it makes no difference (he is not an expert) IMO...even if we all know it does not make a difference.

    The OP is going to have to find case law that says that the methods given by manufacturers' are mandatory to follow (and their should be case law in respect to this point).

    The OP should NOT argue this point with the police officer.

    The OP should ask the officer if he measured the vehicle per the manufacturer's method. The OP should have an admissible manual (FOIA request to police dept. is in order). The OP should ask all the steps the manufacturer says to follow for a moving vehicle.

    The OP should object to calibration records being admitted into evidence for lack of foundation.

    Ask for a summary judgment under every possible reason after the state rests.

    If the OP does not have an admissible copy of the LIDAR manual, the license plate target requirement will not win as no manual will be available for the court to review. License plates are flat, headlights are not ... so make this point & argue that the manufacturer did not recommend targeting either the plate of headlamps, just the plate.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Speeding Tickets: CVC 22350 Trial De Novo, LIDAR No Distance
    By honghai66 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-13-2010, 10:35 PM
  2. Speeding Tickets: Ticket Accuracy
    By Mkang204 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-31-2010, 11:29 AM
  3. Speeding Tickets: California 22349a with LIDAR - Was LIDAR Actually Used
    By cski in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-10-2009, 11:34 AM
  4. Speeding Tickets: Ticket Accuracy
    By adevadancer in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-24-2008, 08:14 AM
  5. DNA Accuracy
    By Pal62 in forum Paternity Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-02-2007, 09:04 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources