[Vial]

Need everyone’s help on this, my court date was today however I stumbled onto this site literally 1 & ½ before entering the courtroom with my defense…

I was inspired by Janes’s 18 yrs old who won her court case. Here is my citation as seen above. To be brief I had a GPS system in my car at the time of being stopped, so I took the log file into court showing that was actually doing 55mph and not 79/55 the judge was very receptive and impress as I used the same line defense as Janes (18yrs old) Daughter.

After listen to both sides he stated that he would take all this under advisement but said that the GPS log ( Which he actually allowed me to playback for the court) was compelling but constituted hearsay unless I can show by an expert that this authentic and back me up.
During the process when the prosecutor tried to stop me from presenting the GPS he simply overruled him stating that he wanted to see this.

He also wanted to know what the state of Ohio limits the use of the Lidar to as I had stated the state of NJ limits it to 1000ft.

So this where I need your help in finding that info and if any experts are available to certify the loop holes of the LIDAR, and authenticates the GPS tracking info.

He gave me a week to send him this info…I think we are on a good track if we can furnish the requested data.
I also need to download the video on Utube about the Lidar.

Originally Posted by Jane Hughes

First of all my daughter and myself would like to thank Suf Daddy for all the assistance he gave us the past few months. Without him and this forum the outcome of this trial today would have been very different. A big thank you!

My daughter (18) was caught with LIDAR in MA doing 87 in a 65, distance 1580 feet! She sent her ticket in ‘not guilty, she was found guilty at the Clerk Magistrates hearing and she had her day in court today.

She went armed with a few pages of questions for the officer. She started by asking the judge for a dismissal on account of the police’s failure to provide discovery. She had a copy of the letter she sent as well as a copy of Chapter 66, section 10 ready to hand to the judge, but did not get to that as the judge cut her off and asked her what items she needed, she responded “officer’s notes and the type of Lidar used in the citation”. She was still looking on her letter for the other items when the judge cut her short and said he wants to go straight to the cross examination. (She also had a few other items listed for dismissal - ticket was not signed by her and she was going to ask for a continuance because she did not have the info she needed to prepare her case but obviously could not get into it.)

The police officer stated his side of the story, surprisingly he said he had a hand held laser although my daughter thought she saw a tripod when he stopped her. This was the first time she was pulled over and she did not know the importance of taking mental notes of the circumstances.
First question was “ Does the LIDAR instrument measure speed?”- Yes. (which was wrong, it measures distances and from that it measures time and computes a ‘speed’).
“What brought my vehicle to your attention?’-Speeding.
“At what distance did you make this visual estimate?” He did not answer this question; instead he repeated the obvious fact that he clocked her at 1580 feet.
“What distance, from your training, is the limit to be able to judge a vehicle’s speed?”- Don’t recall.
“Is it true that the Lidar you used only displays speed in the scope or HUD and the distance on the back of the instrument?” - He answered that he did not remember the specifics of the instrument he used.
“If the distance is displayed on the back of the instrument, isn’t it true that it would have taken you a few seconds to establish this distance?’- Yes.
“ How many seconds officer?”- I don’t know.
“How far from you was the target vehicle when you took the speed reading? - 1580 feet.
“How much time elapsed between when you first observed me and when you clocked me?”- Don’t know.

What we were trying to do here was to get the distance at which he first observed the vehicle, deduct the 1580ft, use the difference divided by the time in the previous question and use the answer **/88x60= ** mph
and hopefully this would have brought the speed down.(60 mph=88 ft per sec).

“What part of my car did you aim at?” - The front.
“Which part, the number plate or headlamps” -Windscreen and hood!!!
“Do you hit what you aim at with 100%accuracy?” - YES!
“You hit my car at 1580 feet, more than a third of a mile - which is nearly twice the eye limiting resolution of 855 feet, so it would be impossible to have a 100% accuracy won’t it?”- I don’t know.
“What part of the car did the invisible beam reflect off?”- I don’t know.
“In the LTI operator’s manual, how large is the Lidar beam at a distance of say 1000 feet?”- I don’t know. (She told him 3 feet wide).
“Officer, are you aware that the New Jersey Superior court does not accept distances in excess of 1000feet.”- No.
“Do you agree that the width of the laser beam at 1580 feet is 57 inches high and wide, nearly 5 feet? - I don’t know.
“How often do you do your scope alignment test?” - I don’t know because it came straight from the barracks.
”Doesn't the operators' manual for LTI LIDAR guns say to do the alignment test daily before using it?” - I did not read the manual before trial.

Now she had a few more questions about cosine error, panning and sweeping, the officer’s training and also quite a few pictures to show the judge but instead she asked the last two questions as she could always came back to the other questions depending on officer’s answers to the following.

“Officer, is it possible that at a distance of more than a third of a mile you registered another car and then stopped mine?” -No
“Officer, if the beam is 57" wide which is nearly 5 feet and invisible, can you be 100% sure that sweep and panning of the LIDAR light reflection didn't happen, keep in mind the size of the vehicle.”- No
(Suf sent us pictures that show that at this distance the car is completely covered by the beam).

“No more questions your honor”.

The judge asked her to state her side of the story, she told him she did not speed, cars were passing her, speed control was set at 65 mph and she thinks that the Lidar hit another car. The officer did not want to cross-examine and the judge said “NOT GUILTY!”
The court official who handed her a copy of the judgment said she did a great job.

I guess she was lucky today - the judge was receptive - however she stayed calm and did a good job, so kudos to her! I am sure it pays to remember the basics such as being polite, dressing conservatively and being well prepared.

Again, many thanks to Suf for your generous help!

As for the forum, I got into the habit of reading it every day and will continue to do so.