The Courtroom (Chapt 10

8/8/2019 The Courtroom (Chapt 10

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-courtroom-chapt-10 1/8

Chapter 10.4

Introduction

Radar Hardware IssuesTake it to Court?

Preparation for Court

Court Day

The Cosine Effect Defense

Visual Speed Judgment

CAVEAT: This document is not intended to give legal advice in any way. This section and any

other sections or references to the law or courtroom activities is based solely on the author'spersonal experiences and observations.

The prosecutor or judge will probably question ANY reference materials' accuracy and reliability, especially

anything technical, presented by a defendant. Be prepared to justify the source of any reference material or

data.

All technical information and conclusions in the POLICE TRAFFIC SPEED RADAR

HANDBOOK quantifiably described using illustrations, graphs, tables, or mathematical

formulas -- based on or derived f rom fundamental scientific and engineering principles,

published factory specifications, measured data, or U.S. Government documents.

Also see Additional Reading / Sources, and About the Author.

RADAR FCC LICENSEMicrowave police traffic radars used in the United States are regulated by the Federal Communications

Commission (FCC). FCC Rules and Regulations, Part 15, 20, and 90 cover Radiolocation Services (police

radar) requirements. The FCC specifics technical standards such as operating frequency, bandwidth, power

density, etc. The FCC Rules do NOT cover the CALIBRATION of radar units, radar ACCURACY, or

OPERATOR capability requirements.

License RequirementsState or local government agencies (including police) that have an FCC license for a communication

system (Public Safety Radio Services) are not required to have a separate FCC license for traffic radar

under part 90 of FCC rules.

Radar units may also be used under Part 90 (other appropriate FCC radio license required) by non-public

safety entities such as professional baseball teams, tennis clubs, automobile and boat racing

organizations, private transportation firms, railroads, etc., to measure the speed of objects or vehicles.

Many public safety agencies operate unattended, low-power, transmit-only radar units under Part 15 of

FCC Rules.

Non-public safety users are required to obtain a Part 90 license.

-- Reference: FCC DA 96-2040, FCC Regulates Radar Transmitters, but not Radar Detectors -- da962040.pdf.

Courtroom (Chapt 10.4) http://copradar.com/preview/chapt10/ch

1/8/2011 1



SUMMARY: Police do not need an FCC license to operate traffic radar (if their radios are licensed), however

other state, local, or agency requirements may apply.

Case Law

There are several case law landmarks supporting police use of microwave traffic radar.

LASER RADARSome states limit or restrict laser radar use. A New Jersey Appeals Court upheld (in a 2-1 decision) a lower

court ruling (based on the LTI Marksman 20-20 lidar) that leaves in place restrictions on laser radar use. New

Jersey Troopers can only use laser radar in clear weather and for vehicles less than 1000 feet.

Sources:-- National Motorists Association NEWS, Jan/Feb 2000, vol 11, issue 1.-- STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. EMAD A. ABESKARON, A-107-98T2F, 24 Nov 1999

NHTSA / IACP Consumer Product List (CPL)The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in conjunction with the International

Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and the Law Enforcement Standards Laboratory of the National

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) developed testing protocols and performance standards for

speed measuring devices. Radars (microwave and laser) that meet the standards are included in the NHTSA /

IACP Consumer Product List (CPL) of approved speed measuring devices.

Only single antenna (front antenna in front/aft systems) capabilities are tested (approved). Laser radars thathave a duel aperture (separate transmit and receive apertures) count as a single antenna. Time/distance

measurement features not tested and not approved. Moving radars approved for car/truck use, not

motorcycles, boats, etc.

CPL approval insures that a microwave or laser traffic radar model (at least the unit tested) meets basic

minimum standards set by the NHTSA, IACP, and NIST. Some, not all, states and/or agencies require speed

measuring devices be CPL approved.

Police know the uniform, flashing lights, siren, car markings, loaded gun(s), and the power to arrest are

intimidating factors when issuing a speeding ticket. Some officers are intentionally intimidating to help insure

tickets are not challenged. Don't let intimidation be a factor in determining whether to challenge a ticket. Do

keep in mind the odds of successfully beating a radar ticket (innocent or not) are against the defendant, but

not zero.

Several factors must be considered before deciding to fight a speeding charge. First and most important, one

must be wrongly accursed -- do not try to beat a charge if you're guilty. However, if you were not speeding as

fast as accused, you might plead for the lesser speed violation to lower the fine (if you can convince the

judge). With some insurance companies the higher the speed the more the insurance rate increases on

conviction. The court clerk should know if the fine would change for a lower speeding ticket, and your

insurance agent should know if rates change with speed.

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), established by federal law in 1966, sets national

standards for every sign, signal, pavement marking, and traffic control signal device in the USA. The standard

is intended to insure signs and signals LOOK and are USED in the same manner everywhere (in the USA).

The MUTCD requires speed limits (USE of speed limit signs) are to be determined by an Engineering

Study (as defined by MUTCD 1A.13). An Engineering Study must also be done (and documented) before

any speed limit can be changed. If some government body changes a speed limit without a proper study --

the speed limit is illegal. Also see Links to Other Sites page for link to MUTCD site (listed under Federal

sites).

A lawyer should be considered if one absolutely cannot afford to lose because of previous tickets and/or the

effect on insurance rate. The defendant is outnumbered in the courtroom -- there are one or more police


1/8/2011 1



officers and the prosecuting attorney (and sometimes judge) versus you -- a lawyer can help even out the

odds. However, legal representation may be more expensive then the fine, and by no means a guarantee of

success.

In general the more people the court serves the better chance for a fair hearing. A small city or county court is

usually the hardest to prove a case and in some situations it is virtually impossible to walk away without

paying something.

Some courts require the defendant to plead guilty or not guilty in a pre-trial hearing at which time a trial date

is set for a not guilty plea. This means two court appearances. Some courts let defendants mail in the plea soonly one court appearance is necessary.

Be prepared to document as many facts as possible. Ground

photographs and/or aerial photographs (widely available for much of

the world on the Internet) of the site could be helpful. Show

approximate distances from the map scale or actual measurements.

Note approximate locations for vehicle and radar at start and finish of

track. Be careful any maps or photographs are not outdated.

WARNING: In Wisconsin (Dec 2002) a judge was reported to have

disregarded a defendant's evidence because the evidence was not

submitted to the prosecutor at least 40 days before the trial. This

results in an additional burden on the defendant not imposed on the prosecutor or police officer, the officer

did (does) not automatically send the defendant evidence without a request. It would seem to be fair the

prosecutor should be required to request (and not an automatic process) evidence if they want it (another

example of don't confuse justice with the law). Check as soon as possible with the court or prosecutor's office

if evidence submittal is required and time constraints.

DISCOVERY

Some experts suggest a defendant should file a Discovery motion or a request for Discovery form with the

court clerk for some or all of the following items;

Table 10.4-1 -- Discovery Motion Items

FCC Public Safety Radio Services (or Radar) License

Radar documents;

-- Make, Model, Serial Number, Options, Age,

-- Manufacturer Certificate of Calibration,

-- Operator Manual and Specifications,

-- Calibration Log Sheets (date, due, lab).

Tuning Fork documents (also see Chapter 4.2 -- Tuning Forks);

-- Specifications (Band, Speed, Resonance, Resonance Tolerance) ,

-- Calibration Log Sheets (date, due, lab).

Officer Training / Qualifications;-- Certificate of Competency,

-- Training Material,

-- Officer Ttraining Records.

All Policies Pertaining to Radar Use.

Officer Notes (your case), and log book (day of ticket).

Note: FCC license and Tuning Forks are not applicable to laser radar (lidar).

You or your lawyer must go through the court clerk to request discovery information by filling out a form, or

making a formal request in writing regarding specific information. In most, if not all, cases an additional


1/8/2011 1



processing/copy fee is required. If the officer cannot produce a reasonable request for information, the charge

may (should) be dismissed.

Some schools of thought suggest that requesting information might negate any chance of the officer not

showing up for court (in which case the charge should be dismissed). Also, if a defendant does not make

proper use of requested information the defendant's creditability could suffer.

OFFICER PRESENTATION

Most officers are trained to collect certain information in the event the case is disputed. Below list typical

minimum information an officer should be prepared to present in court.

Table 10.4-2 -- Police Officer Typical Presentation

Establish time, place, location of radar.

Establish location of offending vehicle.

Identify (able to) the offending vehicle.

Establish and identify the vehicle operator.

Visually observed apparent excessive speed.

Observed vehicle was alone out front(1), (not Fastest mode).

Established steady stable track history.(2)

Insured minimum interference from external sources.(3)

Establish RADAR tested before (and/or after) use;-- self-test run(4,5),

-- tested with tuning fork (4) (not laser radar),

-- tested for Range Accuracy (laser radar)(5),

-- Scope / Beam alignment tested (laser radar)(5),

-- and/or tested against test vehicle (with calibrated speedometer).(4,5)

State (document) qualifications and training.

(1) Chapter 5.2 -- Vehicle Reflectivity / Multiple Vehicles(2) Chapter 5.1 -- Operational Problems / Tracking Time

(3) Chapter 5.4 -- Interference

(4) Chapter 4.2 -- Test and Calibration(5) Chapter 8.2 -- Lidar Test and Calibration

YOUR PRESENTATION

When disputing a speeding charge one should already know the answers to most of the questions listed below

(also see above and Chapter 10.1 -- Motoring Tips / Traffic-Stop Tips). If for any reason some or all of the pertinent

information is not known in advance, ask the officer in court under oath. Do not ask questions the officer has

already addressed unless disputed. The judge will side with the officer on most disagreements (such as exact

location, vehicle placements, distances, etc.) unless one has hard proof.

Table 10.4-3 -- Potential Questions for the Officer

Radar Accuracy Verification

Radar DocumentationIs the radar certified ?

Who established guidelines for certification?

What are policies for radar operation?Many agencies require min track time

3 sec stationary, 5 sec moving mode

Who established operation policies?

Is the radar CPL listed ?

Lab/Shop Calibration Test

Radar latest calibration test?

Calibration Period (how often tested )?

Radar TestWhat are testing guidelines?

Who established test guidelines?

Site pre-tested with test vehicle?

-- Speeds, max/min ranges, Cosine Effects

Self-Test run? When?

Tuning Fork(s) Test? When?-- 2 forks required for moving mode

-- forks do not work for lidar

Additional Test for Lidar Range Accuracy test?


1/8/2011 1



Who established calibration test?

Who calibrates units?

Calibration Log Sheets available?

-- Dates, Due, Results/Data, Repairs

Tuning Fork(s) Test data available?

-- Dates, Band, Due, Resonance

Ranges/Results?

Alignment test?

Horizontal and Vertical?

Radar/Lidar Details

Radar HardwardMake, Model, Date Manufactured?

Year purchased (new or used)?

If used, factory refurbished?

Band (X, K, Ka)? IF Ka, Frequency?

Configuration -- Handheld?

-- Fixed Antenna Front, Aft, Front & Aft?

-- Antenna mounting locations?

Minimum Time for (1) Speed Reading?

Beamwith (Horizontal and Vertical)?

Operating Ranges

Max/min ranges for small/Large Vehicles

Speed Measuring Range

Traffic? Patrol vehicle?

Accuracy?

Radar ModesStationary and Moving Mode?

Fastest/Strongest mode option?

Traffic Direction?-- On-coming, Going, Same-lane?

-- Traffic direction displayed?

Range Control?

-- Number of Settings?

RFI Indicator?

Alleged Violation

EventsRadar/Patrol location?

Your vehicle location?

Color of your vehicle?

Distance from radar to traffic lane?

What was radar track ranges?-- Start/End Ranges?

-- Total track time and distance?

Other traffic? Location(s)?Any Cosine Effects during track?

Any potential inferference sources?-- Patrol vehicle transmitters?

-- Any nearby transmitters?

Lanes covered by radar beam?

Radar SettingsMode-- Stationary, Moving Same-lane mode?

-- Active antenna (front, aft, both)?-- Strongest (std) or Fastest mode?

Antenna angle to traffic?

Alignment to Patrol (moving mode)

Moving mode --

Radar patrol speed match speedometer?Range Control Setting?-- MAX / Mid / min?

-- Traffic range?

Photo/Video Evidence

Verified chain of control?

Driver clearly visible?

Tag # and state legible?

Other Questions

Officer Qualifications

Hours of radar training?Trainer(s) and qualifications?

Training material/records?

Time as officer?

Time in radar enforcement?

Miscellaneous

Number of tickets that day?-- Month? Year?

Tickets disputed?

Quota system in agency?

Not all questions or details are appropriate for all cases. The better you are prepared, the better the odds of a

favorable outcome (the same applies to the prosecution, except the odds are already in their favor). The more

pertinent questions you can ask that the officer cannot answer, the stronger your case.


1/8/2011 1



On court day be prepared to spend the entire day. Do not be surprised that typically 100 or

more people are scheduled at the exact same time. Before a trial one of the prosecutors may

try to talk you into pleading guilty. Be prepared -- scare tactics, intimidation and

time-consuming distractions are designed to make one believe pleading guilty is better than

going to trial. No plea bargain -- no deal.

If the prosecutors believes your case is strong you may be offered a plea bargain. Thestronger you make your case the better the plea bargain, but do not tip too much information in the event you

see the judge. Sometimes you can bargain the plea bargain, sometimes it's take it or leave it. Bargaining to pay

the fine and to not have the ticket on record (for the insurance company to see) is sometimes the best deal

(sometimes not). Most plea bargains also have a probation period of 30 to 90 days, if you don't get any tickets

during probation this ticket goes off the record.

If you do go to trial forget the prosecutor, now the judge is the only one to persuade. Don't try to make a case

with material you don't thoroughly understand, most judges recognize a shaky case. Do not be afraid to ask

the officer specific, pertinent and detailed questions about the radar. The more questions the officer cannot

answer, the less creditable the prosecution's case. Establishing the officer's lack of working knowledge about

radar can discredit the officer's testimony.

The general format for traffic court is the prosecution will state their case and question the officer for support.You will then have a chance to state your case and question the officer. The prosecutor will then try to shatter

your case by questioning you. Be aware judges have authority to conduct court procedures to their

satisfaction, this means court procedures vary with state, county, city, judge, magistrate and arbitrator.

MINIMUM RANGEThe Cosine Effect sometimes works in favor of the motorists in terms of

measured speed -- sometimes a little lower than actual speed. The Cosine Effect

also puts some limitations on the radar -- mainly a minimum range (vehicles lessthan minimum range cannot be measured). The greater the distance the radar

from traffic lane, and the faster the traffic, the greater the minimum range. A

vehicle inside minimum range (closer to radar -- too close) could be mistaken for

a vehicle just outside minimum range by the operator (misinterprets radar

reading). Also see Chapter 2.2 -- Stationary Radar Cosine Effect / Minimum

Range.

The example image location is Interstate 55 (replaced Route 66) between Springfield and East St.Louis, Illinois. This location is the state weigh station (for northbound traffic) near mile marker56.6 north of Litchfield. Springfield District 9 State Police have been known to operate (as shown)

laser and microwave radar from this station and the station north of Springfield (for southboundtraffic) near mile marker 107. Both stations are nearly identical.

LARGE COSINE EFFECT ANGLE

A common occurance is the radar cosine effect angle is so severe when measured speed is corrected for the

cosine effect angle the corrected speed is excessively high and unlikely. This would indicate the radar was

tracking another signal such as another vehicle echo or interference from a transmitter in and/or out of patrol

vehicle.

For example if the cosine angle is 60° radar measured speed is half true speed. If the officer states observed

estimated vehicle speed to be about the same as the radar measured speed (half true speed), one could argue

the officer's judgment was biased incorrectly by the radar. If the officer's estimated speed conflicts with radar

corrected speed, which one is correct, if any? Also see Chapter 2.1 -- Cosine Error Geometry.


1/8/2011 1



OBSERVED COSINE EFFECT

The cosine effect causes measured speed to change, the closer the target vehicle the lower the measured

speed to actual. A good track (steady stable reflection) will show cosine effects -- measured speed changes

slightly. A 75 mph vehicle approaching a radar (microwave or lidar) will display speed readings that look

something like "75...74-74-74-74-74-74-73-73-72-". A 75 mph vehicle receding the radar will display

something like "72-73-73-74-74-74-74-74-74-75-...". Note that each "-" is a radar cycle. Noticeable speed

changes take place relatively close to the radar/lidar. The speed readings are predictable and should be

noticeable to the officer (especially when the vehicle is relatively close to the radar) -- if not the radar was not

tracking the intended (expected) vehicle.

Also see;

Chapter 2.2 -- Stationary Radar Cosine Effect / Cosine Effect Simulator

Chapter 2.3 -- Moving Radar Cosine Effect / Cosine Effect Simulator

Also see Chapter 1.4 -- Visual Speed Measurements.

Some courts (judges) will accept an officer's meager visual observation of vehicle speed (even if all other

evidence discarded). This is dubious at best. Any court accepting a visual speed guess alone as good enough

is a kangaroo court by definition.

Test the officer's speed assessment ability by presenting a video of your vehicle traveling at several speeds.

You will probably have to provide your own video playback equipment in court. When recording place the

video camera about the same distance from traffic as the officer was for your case. The closer the officer is to

the traffic lane (for best radar performance and to minimize the Cosine Effect) the harder it is to judge speed.

In court show a speed run, write down the officers guess, then show the next run. After all runs compare the

officer's guesses to speedometer reading. This could work against you if the officer is proficient at estimating

speeds (not lightly but possible).

Another test is to assess the officer's ability to estimate the speed of a falling object. Drop an object from

several different heights and ask the officer to guess the speed of the object as it hits the ground. Note that a

falling object has a changing speed, speed increases at a constant rate (acceleration due to gravity). Someone(the officer) adapt at visually judging speed should be expected to estimate a falling object's speed

(instantaneous) upon striking the ground, or at least the average speed -- half (0.5) instantaneous speed.

Table 10.4-4 --

Free Falling Object Speed

DISTANCE DISTANCE

OBJECT OBJECT

FALLS TIME SPEED FALLS TIME SPEED

(feet) (sec) (mph) (meters) (sec) (kph)

------------------------ ------------------------

0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0

1 0.25 5.5 0.5 0.32 11.3

2 0.35 7.7 1.0 0.45 15.9

3 0.43 9.5 1.5 0.55 19.5

4 0.50 10.9 2.0 0.64 22.5

5 0.56 12.2 2.5 0.71 25.2

6 0.61 13.4 3.0 0.78 27.6

7 0.66 14.5 3.5 0.84 29.8

8 0.71 15.5 4.0 0.90 31.9

9 0.75 16.4 4.5 0.96 33.8

10 0.79 17.3 5.0 1.01 35.7

For a free falling object with an initial speed of 0 (at rest);

t = (2d/a)0.5, and v = at.


1/8/2011 1



t = time

d = distance object fallsv = instantaneous velocity at time t

a = acceleration (due to gravity) = 32.2 ft/s2 = 9.8 m/s2

Also see Appendix A -- Acceleration Parameters.

CopRadar.com

Police Traffic Speed Radar Handbook

Chapter 10.4 -- The Courtroom

CopRadar.com

Order PasswordInformation

Police Traffic Speed Radar Web site


The Courtroom (Chapt 10

Documents

Transcript of The Courtroom (Chapt 10