
How My Smart Phone Contributed To Getting Me Out Of A Speeding Ticket - acangiano
http://skattertech.com/2011/02/how-my-smart-phone-got-me-out-of-a-speeding-ticket-in-traffic-court/
======
pilom
You got off because the Radar gun didn't have a certificate of Calibration
less than 6 months old. Plain and simple. In almost every state radar guns
must be operated according to the manufacturers directions which includes
calibration every 6 months. If the Officer doesn't have an up to date
calibration certificate, he has no case.

~~~
hammock
Agree with the above. I have a fair amount of experience with traffic court-
you did not get off because of your GPS; it was because of the officer's
answers to your questions. Good job asking, though.

The #1 tip for any court situation like this is the question the officer about
events on the day it happened. By default the officer's word (and/or his radar
gun) is worth more than your own, but if you can get him to say ANYTHING that
calls into question his recollection of events, then his credibility is
reduced. Incidentally this is also why most cops take great notes.

------
Tyrannosaurs
"He mentioned that he was not familiar enough with GPS technology to make a
decision based on my evidence, but I can’t help but imagine that it was an
important factor."

So the judge categorically stated that it wasn't a factor in his decision but
the author imagines it was...

The difference between what you want to hear and what was actually said.

The reality is that he got lucky because he heard what the lawyer before him
said and copied it and the police officer was ill prepared (possibly because
he knew that the defendant was representing himself which is normally a sign
that someone doesn't know what they're doing).

~~~
Flemlord
I assumed the judge didn't want to set a legal precedent for accepting cell
phone GPS data. He entered the verdict in such a way that it couldn't be used
to influence later cases.

~~~
CWuestefeld
I don't think that a local traffic court, in what's certainly an unpublished
ruling, _can_ create a precedent. That's not how the system works.

~~~
qeorge
No, that _is_ how the system works. However, precedents can only go
"downhill." From Wikipedia:

 _"a lower court must honor findings of law made by a higher court that is
within the appeals path of cases the court hears"_

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stare_decisis>

Given, this court may not have any lower courts, in which case you'd be right
- albeit for the wrong reason.

~~~
CWuestefeld
_this court may not have any lower courts, in which case you'd be right -
albeit for the wrong reason._

Actually, that was precisely what I was saying. It's obvious to me that a
local traffic court has no lower courts below it.

In addition, to be a precedent, the decision needs to be published (as I
understand it, but IANAL). When you think about it, this must be true: no
court can follow a precedent that cannot be discovered.

------
kbutler
Officer: I clocked you going 40 miles per hours. Driver: I wasn't going to be
out that long.

GPS measures average speed (delta position vs delta time). Radar guns measure
instantaneous speed (doppler shift).

GPS also tends to be less accurate in a partial Faraday cage (like a metal
vehicle).

Bottom line: don't expect GPS to get you out of your speeding ticket with a
tech-savvy judge.

~~~
zb
Technically, GPS uses both pseudorange and doppler data as an input. These are
usually combined with the previously measured position and speed using a
Kalman filter. Speed is generally more accurate than position (to the extent
that it makes any sense to compare them) because pseudorange errors tend to
change comparatively slowly. Of course how the receiver outputs the speed is
up to it, but since it falls out of the position calculation for free it's
unlikely many will be storing straight delta position/delta time.

Having said that, it's not especially strong evidence since it's pretty
trivial to fake. However, in this case the title is correct: it _contributed_
to him getting off because it gave him the confidence to challenge the ticket.

~~~
pkulak
Sure it's easy to fake, but you are under oath. You can stand up there all day
and say that, to the best of your knowledge you were not speeding and not
perjure yourself. If you get up there with forged documents and get caught,
that's something else entirely. So, they are not iron-clad evidence, but they
should be pretty good.

------
city41
This seems like a non story to me. The judge did not confirm at all the GPS
data affected their decision.

However, I have used GPS data successfully in a somewhat similar situation. I
was riding my bicycle to work and got hit by a car that was pulling out of a
driveway. My GPS recorded the entire incident and showed quite clearly that
the car pulled out and hit me well after I had already ridden pass the
driveway, showing they just plain weren't looking (and not the other way
around). The whole incident ended up in my favor.

~~~
dotBen
GPS is only accurate to 5-10 metres so it would be impossible to _accurately_
tell you were in front of a driveway with it.

------
yellowbkpk
I run at least one logging GPS in my car at all times for OpenStreetMap
mapping. As a result, I've asked several lawyer friends about this situation
should I ever be cited for speeding. Just about everyone has said that the GPS
data would most likely be overlooked because it can easily be faked (or at
least the decision makers have that perception) and/or judges don't know about
it (so they default to ignoring it).

~~~
rmc
Another problem with GPS is the accuracy (or lack thereof). Sometimes you get
a good GPS signal (e.g. outside, clear view of the sky etc.), sometimes you
don't, and you position could be off by 10m. Some GPS store the accuracy of
each track point (e.g. VDOP and HDOP), some don't. If your GPS doesn't store
the accuracy, then someone could claim your GPS is off by 20m, and hence you
were speding (or the data is unreliable).

------
bryanlarsen
I'm glad the judge & author pointed out that it wasn't necessarily the GPS
that got him off: the chain of custody could probably have been successfully
challenged. But it's darn good circumstantial evidence.

Warning: probable abuse of lawyerly language in above post.

------
mychacho
Basically the only help your phone provided is to give you guts to defend
yourself in court. The data you obtained with google tracks has as much legal
authenticity IMHO as data you could pull out of your behind. But the fact that
you asked the officer the right questions and he didnt have the right answers
is in my opinion why the judge decided in your favor.

btw here is a similar story with an iphone and a radar detector
[http://www.americanbankingnews.com/2011/01/21/radaractive-
he...](http://www.americanbankingnews.com/2011/01/21/radaractive-helps-a-new-
york-driver-fight-a-speeding-ticket/)

------
lukifer
Not long ago, I got pulled over and discovered my proof of insurance card was
out of date. I was able to use the iPhone app of my insurance company to load
up a PDF of the most recent copy and prove that my insurance was current. The
cop was amazed that I could do this. No ticket. :)

------
mryall
My uncle was driving a truck a few years ago and hit a woman who walked in
front of his vehicle. It was not his fault because the woman stepped out
looking the wrong way, and the wet weather and short distance meant it wasn't
possible for him to stop in time.

In this instance, the GPS tracking data was used by the police to verify that
he was not travelling faster than the speed limit. The data backed up his
statement to the police and he therefore wasn't considered negligent or liable
for the accident in any way.

Technology like this certainly has its benefits, particularly when the
presumption of guilt is so often on the driver in this kind of situation.

------
Mizza
Next time you're interacting with the police, you might want to use the
OpenWatch recorder to record the interaction:

<http://www.openwatch.net>

~~~
PakG1
I can't remember specifically the example, but there was a recent case where
someone recorded the conversation with a police officer without the police
officer's knowledge or consent. This ended up getting the person in a lot more
hot water than the original issue. If someone could provide specifics, would
be appreciated.

~~~
true_religion
Usually you have to at least tell someone they are being recorded, but they
don't have to consent to it.

~~~
metageek
That's the law in Massachusetts, but the cops don't believe it.

~~~
losvedir
Really? All I can find[1] seems to indicate all parties need to consent:

"4. The term 'interception' means to secretly hear, secretly record, or aid
another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of any wire or oral
communication through the use of any intercepting device by any person other
than a person __given prior authority by all parties __to such
communication..."

[1]
[http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/...](http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter272/Section99)

~~~
metageek
If you tell them you're doing it, it's not secret.

~~~
losvedir
What about the "given prior authority by all parties" part?

~~~
metageek
Read it again. That's an exception for the "no secret recording rule"; it's
not an extra requirement.

------
omh
_The speed limit in the area was a mere 25 miles per hour_ ... _I found that
my phone only recorded a top speed of just 26 miles per hour_

It seems that he probably _was_ speeding, albeit only slightly. That makes it
more impressive that he ended up not guilty!

~~~
martincmartin
In Boston (all of MA?), as I understand it, it's only a crime to go 5 mph or
more over the speed limit. 4mph or less and you don't get a ticket.

~~~
_mayo
It's the same in Ohio as well

~~~
m_myers
Here's a table of speeding laws, for anyone else who's wondering about their
state: <http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/laws.html>

------
tocomment
My question is how does he leave that app running while he drives around. When
I turn on GPS on my HTC incredible the battery dies in 1.5 hours.

Otherwise I'd love to record everywhere I go like this. I'm hoping the next
generation of phones won't have this problem.

~~~
jff
Some phones, at least in the Droid line, have car mounts which include
chargers; he mentioned a car mount in the article, so it's quite likely using
it as a GPS was having a _positive_ impact on battery life in this case!

------
osipov
In California you can avoid going to traffic court and do a trial by
declaration. Much easier, very effective.

------
georgieporgie
I got out of a speeding ticket in 2004 because the officer had allowed his
radar certification training to lapse in _1982_. The guy before me in court
also got his case dropped when the judge found out the officer hadn't been
radar certified.

This guy's GPS data was a novelty. No more a deciding factor in the judgment
than his choice to wear business attire.

