speeding - what is ACUTRAK?
 

I just got pulled over for speeding. The ticket says the officer used acutrak. I can't find anything about it on the web. Does anyone know what it is or a place where I could research it?
Thanks

Did you get pulled over in Butler, PA? I see your location is in PA. I found on the web that they list their police officers as being Robic SC-800 Acutrak certified. The SC-800 is a stopwatch which I presume that they use in VASCAR traps. www.robic.de to look at the unit but beware its in german. Hope this helps.

0260N4

No, not Butler (although I did see that web site). I got pulled over in Hartleton, PA - if anyone is a PennState fan you may know the place. It's on route 45. Anyway, I checked out the web site. Thanks. I wasn't able to get much info from it though, as you said, it was in German.

Here's what my ticket says, though. There are 2 boxes Miles timed and seconds timed. Typed in these boxes are
5' // .019

Now, I know how VASCAR works. It's a distance over time measurement. If I was going 5 feet in .019 seconds, my speed would be something like 180 MPH! I was cited for 48 in a 35.

I'm going to fight this one and hate the idea of going in there blind. I've read a lot on fighting tickets and plan to request disclosure of evidence against me. Maybe more info woule be there.
THanks 0260N4 for finding the web page.

Now there isn't any chance that you actually going that fast, is there? ;)

Ehyde


48 mph = 70.4 fps.

How that translates into the numbers on your ticket is beyond me.


Larry III
PS: When you request the evidence, ask for the normal interval between calibrations on the unit that tracked you. Also ask for the date of it's last calibration before you got the ticket.

PPS: Your speedometer must be slightly optimistic.
5'/0.019 sec. =179.4025 mph :D

With no sarcasm and in all seriousness. No, I wasn't going that fast. THis area of PA Route 45 is notorious as being a speed trap. I would never speed through there. It's a 2 lane no-passing zone road through a town. It's not even fun to go fast there:D

Yeah, I have run the numbers every way I can think. I have no idea what those numbers mean.

About the calibration, the last one was 29 days -- listed on the ticket. I will add the request for the normal calibration period. Possibly it was right at the end of a 30 day interval. Thanks for the advice

I recall something a friend in Fla. clued me into, regarding radar, maybe it might help you. Florida statutes stated (this is a few years ago, things may have changed) that "...all speed measuring and/or detecting devices must be checked and calibrated every six months." The nice part was the 'and', officers could check the gun all day long but there was no method of calibration available to them. If the gun required calibration it had to be sent in to a repair facility. If they had no record of the gun being in for service they had to toss the case out.

When the judge asked me if I had anything to say in my defense I just asked the officer "What was the method of calibration?" and the judge immediately dismissed the case. When I started to ask why, the judge replied that any further responses on my part would result in a contempt charge. That certainly boosted my confidence in the local judiciary system. At least I left smiling....

Beav

Well, I've mailed in the citation and requested a trial. Sent in the request for disclosure of evidence also. Thanks to all for the advise. I'll let you know what info they send me and how the trial goes.

Discovery refused
 

I sent the request for information relating to my citation and the police chief refused to supply any information. The reply said:
"REFUSED" !

Does anyone have an idea if I can/should fight this. I was thinking I would go to the hearing and show the judge the refusal and ask my charges be dismissed because the PD prevented me from preparing an adequate defense?

First off - I am not a lawyer so take what I am about to say with all due respect (that is to say, none).

I believe that they can refuse absent a granted discovery motion. Therefore, I would contact the court and request a discovery motion. (However, first I would find a friend, relative, acquaintance, friend of a friend - well, you get the idea - who is a lawyer to ask how to go about it).

I would not be surprized if the the police know that they did not adhere to procedures and that is why they refused your request. That, or they always refuse even when they have conformed with the law and regulations.

Good luck and let us know the outcome.

The verdict is in
 

I had my day in court and I lost. The whold Hartleton, PA police department was at the trial (yes, all 2 of them). All I have to say is that they ganged up on me. If only the arresting officer was there, I'm certain I would have won. He made the mistake of testifying that the VASCAR lines were 1000 feet apart (instead of 100), but the chief caught him right away and he corrected himself. Oh well. I'll just have to watch it until the points expire off of my license. Thanks for all of the input.

Numbers game
 

Chris, they screwed you good on this one. If you were doing 48 mph, you would have covered 100 feet in approx 1.8939 secs.

This number is remarkably similar to the value in the second box, 0.019. It is only wrong by a factor of one hundred.

If this is the measurement in seconds over 100 feet, it implies you were doing 4800 mph. If instead this is the time measurement for covering 5 feet, as the first box might imply, then your speed is one twentieth of this value, or 240 mph.

Did you not have a lawyer? If these guys are mathematically incompetent, you are entitled to be let off on a technicality. None of these values indicate 48mph

Joe

Re: Numbers game
 

Ahh, Joe, I did get a (pretty bogus) explanation on that one. The 5'//.019 is a reference to the distance I was times (either 5 feet using an automated system -- or -- .019 miles (100 feet) using the stopwatch method). Testimony revealed I was timed over 100 feet (something I already knew but didn't let on). The officer never did fill in the time it took me to cover that 100 feet distance. That was the main point of my argument. That there was no way to mathmatically verify the accusation made by the officer. The magistrate did seem to contimplate it for a moment. He then read from the PA vehicle code which states that (other than pertinent identification information) all that must be present on the citation is the posted speed limit and the speed at which I was allegidely traveling. The magistrate said it would be "good practice" for the officer to fill in all blanks, and that indeed an error was mane--not a fatal error, though. He then went on about speed enforcement being a "very mechanical system" and the officer fulfilled his burdeon of proof when he handwrote "35/48 ". Bunch of crap if you ask me. No I didn't have a lawyer. I felt I understood all the points of law. And now I understand just how badly I got screwed. It basically came down to his word against mine. So what if he couldn't back up his speed measurement. HA!

Letter of the law
 

Tough break Chris.

In a way not surprising the judge supports the cop. What is surprising would be the premise that the cop measuring your speed, and neglecting to fill out the paperwork for your defense effort is a done deal. In this case you were guilty until proven innocent, radically against the precepts of law in the US or this side of the pond. A lawyer might have been able to make something of this.

Write it up in the newspaper if I were you, this is sloppy police work. If we lie down they will bury us with fines. This is a money harvesting mechanism more than it is a speeding deterrent these days.

Joe