The case was thown out within 5 minutes once the judge heard both the police officers account and the driver's.
1. For what obvious reason would the judge throw the case out?
2. Scientifically speaking, if radar is so 'accurate' how could this error occur in the first place?
This ticket was issued along Mandela highway in Kingston, Jamaica. A 4 to 6 lane dual carriage way leading into the capital city (Lookup on Google maps). There is a 15 to 30 foot median with heavy foliage separating the two directions of traffic flow.
Please do some research and provide some references for your answers.Why did a Judge do this? What's the Scientific explanation?
A radar unit is accurate to plus or minus 1 mile per hour, so accuracy is not an issue. The issue is with training. Radar units are subject to several anomalies, apparently the officer did not recognize there was one present at the time of the clock.
Radar units operate by emitting a radio wave of a known frequency. The wave continues unless it is reflected, refracted, or absorbed. The dense foliage would absorb a great deal of energy.
If the radar wave strikes a solid stationary object, it is reflected back at the same frequency. If the object is moving, the frequency changes in relation to the speed. The faster the speed, the more change to the frequency. This is calculated by the counting unit, and a speed reading is displayed.
The radar unit is only capable of showing one reading. This would be the strongest signal. The Suzuki would be a small target. If there is a larger vehicle further back, it could reflect more signal.
There is also an anomalie known as "shadowing", where the unit picks up two vehicles, and either combines or subtracts the speed.
Do your own homework.Why did a Judge do this? What's the Scientific explanation?
It seems to me that the judge heard something in the officer's testimony that went against procedure and thus invalidated the arrest.Why did a Judge do this? What's the Scientific explanation?
The first thing I thought of was that the officers caught the speed in kph but noted it as mph, however 110 kph in a 50 mph zone would still be speeding.
I don't know; what's the answer?
1) The vehicle isn't capable of that speed.
2) The policeman's location would have blocked a clear view of the vehicle through the foliage. Diffraction of light through moving leaves gives the illusion of faster speed (and no, there isn't room here to explain why).
Anyway, you should be doing your own work; or at least have the courtesy to include the witness statements we're supposed to be evaluating.
You don't have enough information to give an accurate answer here.
Was the officer using moving or stationary radar?
Was he facing the same direction as the suspect or the opposite?
Was the officer able to make a visual estimate of the speed in addition to the radar reading?
There are many possible explanations, but more information is needed.
1. The Honorable Judge threw the case out because... Obviously a Suzuki could never do 110 m.p.h. in it's owners wildest dreams.
2. You meant to type " Scientifically speaking, if radar is so "accurate" then how could this "expletive?!?!" have occurred in the first place?
3. Radar is not accurate it relies on sound waves which are sporatic at best... Laser is far more accurate. But rather he got shot with Radar or Laser he had the right to look at the gun and see for himself
Judges do as they please
It sounds like homework and if we answer it then YOU are not doing your own work. Research it yourself (the real way) and write your own paper.
Or did you just not like the answers you got the first time?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>
Similar story with totally different "questions"......makes ya wonder.
And considering you say this took place in a foreign Country, what is it you think that we can do for you anyway? Your questions need to be directed to Jamaican authorities.
No comments:
Post a Comment