Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Speed Record Against Police - Black Box

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Speed Record Against Police - Black Box


    Which software for a CAR COMPUTER can have this option:

    can record (via a bluetooth GPS) for a time or a router planner all speed take by our car and make also a grafic analysis?
    Maybe this can be useful when police (specially in some east countries) stops you saying your speed limit was over.

    I see G-NET Digital Dash but I don't know if this is included, otherwise where I must find and how.

    Thanks in advance.

    Sullivan2002 from Italy.






  • #2
    I am not sure about in Italy, but here in the US, that type of evidence would not be very strong, because the data can be EASILY manipulated to be false.

    I know that IGuidance has the ability to record a trip including speed, which can be played back in IGuidance. I have a feeling MOST GPS software allows that.

    Michael
    ...I love the French language...especially to curse with...Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculés de ta mère. You see, it's like wiping your *** with silk, I love it.

    Comment


    • #3
      FreeDrive using the destinator back end can log journeys.

      But anything that can record an NMEA data string should be sufficent.

      And I don't think NMEA data can 'easily' be manipulated to change speed or positions that will make it readable.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Enforcer View Post
        FreeDrive using the destinator back end can log journeys.

        But anything that can record an NMEA data string should be sufficent.

        And I don't think NMEA data can 'easily' be manipulated to change speed or positions that will make it readable.
        Just enter the NMEA string into excel, run a script on the data to change location on it to show you were going slower then you were cited for, and then save it back into an NMEA string, and play it on your "player"

        See, it is easy. An NMEA sentance

        (http://www.gpsinformation.org/dale/nmea.htm#position)

        " $GPGGA,123519,4807.038,N,01131.000,E,1,08,0.9,545. 4,M,46.9,M,,*47

        Where:
        GGA Global Positioning System Fix Data
        123519 Fix taken at 12:35:19 UTC
        4807.038,N Latitude 48 deg 07.038' N
        01131.000,E Longitude 11 deg 31.000' E

        1 Fix quality: 0 = invalid
        1 = GPS fix (SPS)
        2 = DGPS fix
        3 = PPS fix
        4 = Real Time Kinematic
        5 = Float RTK
        6 = estimated (dead reckoning) (2.3 feature)
        7 = Manual input mode
        8 = Simulation mode
        08 Number of satellites being tracked
        0.9 Horizontal dilution of position
        545.4,M Altitude, Meters, above mean sea level
        46.9,M Height of geoid (mean sea level) above WGS84
        ellipsoid
        (empty field) time in seconds since last DGPS update
        (empty field) DGPS station ID number
        *47 the checksum data, always begins with *"

        Change the position (green) to show a different location that indicates you were moving slower then claimed by the officer, or change the time (red) to make it seem it took longer to get to that position.

        Just takes some manipulation. Seee, easy.

        Michael

        EDIT: Oooops, forgot about the checksum. From that same site

        "There is a provision for a checksum at the end of each sentence which may or may not be checked by the unit that reads the data. The checksum field consists of a '*' and two hex digits representing the exclusive OR of all characters between, but not including, the '$' and '*'. A checksum is required on some sentences. "

        Not all units need the checksum, and it can be generated quite easily, all it is is the total number of characters excluding the commas and the "$" and "*"
        ...I love the French language...especially to curse with...Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculés de ta mère. You see, it's like wiping your *** with silk, I love it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Wiredwrx View Post
          Just enter the NMEA string into excel, run a script on the data to change location on it to show you were going slower then you were cited for, and then save it back into an NMEA string, and play it on your "player"

          See, it is easy. An NMEA sentance

          (http://www.gpsinformation.org/dale/nmea.htm#position)

          " $GPGGA,123519,4807.038,N,01131.000,E,1,08,0.9,545. 4,M,46.9,M,,*47

          Where:
          GGA Global Positioning System Fix Data
          123519 Fix taken at 12:35:19 UTC
          4807.038,N Latitude 48 deg 07.038' N
          01131.000,E Longitude 11 deg 31.000' E

          1 Fix quality: 0 = invalid
          1 = GPS fix (SPS)
          2 = DGPS fix
          3 = PPS fix
          4 = Real Time Kinematic
          5 = Float RTK
          6 = estimated (dead reckoning) (2.3 feature)
          7 = Manual input mode
          8 = Simulation mode
          08 Number of satellites being tracked
          0.9 Horizontal dilution of position
          545.4,M Altitude, Meters, above mean sea level
          46.9,M Height of geoid (mean sea level) above WGS84
          ellipsoid
          (empty field) time in seconds since last DGPS update
          (empty field) DGPS station ID number
          *47 the checksum data, always begins with *"

          Change the position (green) to show a different location that indicates you were moving slower then claimed by the officer, or change the time (red) to make it seem it took longer to get to that position.

          Just takes some manipulation. Seee, easy.

          Michael

          EDIT: Oooops, forgot about the checksum. From that same site

          "There is a provision for a checksum at the end of each sentence which may or may not be checked by the unit that reads the data. The checksum field consists of a '*' and two hex digits representing the exclusive OR of all characters between, but not including, the '$' and '*'. A checksum is required on some sentences. "

          Not all units need the checksum, and it can be generated quite easily, all it is is the total number of characters excluding the commas and the "$" and "*"
          To change one single record is easy. However to change a whole stream to a different speed and have it still make sense would not be easy, believe me it is something I have thought about.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Enforcer View Post
            To change one single record is easy. However to change a whole stream to a different speed and have it still make sense would not be easy, believe me it is something I have thought about.
            What was the hard part about it.

            One could simply drive the same route, at the proper speed, and then just change the date and time stamp (again, with excel, this is VERY EASY, and actually, that string doesn't include a DATE stamp, just a time stamp) to show you did it by the book.

            No need to figure out "positions, lats and longs" because you already have them, either from that trip, or form another NMEA string.

            Michael
            ...I love the French language...especially to curse with...Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculés de ta mère. You see, it's like wiping your *** with silk, I love it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Wiredwrx View Post
              What was the hard part about it.

              One could simply drive the same route, at the proper speed, and then just change the date and time stamp (again, with excel, this is VERY EASY, and actually, that string doesn't include a DATE stamp, just a time stamp) to show you did it by the book.

              No need to figure out "positions, lats and longs" because you already have them, either from that trip, or form another NMEA string.

              Michael

              To do it at home after the fact yes and maybe, but to do it there and then when stopped, I think not.

              yes you have some already prepared, but to change to dates and times on the fly would be difficult.

              I didn't say it couldn't be done, but to do it in the time it takes for the officer to reach you after stopping the car, would be difficult.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Enforcer View Post
                To do it at home after the fact yes and maybe, but to do it there and then when stopped, I think not.

                yes you have some already prepared, but to change to dates and times on the fly would be difficult.

                I didn't say it couldn't be done, but to do it in the time it takes for the officer to reach you after stopping the car, would be difficult.
                True, I was thinking more along the lines of court, since no officer is gonna stop giving a ticket just because you show them a GPS track that says you were going slower.

                Now, doing it instantly would take some work, but could probably be done if the route was continuously saved, say every 2 minutes, and automatically reworked in excel using a script and say, AutoIt, but I don't think it would be practical, and would take a lot more work then would just fighting the ticket in court using the "corrected" information.

                Michael

                EDIT: I guess I have a project for tonight and tomorrow. Just got to make sure I can get the raw NMEA data on the way home tonight. Hmmmmm, we'll see.
                ...I love the French language...especially to curse with...Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculés de ta mère. You see, it's like wiping your *** with silk, I love it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Wiredwrx View Post
                  True, I was thinking more along the lines of court, since no officer is gonna stop giving a ticket just because you show them a GPS track that says you were going slower.
                  Don't you always

                  I don't know, if they are deliberatley scamming/hassling you then they may feel on shakey ground if there is a possible way you can prove them wrong.

                  If their equipment has been checked within the required time period, and acoording to it you were over the speed limit, then no it will not stop them.


                  Good luck with the project.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The key is to have a camera and voice recorder in your car. Get a shot of the data as the cop is coming up and make sure your on record disputing it and showing evidence to the officer. I can imagine that would hold up a lot better than data you came up with by your court date.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      On a similar note, is there any software that can overlay speed, location, and any other engine parameters over a video input and record it, in a similar way to what police cars have? It'd be awesome to have something like that on a track day or alike.

                      Also, it _might_ be able to be used in a similar way to what the thread starter was chasing. As a record of your trip for fines etc
                      I installed my carpc into my pet Kangaroo, mate.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        sullivan2002 - I have a working prototype of a camera recording system which overlays in text the current time & date but more importantly your speed as logged by your GPS receiver. So in effect youo wioll have a piece of footage which is water-marked with your speed as you travel.

                        The full thread is here if you want to subscribe to it for updates.

                        http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/show...506#post973506
                        System - Epia SP13000 for Main PC, Holux GR-213 USB GPS Receiver SiRF Star III, 2.4Ghz Uplink with VNC and Custom designed USB Intelligent SDC (In DEV). All fed to a Sony CDX-F7500 Headunit via USB. www.wrx-carpc.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by gthing View Post
                          The key is to have a camera and voice recorder in your car. Get a shot of the data as the cop is coming up and make sure your on record disputing it and showing evidence to the officer. I can imagine that would hold up a lot better than data you came up with by your court date.
                          Why do you think "that would hold up a lot better" First of all, in many states, you are not permitted to record someone else with out thier permission, and would therefore be inadmissable in court. Second, proving that you argued with the cop, or somehow "proved" something to them does nothing. Cops are not the ones who measure proof. Do you really think that when a cop comes to arrest you, he is supposed to listen to your evidence to determine if you should be arrested. Nope, that is the JUDGES job. The judge (or jury) is called the trier of facts. They measure and wheigh the evidence, THE OFFICER DOES NOT. All the officer knows is that he had Probable Cause to arrest and/or cite you for speeding. You can argue and show proof all you want, it is not the officers job, and thankfully not, to determine if your evidence is good or not.

                          That is why you bring it to court. The judge decides who has the "better" evidence.

                          Also, NEVER ARGUE WITH A COP ABOUT ANYTHING. Just take the ticket. If he asks you to incriminate yourself, like "Do you know why I pulled you over" the answer is No, I do not. Do you know that you were going 60 miles an hour?, the answer is "I do not believe I have violated any laws" or I do not believe I was going that fast. That is all, don't argue, and don't give ANY information, and politely disagree with his statements with the ones I just stated.

                          Michael
                          ...I love the French language...especially to curse with...Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculés de ta mère. You see, it's like wiping your *** with silk, I love it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            All I'm saying is it is better data. And I doubt it would be inadmissible. Argue is the wrong word, I'm just saying show the cop what your data shows.

                            When you get a ticket, the cop HAS passed judgement on you - however you want to look at it. He has tested your speed and found you guilty of going over. Now true, our legal system requires a judge to stamp his approval on it to make it official, but if it's your word against the cops you're going to lose every time. Showing speed records is weaker evidence then showing the records on video WHEN they are fresh. It's a lot harder to fake, therefore better evidence. I'm not saying you're going to get out of it, fact is you were probably speeding. But in the rare case you're just being hassled you'll have evidence.

                            Besides, cops record everything - I see it on COPS all the time. People take cellphone videos of crap and it's used as evidence all the time. Do you think they go around and get everyone to sign off on it? I've never had a cop ask my permission to record our conversation when he pulls me over. Maybe you're thinking of laws concerning recording phonecalls.

                            Only cops have rules about properly obtaining evidence. Evidence obtained by citizens is a lot easier to us in court. I think it was the OJ Simpson trial where this was a big issue - the cops improperly collected evidence so it was thrown out, but other evidence collected by a citizen was used.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              All I'm saying is it is better data. And I doubt it would be inadmissible.
                              You doubt it. O.K., read this http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...09/ai_n9272007

                              Read the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding admissability of illegally obtained recordings. Then read up about one party consent and 2 party consent states.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              Argue is the wrong word, I'm just saying show the cop what your data shows.
                              Nothing is accomplished by that.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              When you get a ticket, the cop HAS passed judgement on you - however you want to look at it. He has tested your speed and found you guilty of going over. Now true, our legal system requires a judge to stamp his approval on it to make it official, but if it's your word against the cops you're going to lose every time.
                              That is just a plain ignorant statement. First of all, Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Officer arrest and give tickets when they have PROBABLE CAUSE. He has NOT found you guilty. If he had, then you would not need a court . Do you REALLY think that someone is guilty if they are arrested/given a ticket? That is nuts. And, I have beaten ALL of my tickets (well, except one or two) Sure, word against word, the cop probably wins, that is why you need to bring EVIDENCE.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              Showing speed records is weaker evidence then showing the records on video WHEN they are fresh.
                              Again, that statement is not legally sound. In fact, the Federal Rules of Evidence REQUIRE that the ACTUAL evidence be introduced in court, and evidence of evidence is not allowed. It is called the "best evidence rule", you should read it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_evidence_rule

                              Of course, we also have the issue of admissability because of relevance. It does not tend to prove or disprove a material fact of consequence to the outcome of a case whether the cop saw your evidence or not, which is the only thing that the video will show. What proves your speed is GPS data, and NOT a picture of your GPS data.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              It's a lot harder to fake, therefore better evidence.
                              You are correct that evidence must be reliable, and a factor in that is the ability to "fake" it, but all evidence is evaluated on that bassis, and since a video and audio recroding is problematic for the reasons I mentioned above, the fact that it may not be fake is not enough to make it admissable, since the question of authenticity only arises after it is even possible to admit the evidence.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              I'm not saying you're going to get out of it, fact is you were probably speeding. But in the rare case you're just being hassled you'll have evidence.

                              Besides, cops record everything - I see it on COPS all the time.
                              First, that is because the guys from the COPS show run around with a camera and a bright light. If someone refuses to be video taped, and he knows he is being videotaped because the people with cameras, they probably won't show it, AND, the Supreme Court held that a criminal is not protected by privacy rights from being recorded by an officer(http://www.library.ca.gov/CRB/97/05/...html#liability)

                              The officer is protected by his right to privacy from being audio recorded. Mind you, audio is the most problematic, but video is probably also problematic.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              People take cellphone videos of crap
                              True

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              and it's used as evidence all the time.
                              Uh, no it is not.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              Do you think they go around and get everyone to sign off on it?
                              See the reasoning above. Lawbreakers have no protection, and "newsworthy" stuff is not private and has no privacy protection, but an officer who is not breaking the law, is protected. Perhaps recording video of him may not be a violation, but ANY audio recording certainly is. Case in point, the rodney king video. First, there was no audio recording of what the officers and King were saying. Anything that was heard on the tape from the officers and King, in that situation, was loud enough for a bunch of poeple to hear, because the videographer was far away, that they would have no real expectation of privacy in what they said. The king video shows the officers action. Like I mentioned, video is less problematic, because no one has an expectation of privacy from being seen when they are in public. The "expectation" of privacy is what the Supreme Court has decided to protect. Also, the beating was newsworthy, and quite probably a video of a criminal offense. BUT, the officer that stopped you is not commiting a criminal offense, he has an expectation that what he is saying is only being heard by you (and the people in the car), and it is not newsworthy.

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              I've never had a cop ask my permission to record our conversation when he pulls me over. Maybe you're thinking of laws concerning recording phonecalls.
                              There is no difference between phone calls and in person conversations. I think I have a link that explains that, but if not, I will find you one later. He doesn't NEED your permission, because he is not attempting to introduce it in court. HERE IS A LINK, http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.p...d=40817&col=75 "

                              Originally posted by gthing View Post
                              Only cops have rules about properly obtaining evidence. Evidence obtained by citizens is a lot easier to us in court. I think it was the OJ Simpson trial where this was a big issue - the cops improperly collected evidence so it was thrown out, but other evidence collected by a citizen was used.
                              Wow, I wonder where you got your legal education, was it watching the OJ trial? It is true that certain constitutional protections only grant protection from the Government and it's agents. The 4th amendment is not violated if I go through your bag and find drugs, cause only the Gov is barred for illegal searches and seizures. Your 5th amendment right to be represented by counsel when questioned only counts if the police are questioning you. BUT, NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO VIOLATE A PERSONS RIGHT TO PRIVACY. For the most part, video and audio recording is violating a person privacy right. Additionally, the Legislature has enacted laws to protect people from such "hidden recordings" (see the link above), including telephone and in person conversations.

                              Can you guess what I do for a living?

                              Michael
                              ...I love the French language...especially to curse with...Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculés de ta mère. You see, it's like wiping your *** with silk, I love it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X