Was ordered by the court to provide information on - Page 5

96TransAm · 01-09-2007, 03:25 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by ShawJohn

How irresponsible are you? You telling us you didn't notice the car almost double in speed! Looking at the speedo or not! In the UK you'd have been charged for 'driving with undue car and attention' just for admitting it, on top of the speeding ticket!

You shouldn't be in control of a car!!! Never mind one with the distraction of a CarPC too

Please don't turn this into a flamewar.

ShawJohn · 01-09-2007, 05:25 PM

sorry to hijack

Deric · 01-09-2007, 05:34 PM

Show them your setup (in the car) but see if they will agree on a demonstration using your GPS reciever and software on their laptop or another laptop in their car. It could even be the patrol car doesn't matter but offer a demonstration. Keep in mind the prosecutor will look for anything that will void your claims. Sudden stops / stomping on it etc. If the judge agrees see if they want to test it with his/her vehicle etc. If you can show them in your vehicle make sure the prosecutor sits in the back. LOL.

I'm honestly suprised they haven't dropped it due to the amount of time involved.

96TransAm · 01-09-2007, 06:04 PM

With any other prosecutor they would have dropped it by now...but this guy is taking it personal and will not back down.

Wiredwrx · 01-09-2007, 06:25 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by 96TransAm

I just got a letter from the prosecution requesting the judge for a 'Request for Evidentiary Hearing'

He also requests the court lets him exam the equipment used to take the GPS log. I really have no idea how they expect me to remove a integrated car pc and set it up to the point where they can use it out side of a car environment.

He states in the letter " The state never had the opportunity to review the evidence prior to the hearing and the court has ordered briefs to be filed including a brief on credibility of the program and science that is foundation of the evidence submitted to the court by the defendant"

I infact did offer to let him see the video at the pre trial, and he told me I was not required to and he suggested I not show him, because he would use it against me. I told him I would be showing a video and wanted to make sure there was nothing I had to do make it admisable, he said there was not.
Therefore, he did have an opportunity to review the evidence.

Also, the judge accepted the evidence durring the trial, so can he legally call up this evidentiary hearing, even if it has already been accepted as evidence?

They don't expect you to remove the stuff for inspection. In fact, he has no right to that. He can ask to inspect the carputer/gps in your car. What he plans on finding is beyond me, but he wants to look at it.

He can probably call an evidentiary hearing, to determine the "accuracy" of the video, has it been modified, is the GPS track the GPS track from that day, that type of stuff. It is, however, unusual for it to happen after being introduced, and in fact, that would be my argument. The Prosecution had an opportunity to view the video before trial (I assume it was a "pretrial conference") and he failed to do so. He also failed to timely object to the introduction of the evidence at trial, never questioning the "authenticity" of the video and the information contained inside, and he should not allowed to now question evidence that the court has seen fit to allow to be introduced into evidence.

Michael

96TransAm · 01-10-2007, 11:25 AM

He did object to the video, but was over ruled by the judge.

MatrixPC · 01-10-2007, 01:41 PM

How about an invitation for a demontration ride like Deric said.

JoeKamel · 01-10-2007, 01:55 PM

Now are they accepting the tape as absolute proof, or are they still saying that it was possible for you to slow down and then speed up? BTW: Sorry I couldn't help, I misread the thread and thought you hadn't started your trial yet, like you were still doing all the pretrial hearings.

96TransAm · 01-10-2007, 02:18 PM

No, to be honest I'm kind of confused on what is deciding if the video is proof...the evidentiary trial, or the briefs we have to turn in.

Wiredwrx · 01-10-2007, 02:41 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by 96TransAm

No, to be honest I'm kind of confused on what is deciding if the video is proof...the evidentiary trial, or the briefs we have to turn in.

Well,

An evidentiary hearing can be held for various purposes. A brief is used by the court to understand a particular issue. IN this case, the court asked you to "Brief" GPS technology, basically, to explain to the coiurt what GPS is, how it works, so the court can understand if the technology is accurate, and in particualr, if there is such a lag time, and how it can affect the display of speed and location. You are just BRIEFING the technology.

The evidentiary hearing could be held fior the same reason, if the court wanted. IN this particular case, it appears as if the prosecution wants to appear before the court to question the AUTHENTICITY of your VIDEO, whether it is accurate, and wether it has been altered. It also wants to determine the specs of your system, and to determine if it in fact has GPS, and to determine what parts you are using, what software, and the like. It has nothing, it would appear, to do witht he actual technology behind GPS in general. They Brief and Hearing are regarding different matters, though they are interelated. To clarify, the hearing is to determine that you have an actual, legitimate VIDEO of the event, and what you are using as far as the system goes, and the brief is for the court to determine that what you are actually showing, the GPS data, is reliable technology.

Michael

96TransAm · 01-10-2007, 02:46 PM

Thanks Wired, that clears it up a lot.

LinuxRacr · 01-11-2007, 11:37 AM

This is a very interesting read. I will keep posted.

ComputerGuru · 01-28-2007, 12:58 PM

What was the outcome? This is very interesting.

96TransAm · 01-28-2007, 01:16 PM

Still going on, his brief had evidence he had been doing a lot of googling, so I'm not going to post any more identifiable information until after this is all over.

Thanks guys.

JoeKamel · 01-29-2007, 01:25 AM

Well however this works out, good luck.