Nabbed for speeding? GPS data could get you off the hook

[my_bd]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-the-hook.html

By Jacqui Cheng | Published: July 18, 2008 - 11:57AM CT

As anyone who has ever gotten a speeding ticket knows (full disclosure: I never have... knock on wood), you often have very little ammo to fight back against the reading that the all-knowing radar gun spat out. But thanks to more sophisticated and affordable technology, that could be changing. GPS data was able to get a California teen off the hook for allegedly going 17 miles per hour over the speed limit, simultaneously casting doubt on the accuracy of police radars and giving hope to tech-savvy drivers.

The story started out simply enough. 18-year-old Shaun Malone was caught by a police radar going 62 in a 45 mph zone last summer. Under most circumstances, most people would assume that this was all simply true—it's not unheard of for teenagers to speed, after all. Malone's parents knew differently, though. It turns out that they had installed a GPS device from Rocky Mountain Tracking in his car in order to monitor his driving behavior.

But this was far more sophisticated than your everyday "turn left at the stop light" kind of GPS device—it tracked his speed, sending signals every 30 seconds, and was even capable of sending e-mail alerts to Malone's parents if Shaun ever exceeded 70mph. (I'm thanking my lucky stars right now that my parents didn't have access to this technology when I was a teenager.) According to the data from Shaun's GPS device, he and his parents argued that he was going exactly 45mph at almost the exact time the police radar clocked him going 62.

Unfortunately for the Malones, Shaun was found guilty of speeding in a trial-by-affidavit thanks to a report from an expert saying that the GPS data could not have been accurate. The Malones appealed the decision, however, with a hearing in the Sonoma County Superior Court earlier this month. During the new trial—where both the city and the Malones pulled out all the stops to bring in experts to argue their sides of the case, according to PressDemocrat—the same GPS expert was called to testify. Dr. Stephen Heppe ended up backtracking on his original report, however, once he was on the stand. Rocky Mountain Tracking says that Heppe "corrected" his original statements and painted the device as being quite accurate after all, "to within a couple of meters on location and to within 1mph on speed."

The judge eventually found Shaun not guilty and let him off the hook for his $190 speeding ticket. But the implications of the case go far beyond $190—it could change how speeding tickets are handled in the future. "This case has caught the attention of the nation, and it will set a precedent on how police departments use speed traps in the face of an increased GPS presence," Rocky Mountain Tracking president Brad Borst said in a statement. "The accuracy and reliability of GPS has helped bring this important issue into the limelight."

Of course, Borst is happy to talk up using GPS data to help keep you out of speeding tickets, as his commercial interests are in line with your interests in proving yourself innocent. However, the outcome of the case does suggest that consumer tech has reached a point at which it's considered accurate enough to hold up in court. Does this mean everyone should run out and buy GPS units for their cars that can track speed and location down to three digits to the right of the decimal point? Perhaps, if you feel the cost is worth the peace of mind and you're not a big speeder. But, as HotHardware points out, that same data could eventually be used against you, too. All the police have to do is obtain subpoena for your GPS data when you argue that you weren't really lead-footing it down a straight stretch of the highway a couple of weeks ago..

[BigBrother]

Yeah - it's a double-edged sword. Great when you're the one swinging it, not so great when cars come with these trackers automatically telling the DMV every time you commit a moving violation. And if you think it won't go there, I have a bridge to sell you.

It's like this: Owning and operating a vehicle on public roads - even having a drivers licsense - is a privilidge, not a right. Certain constitutional laws do apply - i.e., the cops can't search the car without permission/resonable suspicion/a waarant becuaase it's your property - but if a state (I bet $2,000 to any takers that CA or NY pass it first) requires that in order to obtain registration the vehicle must be equipped with a certain device, and that tampering with said device is a misdemeaner or etc, well - there's not a goddamned thing anyone can do about it. And it WILL happen - just think of the upsides! Insurance companies will be all over it; no more questions about what happened at an accident scene. Cities and state will be all over it - revenu POURING in with fewer cops on teh road, less manpower to generate 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times the citations among other things...

I'll move to whichever state is the last to pass it before it goes federal, at which time I'll stop driving my car on teh roads and keep one in storage at a track somewhere.

[Big Knight]

Sounds like I need to keep the RL running forever.....

[qwikredline11]

Originally Posted by Big Knight

Sounds like I need to keep the RL running forever.....

can you imagine if my parents had done that to me i would be in jail for a life sentence... 10-4 keep the redline for ever

[BigBrother]

ACTUAL reasons I specifically wanted an '05 when I went looking:

1st - No comp package in '04 = no LSD, and this car was purchased specifically for Solo II; LSD = necessary.

2nd - 1st year bugs were worked out from teh '04's for the most part besides tha lack of LSD.

3rd - '07's had no Recaros, and '06's and '07's had standard (read: can't get one without it) OnStar. OnStar is cool and all, but I'm not interested in the possibilities for abuse by my screen name, per the subject in this thread. Same reason I will never buy a car with standard GPS/etc.

Newer cars (after '98 IIRC?) all have a primitive datalogger in them that records the last 5 or 10 minutes or something of sensor data. though not all police forces bother with it right now. That's bad enough thankyouverymuch - I don't need tha car to have the ability to upload that shit automatically by satellite or cell tower, much less be remotely tracked - and in the case of OnStar, remotely fucked with (they can shut off your ignition as easily as they can unluck your doors; it's a theft-recovery feature).

Do I think GM has any impetus to do these things? No. Do I think governing bodies have the authority and ability to MAKE them do this if they feel like it? You bet your ass I do. Do I think GM will get around to abusing it "a little" to verufy warranty issues? Weeellllllll...

[Dainslaif]

Originally Posted by BigBrother

Yeah - it's a double-edged sword. Great when you're the one swinging it, not so great when cars come with these trackers automatically telling the DMV every time you commit a moving violation. And if you think it won't go there, I have a bridge to sell you.

It's like this: Owning and operating a vehicle on public roads - even having a drivers licsense - is a privilidge, not a right. Certain constitutional laws do apply - i.e., the cops can't search the car without permission/resonable suspicion/a waarant becuaase it's your property - but if a state (I bet $2,000 to any takers that CA or NY pass it first) requires that in order to obtain registration the vehicle must be equipped with a certain device, and that tampering with said device is a misdemeaner or etc, well - there's not a goddamned thing anyone can do about it. And it WILL happen - just think of the upsides! Insurance companies will be all over it; no more questions about what happened at an accident scene. Cities and state will be all over it - revenu POURING in with fewer cops on teh road, less manpower to generate 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times the citations among other things...

I'll move to whichever state is the last to pass it before it goes federal, at which time I'll stop driving my car on teh roads and keep one in storage at a track somewhere.

The first thing that springs to mind is - wouldn't that be an absurdly huge invasion of privacy issue? (assuming they don't make you sign something allowing them permission) The legal issues involved with that are the same reason widespread wire tapping is not used (whether or not they actually do it is anyone's guess, but I'm pretty sure it's illegal)

[Flatlander]

my '07 does not have onstar...that I know of at least

[BigBrother]

Look at your rearview mirror. You may not have activated it, but it's there. t least, it should be, lol.

The first thing that springs to mind is - wouldn't that be an absurdly huge invasion of privacy issue? (assuming they don't make you sign something allowing them permission) The legal issues involved with that are the same reason widespread wire tapping is not used (whether or not they actually do it is anyone's guess, but I'm pretty sure it's illegal)

...is addressed by:

Owning and operating a vehicle on public roads - even having a drivers licsense - is a privilidge, not a right. Certain constitutional laws do apply - i.e., the cops can't search the car without permission/resonable suspicion/a waarant becuaase it's your property...

...and issues of privacy are not an issue becuase they're tracking only your activities on public (regulated) roads in a vehicle registered for such use. They're not listening in on your conversation (although w/ OnStar that IS possible), they're not searching your personal belongings inside the car. They are monitering your driving according to the laws you agreed to when you registered your car and got a licsense. It is not an invasion of privacy any more than a radar gun or a cop in a chopper timing you and radioing down to guys on the street. Besides, as you say "unless they make you sign something". Even if they had to do so (which they wouldn't per above), all they would have to do is introduce the necessary language into the registration process. You refuse to sign, no tags for you.

Photocop got busted a couple times bacause privacy issues were raised as it captured photos of the people inside the car. Even with that legal precedant, they're still in use and still hold up in court the vast majority of the time. Hell - VA's anti-radar detector laws are CAKE to beat in court, but they keep them on the books anyway becuase so few people know how to beat it or bother to try. :shrug:

[Kingofthehill]

its a "Taddler"... in the studio trucks we get these every now and then... some Copper mesh is your best friend... cover the top of it and NO SIGNAL..

like everything, we will find ways around.

JOe