Re: Valentine/WSP (low Audi content)

[Kevin Barry <krbarry@NetUSA.Net>]

	I believe there was a fairly good article on how to beat a laser
ticket in Car & Driver, I'm not sure of the month, probably around May 97
or so.
	I didn't read the article myself, but a friend of mine gave me
some details.  I beleive the case was in NJ.  The defendant called in some
NASA experts to refute the accuracy of the laser and won the case.  This
case can surely be cited in any state, but you'll have to look up the
actual case, and Car & Driver isn't the sort of mag that would likely list
a cite.
	But a little research could certainly unearth it.
KB


			Kevin Barry
			krbarry@alpha.netusa.net
			Jesus is returning!
Cynical: Adj.  Word used by the frightened to describe the realistic.


On Sun, 27 Jul 1997, Igor Kessel wrote:

> Fringe Ryder wrote:
> 
> > 4) The V1 rear laser detection does work, but this isn't going to do you one
> > whit (whatever a whit is) of good.  You're sunk if it goes off.
> 
> That's precisely why I elected to buy my V1 without the laser option.
> I remember posting this a year ago, but the vast majority of the listers did not 
> agree at that time. Fringe's post is a sad proof of my words. The coherent laser 
> beam is precise, accurate, has a very narrow volumetric angle of propagation and 
> does not scatter. That's what makes it deadly. Sure, you can sense it by a 
> photodiod, but the moment you've senced it you are history.
> 
> Sorry to hear your story , Fringe. Get a good laweyer and fight those points.
> I remember reading on the list that laser-based citations do not hold up in court 
> too well. Perhaps the legal crowd on the list can shed some light on this issue.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Igor Kessel
> '89 200TQ - 18psi (TAP)
> '97 A4TQ - on the dealer's lot
> Philadelphia, PA
> USA
>