Legal System Failing Western Australians
by the Editor PoliceSpeedCameras.info
The police are now up in arms in WA because of the light sentences being handed out to the mongrel dogs who bash police officers.
This is a photo of my son Jared who was bashed in March this year after a taxi ride.
The offender - Michael Thomas DOB 3/3/86 - The Lakes Blvd Jandakot WA only received a $2000 fine!
If you bashed a defenceless person to to this extent in the United States, you would go to jail for years!
The justice system in this state should be overhauled immediately. The "truth in sentencing" law should be abolished and mandatory sentencing laws should be passed to take the issue out of the hands of "pussy footing" magistrates and judges. We are all sick of hearing about (and for many, experiencing) the failures in sentencing in WA. It is hightime Parliament stood up and took account of the situation and FIXED it! When the law lets you down, there is only one thing to do! "
This will follow you pal, for the rest of your life. I'll make sure of it!
Above "You can do this in Western Australia and only get a $2000 fine!"
Below "You can do stuff around on a bike (only endangering yourself) a few times in Western Australia and go to jail for nine months "
West Australian
Repeat multanova stunt rider Christian Nicola Marchesani was today sentenced to 10 months in jail for speeding through multanova cameras in January and March while gesturing and performing stunt moves.
Marchesani, 28, from Samson, pleaded guilty to four charges of reckless driving and two of riding a motorcycle while his licence was suspended.
More cameras set to target WA road users
8th August 2008
Motorists are almost certain to be targeted by a big increase in the number of speed cameras in the next few years after the Road Safety Council overlooked changes to speed limits in favour of tough enforcement measures as part of the State’s 12-year road safety strategy.
The multi-billion-dollar plan, which is a substantially watereddown version of initial recommendations by Monash University’s accident research centre, shunned 10kmh speed reductions on country and city roads after community consultation found major opposition to the move.
This is despite researchers and the council admitting it was the “easiest”, “optimal” and “most cost-effective” way to cut serious crashes and deaths.
Delivering the document to the Government yesterday, council chairman Grant Dorrington said it was unfortunate that people were not more receptive to lowering speed limits. But lower limits could not be ruled out after further consultation and trials to help drivers accept the idea.
The Towards Zero report is based around four “safe system” cornerstones and includes a three-year plan, to begin next year, that mostly continues the State’s previous road safety strategy. But it has additional recommendations such as seatbelts in all school-owned buses, extending the Black Spot program and implementing better road layouts, including roadside barriers. The 12-year plan would cost an extra $2.3 billion and prevent an estimated 11,000 road deaths and serious injuries — a 40 per cent cut on current levels.
About $240 million would be needed for education and enforcement, $600 million for speed management and $32 million for safer vehicles. The first three years are expected to save 750 lives. Mr Dorrington said the speed enforcement component, which is yet to be finalised, would be a significant part of the three-year action plan.
Road Safety Minister John Kobelke defended the delay in implementing some of the recommendations in the State’s previous road safety strategy, which expired last year, and conceded the State still had a long way to go.
The RAC would seek a pre-election commitment from both parties to fund and implement the plan in a timely manner, spokesman David Moir said.
Shadow road safety minister Murray Cowper said the strategy should focus on putting more police on the roads and educating drivers.
BEATRICE THOMAS (The West Australian)
Police Change Speed Camera Traps 
- Chris Thomson
- June 24, 2008
Western Australia - A statewide review of multanovas conducted by police has prompted changes to where and how the speed cameras are deployed.
"The commissioner was closely following the debate on location of speed cameras and asked for the review," Stephen Brown, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Traffic and Operations said today. "What it's found is we can do it better.
"In the past we have placed multanovas in and around fatal accident spots, based on nine-year-old data.
Assistant Commissioner Brown said only data up to two years old would now be used.
Half of the state's 26 multanovas currently operate in metropolitan Perth and half in regional areas.
"We're looking at deploying them more in regional areas, where 60 per cent of serious road accidents are occurring," Assistant Commissioner Brown said.
Multanovas would also be used later into the evening and in the early hours of the morning, when many serious crashes were found to occur.
"That might take away from the volume of vehicles we catch exceeding the speed limit," Assistant Commissioner Brown said. "We are not interested in revenue raising.
"Police don't get any of that money - it goes into consolidated revenue."
Total re-think on speed camera strategy
Joe Spagnolo June 06, 2008
A NEW report has recommended a complete re-think of the way speeding drivers are caught and prosecuted in Western Australia.
Office of Road Safety executive Iain Cameron said today "point-to-point'' technology, based on interstate and world-wide evidence, research and best practice would reduce speeding and improve road safety on WA roads.
The point-to-point system works by photographing a vehicle as it passes between two cameras, then calculates the time taken and works out the average speed of the vehicle.
Mr Cameron's comments follow the release of a new report by the Monash University Research Centre which also recommended a mix of exposed and hidden cameras for WA.
``Together with enforcement by police officers and infringement options, the report outlines the options of using covert mobile speed cameras, randomly scheduled overt mobile cameras and a mix of covert and overt mobile speed cameras,’’ Mr Cameron said.
``As evidenced in Victoria, the use of covert speed enforcement is highly effective in reducing the number of fatal crashes, with estimates of up to a 26 per cent reduction in fatal crashes in Perth.
``Conversely, as evidenced in Queensland, the use of overt speed enforcement has less of an impact on fatal crashes, but has a greater impact on the number of serious injury crashes.
"A mix of both covert and overt speed enforcement would potentially result in high reductions in both fatal and serious injury crashes, with estimates of up to a 23.2 per cent reduction in fatal crashes, up to 13.8 per cent hospital admission crashes and 11.2 per cent medical treatment crashes in WA.
``The MUARC supplementary report also explores the use of new point-to-point camera technology on suitable road lengths. This emerging technology has so far proven effective in jurisdictions across the world.
``Undoubtedly there will be mixed reactions to the different options, however the evidence is clear that substantial improvement to speed enforcement will reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured on our roads.
``Speed enforcement, including the use of speed cameras and Police officers, is an important part of a wider mix of strategies to improve road safety in both regional and metro WA.
``In developing Towards Zero, the recommended road safety strategy for WA for 2008-2020, MUARC has modelled improvements in road use behaviour, roads and roadsides and vehicle safety as well as enhanced speed enforcement.
``They estimated that enhanced speed enforcement could potentially save 4200 people from being killed or seriously injured in road crashes over the 12-year strategy, which equates to 21 per cent of the total potential savings.’’
Ultimately, it will be up to the State Government to decide which – and how many -- cameras to use in its new road safety strategy.
It is also considering handing over the running of the cameras over to private enterprise as well as the infringement issuing service.
``The next step for the Enhanced Speed Enforcement Steering Committee is to engage a policy and finance specialist through a tender process to thoroughly examine all the costs and benefits of operating the various options and to develop the Business Cases that will be presented to Government for consideration as to the future direction for enhanced speed enforcement in Western Australia,’’ Mr Cameron said.
Multanova photos ‘thrown out’
Police were so far behind in processing speeding fines that thousands of Multanova photographs were thrown out last year rather than being used to issue fines to offending motorists, the Opposition claimed yesterday.
Figures supplied by WA Police in response to questions from the Opposition in Parliament show that about 28,000 Multanova images were discarded last year.
Shadow road safety minister John McGrath said the cancellations proved that police were forced to discard the photos because of the massive backlog in processing Multanova fines, which have an average delay of 53 days.
Police deny that the images were discarded because of a backlog in processing fines.
The figures also showed that the number of pictures taken by speed cameras had halved over the past four years despite steady increases in the number of Multanovas in use.
Mr McGrath said the declining number of photographs was further evidence that the system was not coping and that a parliamentary inquiry was needed to identify the cause and extent of the problem.
“Are speeding drivers being let off the hook because police are taking fewer camera shots or throwing more film into the bin?” he said.
“I think the public needs some answers on Multanovas and how they work. We don’t expect the police to tell people the great intricacies but we do need to be confident that the system is going to work properly and will pass all tests in terms of scrutiny.”
Last year, more than 1100 rolls of film, which each hold an average of 25 photos, were discarded. A total of 468,000 images were taken, compared with more than one million four years ago and 708,000 in 2006.
Traffic services Insp. John Vivian said the films were cancelled because of testing, technical and operational issues, not because of the backlog in processing infringements.
He said the implementation of the new speed camera infringement processing program, CAP Speed, had presented some difficulties but he expected improvements as soon as next month.
“Yes, there is a backlog but we are putting out the number of images as quickly as we can,” Insp. Vivian said. “We’ve employed more people to address those issues and we’re slowly bringing it down.”
“The underlying thing behind all this is we do have strict quality control and if there is an operating error we will cancel the film.”
He said people were quick to criticise speed cameras without recognising that the road safety message was getting through to West Australians.
RAC member advocacy executive manager David Moir, who has called for a review into the Multanova program, questioned their use as a deterrent given the lengthy delays between the time an offence occurred and the issue of the infringement notice.
“The question is how well is the current enforcement program working given that the whole purpose of this is to reduce crashes yet we are seeing the number of fatal accidents and serious injuries rising in recent years.”
Wowser speed nannies exceed limits of reason
15th May 2008, Editor The West Australian Newspaper
It doesn’t take much to get the speed wowsers flecking at the mouth. I wrote a column recently about how Nanny State governments cynically disguise blatant revenue-raising policies as being for the public good when their own modelling shows the measures will not change antisocial behaviour.
One of the examples was the Carpenter Government’s intention to increase massively the use of speed cameras to suck an extra $200 million a year in fines.
And I made the point that speeding fines were, in the main, merely a form of tax on road users.
“There is no victim other than the driver when you are snapped for doing something like 5kmh over the speed limit,” I wrote.
“So it is hard to see the fine as a punishment when there’s been no offence against anyone.
“The majority of speed camera fines are for low-speed offences. They are therefore such a small relative penalty as to be useless in changing behaviour.”
A few letters were published in response to the column.
“Paul Murray displays the mindset of the majority of WA drivers when he states that driving a few kilometres an hour above the speed limit is ‘no offence against anyone’,” Denis Eyles, of Ellenbrook, said.
“May I remind Murray that breaking the law is an offence against society — that is, everyone.”
That fairly shallow argument ignores the pertinent point that no one is harmed when a speeding vehicle passes a Multanova.
It was nicely dispatched in a letter from C. R. W. Wilkins, of Swanbourne, who referred to the “self-righteous breast beaters” brought out by the speeding debate.
“The tired old argument about kinetic energy increase from 60kmh to 65kmh is putatively true, but then it is also true for the 50kmh/55kmh situation or, for that matter, the 40kmh and 45kmh scenarios around schools,” Mr Wilkins said.
I was emboldened by Mr Wilkins because the sanctimonious tone of the speed wowsers had been worrying me for some time. Their self-righteousness just reinforces an outdated and failing road safety strategy in WA built around a mantra that speed is the major cause of our growing road toll.
Frankly, if people can’t drive safely at 5kmh or 10kmh above the set limit, they should not be on the roads. That’s my absolute bottom line.
These speed limits are arbitrary, not scientific. If they were scientific, we would have a much greater range of zones as the applicable road conditions changed.
My whole interest in this issue of speed in the road safety debate is that it hides the real culprits — carelessness, inattention, poor skills and bad attitude. None of them is caught by speed cameras, but can be affected by a visible police presence on the road.
The whole idea that someone is a safer driver on a suburban road at 59kmh than at 64kmh is just silly. Drivers who believe it is true are clearly a danger to others on the road.
But the letter to the editor which best exemplified this cult of speed wowserism was unfortunately not published. It deserves exposure as a fine example of the genre. I will allow the writer anonymity, given the way I intend to use his words.
“There are very real victims of driving a few kilometres an hour above the speed limit,” he wrote.
“There are dead people, people with injuries and people paying more than they need — they are the victims.”
These are baseless, unproveable assertions. Emotive claptrap.
It is impossible to say that someone who was killed in a crash involving a vehicle travelling in a 60kmh zone at 63kmh would not have died at 59kmh.
It is similarly impossible to mount a cogent argument about the severity of injuries on those small margins of speed.
And that discounts the even more compelling argument about the possible causes of the crash: whether carelessness, inattention, lack of skill or bad attitude or a combination of them were the reasons and whether a minor breach of speed was just the symptom.
Police traffic accident reports are notoriously unreliable in apportioning speed as a cause.
“It is a fact that a small increase in speed produces a larger increase in the number and severity of road crashes,” the sanctimonious letter writer said.
Well, why then did WA’s road toll go up after we adopted 50kmh limits on suburban roads? There was no research advanced by the Government at the time to demonstrate that the lower limit would reduce the toll.
And the logical extension of his argument is that we should only be allowed to drive at speeds at which a collision — even with a pedestrian — would not cause any injury.
“When Paul travels at a little over the speed limit, he increases his own risk of a crash and that of everyone else he meets on the roads,” the wowser continued, personalising the argument.
Bollocks. How does he know that I don’t pay a lot more attention to my driving if I’m going at a higher speed, regardless of whether it’s within the zone limit or not.
Like most drivers I try not to speed. And, in the main, I don’t. I don’t incite speeding and think drivers should keep to the limit.
But the speed wowsers should really pull their sanctimonious heads out of the sand and other places and realise that speeding is just an indicator of a much more difficult range of attitudinal problems.
PAUL MURRAY
Multanova slugs just a futile excise
by Paul Murray Editor of The West Australian
It used to be that the two absolutes in life were death and taxes. These days it seems more about death by taxes: the new certainty of government. There is a belief among some politicians that you can change adverse public behaviour by taxing it out of existence.
Not only is this myth unsubstantiated, but it is cynically manipulated to enrich governments while giving the appearance of acting in the public good.
There are two current examples on the Federal and State levels. From Canberra we have the ramping up of excise in a bid to stop the abuse by young people of so-called alcopop drinks. From the Carpenter Government there are plans for a massive increase in the deployment of speed cameras and therefore the amount of money they bleed from drivers.
The parallel with the Carpenter Government’s approach to speed cameras is interesting. I have no compunction in calling speeding fines a form of taxation because any examination of how they work leads to that conclusion.
There is no victim other than the driver when you are snapped for doing something like 5kmh over the speed limit. So it is hard to see the fine as a punishment when there’s been no offence against anyone.
The majority of speed camera fines are for low-speed offences. They are therefore such a small relative penalty as to be useless in changing behaviour.
So, in my view at least, speeding penalties have more in common with a road use fee than a punishment. They are more of a tax than a fine.
Independent MP Dan Sullivan used Freedom of Information laws to uncover a report to the Carpenter Government recommending an increase in the use of speed cameras to increase revenue from speeding fines by some $200 million a year.
There would be a six-fold increase in speeding fines to more than two million each year.
But, just like the alcopops strategy, the report by Monash University academic Max Cameron indicates that for the associated revenue targets to be reached there is the assumption of very little change in driver behaviour.
“This report is conclusive proof that the State Government is more interested in using speed cameras to raise revenue rather than reduce the road toll,” Mr Sullivan concluded.
“It is clear that the Government’s only new speed enforcement strategy involves increasing the number of speed cameras in a way that maximises its revenue from speeding fines.
“The report contains no analysis of the benefits of increasing the visible presence of police on our roads or providing better driver education instead of increasing the reliance on speed cameras, probably because these strategies cost money rather than raise it.”
Mr Sullivan noted that the 2006 Monash report stated: “No crash-based evaluation of WA’s Multanova speed camera program could be found.”
The report showed the Government was considering installing 24 speed cameras on the Mitchell and Kwinana freeways, even though it found a low rate of accidents on those roads.
“Despite not knowing what effect speed cameras have had and in the face of a worsening road toll the Government remains hell-bent on introducing more of the same,” Mr Sullivan said. A subsequent report by PA Consulting Group warned the Government that a big increase in the number of speed cameras and fines would push the police infringement processing department to breaking point.
Paul Murray
