Ever been caught speeding but been doubtful about the accuracy of the radar? Well, those suspicions may not have been unfounded.
Today ACA meets one man who has found the key to unlocking the secrets behind radars and is keen to share his knowledge about the many factors which can affect their accuracy.
Motorist Bruce Josephs isn’t the first person to express concern over the accuracy of radars. But he could be the first person to uncover a document which confirms his doubts. After hundreds of hours on the Internet and writing letters to the Infringement Processing Bureau, police minister and ombudsman, he finally found what he was searching for — a copy of the police service’s radar operation manual.
According to Bruce, who found the information through the Freedom of Information Act, the document outlines some compelling evidence that trees, wind, billboards, even birds can cause an inaccurate reading. The document also states that even heavy rain could affect the correct patrol speed.
Even worse, says Bruce, when a police car is actually moving, it is less accurate.
"So if you have ever been done by an approaching police car, you may have cause to complain," says Bruce. "The manual points out dual-carriageways can be a problem, because the angle you’re getting zapped at might be more than eight degrees, which can alter your radar reading."
This research began when Bruce was clocked going 80 kilometres an hour, when he reckons he was only going 60. Through his investigation, Bruce has drawn the conclusion that unless you have a straight flat road in good weather with no other cars on it, radar is not going to give an accurate reading.
"I was following a semi-trailer, I was going around bends and there was no straight stretch of road at all," he says.
In light of Bruce’s discovery, ACA asked the NSW Police Service to comment, but they refused. Likewise, Police Minister John Watkins also declined an interview.
Fellow radar crusader Harry Brelsford is also familiar with fighting a fine. He’s even written a book about his own battle and has a website for people who want step-by-step advice on how to challenge the system. He urges motorists to fight fines because they have every right to, but contends that even if you take your matter to court, the system is unfair.
“To take this to court will cost me $10,000 minimum,” Brelsford says. “People have to mortgage their houses to do this sort of thing, just to pay a fine they shouldn’t have got in the first place.”
Bruce, who many people may think should simply pay the fine, says it’s not about the money.
"If it was $200, I’d pay it," he says. "It is not just $200. Firstly, it is half my licence, which I should not have to lose, and secondly, if I do it, it means everybody else that comes after me is also subject to this insanity."
Bruce says that, for too long, it’s been assumed radars are infallible. But he hopes the release of this document into the public arena will force a change in the system.
"They should start to change the legislation so that radar is only used where there is 100 percent accuracy," he says. "We don’t want circumstances where innocent drivers are pulled over."
A Current Affair Speed Cameras: Doubling the Money
Reporter: Ben Fordham
11 May 2004
Speed cameras are installed to slow us down on the roads, but they’ve also become quite a money-spinner for governments. Once you’re caught, getting a speeding fine overturned can become a David and Goliath battle. Today on ACA, one man who dared take on the system speaks up
A few years ago, ACA revealed how one speed camera at Sydney’s Spit Bridge was the biggest money-maker in Australia.
Every day, it was raking in $20,000 worth of fines, filling government coffers with more than $7 million a year.
In fact, the speed camera was so effective, authorities installed another one just 300 metres up the hill, fining speeding motorists twice on the same stretch. But then along came solicitor Stephen Rosanove, who was prepared to take on the system.
“If someone within the system doesn’t do something about it, it doesn’t get done and clearly, for a long time, this has been going on for people who don’t know what to do about the system,” he says.
The two speed cameras cost Stephen four licence points instead of two and two fines totalling $500. Against the advice of many friends in the legal community who told him to simply pay up, Stephen armed himself with a barrister and a sound argument and went to court.
“Two guys are having a fight walking up the street and they go through a few blocks and three cameras catch it, is that three separate offences that the guy will go to court for and go to jail for?” Stephen asks. “No, it’s the same offence.”
A speeding fine is usually dealt with in a matter of seconds. But when this case was heard, judgement was reserved and the parties called back to court four days later. Magistrate Michael Price rocked traffic authorities by supporting Stephen’s argument that despite two camera flashes, only one speeding fine had been committed.
The same thing is happening in Victoria.
Six weeks ago, motorist Stuart North was snapped by two mobile speed cameras in a 60kmh zone. Like Stephen, he felt the way the cameras were positioned was just a revenue-raiser.
Victorian police admitted the mistake and say in cases like Stuart’s, the second fine will be withdrawn. But back in New South Wales, authorities are standing by the controversial second camera.
While Stephen’s legal costs exceeded the original fine, he says it was all about principle and believes his case might help others fight for their rights.
As for the camera which started it all, he has this advice for authorities. “There are a lot of schools, lots of blackspots around this country that don’t have speed cameras. Let’s not use them for raising revenue, let’s put them to good use.”
New to Australia Flash2Pass Garage Remote Controls for Cars and Motorcycles. Used by Harley Davidson dealers in the USA. Tired of fumbling around for the remote control? Flash2Pass transmitter sits under the hood and is activated by 2 quick flashes of your headlights. No more batteries to go flat in your remote. Visit the Australian dealer distributor at
What on earth is wrong with Victorians allowing a State Government to do what they are doing to the general population? A small Australian state with 5 million residents, where 2.86 million warrants and Court orders exist for unpaid speed camera fines and tollway fines. Are Victorians so distracted with football that there civil liberties no longer matter? WAKE-UP!!!
The down side of nabbing the majority of drivers with a speeding fine is the inevitable rise in disqualified drivers and a steady rise in the road toll.
Concern has been raised by both supporters and opponents of speed cameras that the exponential growth in speeding offences detected will lead to a large increase in the number of people disqualified from driving, which causes severe economic consequences for those involved and may also encourage unlicensed (and therefore uninsured) driving.
Come to Victoria - The Speed Camera Mugging State of Australia. "If you come to our state with a drivers licence, we'll make sure you leave without one."
Do Speed Cameras save lives? Statistics from around the world and Australia suggest not! Why? Because speed cameras target the vast majority of law abiding citizens who travel a few kms over the speed limit, not the true causes of road fatalities! Speed Cameras are "fools gold" for governments looking for a quick fix solution to road deaths, but prove a bonanza for cash strapped governments looking to reduce police manpower and raise revenue. Add to this mix speed detection technology that is inaccurate, low speed tolerance limits and a court system that is blind to these problems and you have a recipe for disaster.
Microwave Radar Perimeter Protection - Infrared Perimeter Barriers - Surveillance Cameras - Surveillance Gear - Digital Video Recording Systems Available in Australia
The Editor of The Observer wrote (17th July 2005):
"Last week, the government announced a three-month moratorium on further speed cameras. This was partly in response to the work of engineer Paul Smith [Safe Speed's founder], who has spent 5,000 hours finding out why, though the number of cameras has risen exponentially, there has been no corresponding reduction in traffic fatalities. He concludes that, far from acting as a deterrent, speed cameras take responsibility for safe speed away from drivers, and their concentration from the road. Cameras are as likely to cause an accident as to prevent one." (link)
