Speed
Camera Law in Victoria
Mobile
Speed Cameras
Mobile
speed cameras are usually mounted in
cars which are parked on the side of
the road. A radar beam is directed at
an angle across the line of traffic to
detect the speed of vehicles passing
in either direction. If it detects a
vehicle travelling over the threshold
speed, the device will take a
photograph of the offending vehicle.
The registered owner of the vehicle
will then receive a traffic
infringement in the mail. The owner
has the option of paying the fine,
objecting to the fine, nominating a
driver or explaining that the driver
is unable to be nominated.
Because
mobile speed cameras operate on radar,
they are prone to the many of the
typcial problems that hand-held radar
devices suffer. If another vehicle is
in the picture, it is possible that
the other vehicle may have interfered
with the radar reading. Same applies
for large reflective objects such as
metal signs or large metal objects
like trucks.
The
Government of Victoria has published a
simplistic document called How
mobile speed cameras work
|
Fixed
Speed Cameras
Fixed
speed cameras are mounted on
poles, bridges or other
structures by the roadway.
Most fixed speed cameras
operate using piezo strips
which are imbedded in the
roadway. The strips of
chrystaline material react
to the pressure of the
passing vehicle and measure
the time it takes for a
vehicle to pass between two
points on the road surface.
If the vehicle's speed
exceeds the threshold, a
photo is taken of the
offending vehicle.
Piezo
strips are able to determine
which lane the offending
vehicle is travelling in, so
the fact that other vehicles
are on the road or in the
photo is not usually a
problem for the prosecution.
See
also: How
do fixed speed cameras
work.
|
|
Defences
If
your licence is at risk, then it is
usually worthwhile to take the case
the court because it is always
possible to avoid licence loss if the
case is properly handled.
In
many situations it is not easy to
defend speed camera cases. Sometimes
expert evidence is relied upon to cast
doubt on the accuracy of the speed
reading. In almost every case it is
not necessary for drivers to prove
what speed they were travelling at.
The police have the obligation of
proving the case against the
defendant. Many cases are won because
the police fail to achieve that. If
you are wondering if it is worthwhile
taking your fine to court, you will
find the answer by asking yourself if
you can afford not to take it to
court. Unless you can get around
happily without driving a motor
vehicle, then generally you will need
to take the matter to court to achieve
a better outcome.
Mobile
Speed Camera Set-up
Guidelines.
Paragraph 2.2.1 of the Mobile
Cameras Policy Manual states:
To maintain
community confidence in the speed
camera initiative, it is important for
the operational use of the devices to
be seen as fair and reasonable.
Under no circumstances are speed
camera vehicles, tripods or flash
units to be disguised by signs, logos,
breakdown of vehicle (eg. boot open or
spare wheel / jack visible etc), tree
branches, lamp posts, dust bins or any
other means that would generate public
perceptions of sly operations.
I am
sometimes asked if a breach of the
guidelines or Standard Operating
Procedures will afford a good defence
to a speed camera charge.
The short answer is that it will
not. Bonnet
open.
When prosecuting a speed camera
charge, the police must prove that it
has been operated according to law.
The relevent law is regulations 34 and
40 of the Road
Safety (General) Regulations 2009.
The only provisions
that touch on the issue of
compliance with guidelines is r. 34(a)
and 40(a) which state that certain
speed cameras must be used in
accordance with operating instructions
approved by a testing officer.
The
testing officer's operating
instructions for the Gatsometer MRC
System mobile speed camera can be downloaded
here.
The
law says the testing officer's
operating instructions must be
complied with. However, the
operating instructions do not
adopt, refer to or incorporate any of
the matters mentioned in paragraph
2.2.1 of the Mobile Cameras Policy
Manual.
The
operating instructions relate to
matters concerning accuracy of the
device and correct data collection.
They do not relate to the
fairness of its operation.
There
is no
law which requires the police to
comply with paragraph 2.2.1 of the
Policy Manual. When the police
prosecute a person for a speed camera
offence, they do not need to adduce
any evidence in court that
paragraph 2.2.1 or any other paragraph
of the Policy Manual has been
complied with. The policy manual is
never tendered in evidence by the
prosecution. Compliance with it is
irrelevant to proof of the offence.
Because the prosecution does not need
to prove the operator complied
with the policy manual then it can not
help the defendant to allege
that the policy manual has not been
complied with.
Even
if a defendant satisfies a court that
paragraph 2.2.1 has not been complied
with, this does not prevent the police
from proving the speeding offence
occurred. The driver would need to go
further and show that non-compliance
with the Policy Manual or any owners'
manual or operators' manual might have
caused the speed measurement reading
to be incorrect. See Ozbinay v.
Crowley (1993) 17 MVR 176, a decision
of the Supreme Court of Victoria,
where the court held that
non-compliance with the manufacturer's
operators' manual was not a ground for
dismissing charges unless there was
further evidence to show that the
non-compliance caused or resulted in
an erroneous reading for this
particular defendant. In
speeding cases defendants may adduce
evidence to show that there is
reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of
the speed measurement, but they will
most likely be wasting their time if
they rely solely on the police failure
to comply with the policy manual
without linking that failure to a
possible error in the measurement.
If
your vehicle was photographed at a
time when you believe guideline 2.2.1
was not being complied with, you might
decide to complain to the Traffic
Camera Office and see if it will
withdraw the fine. The T.C.O. probably
won't help you because the camera
operator is unlikely to agree that
they operated the camera in breach of
para 2.2.1, and the TCO never
withdraws a fine if there is a dispute
about the facts of the case.
Don't
be too disheartened though. There are
often other ways to win a speed camera
case.
|
