Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
DITTRICH
MB Enthusiast
...the gun was used at twice the maximum range. But although the limiter had not been removed from the vehicle, perhaps it might have been bypassed or unplugged on the day in question or reprogrammed afterwards?
Les
Les
Plodd
Active Member
Not seen that make of Lazer, we use a different one.
Ours supposedly has a range of 999mtrs. BUT it is there only to confirm the officers suspicions regarding a vehicles speed. i.e you see a vehicle you think is exceeding the limit and use the lazer to confirm your suspicions. The max range we usually get is 250/300mtrs. A lot less than that case.
Ours supposedly has a range of 999mtrs. BUT it is there only to confirm the officers suspicions regarding a vehicles speed. i.e you see a vehicle you think is exceeding the limit and use the lazer to confirm your suspicions. The max range we usually get is 250/300mtrs. A lot less than that case.
glojo
Hardcore MB Enthusiast
I find it kind of crazy that the press really lay into the Police when they put a lot of resources into proving an offence actually occured and then in the next breath try to humilate them for not putting enough resources into proving the offence.
Imagine the outcry if the Police had taken the car away and their scientific aids department went to town under the bonnet to see what parts had recently been removed, or replaced. Then had Subarau connect the engine to their own diagnostic equipment to see what this would disclose.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
It is the old adage of 'Money buys innocence'
Satch sums this case up very well. The case was 'Not Proven'
similar really to the woman who won her appeal against what she claimed were cot deaths. Not one Appeal Court Judge said she was indeed innocent, but there was doubt over some of the evidence.
John
Imagine the outcry if the Police had taken the car away and their scientific aids department went to town under the bonnet to see what parts had recently been removed, or replaced. Then had Subarau connect the engine to their own diagnostic equipment to see what this would disclose.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
It is the old adage of 'Money buys innocence'
Satch sums this case up very well. The case was 'Not Proven'
similar really to the woman who won her appeal against what she claimed were cot deaths. Not one Appeal Court Judge said she was indeed innocent, but there was doubt over some of the evidence.
John
I to am amazed that he got away with that one, Grey Import WRX is so easy to increase the setpoint of the limiter, doesn't even involve re-programing or removing the limiter from vehicle. Would have taken all off 20min to remove the device & return car to standard with nothing to show it had ever been fitted. Still as they say he's innocent until proven guilty, the not-proven verdict goes to show that the court is not convinced he's innocent just that the police could not prove the case.
