Defendant granted source code for police breathalyzer
Mikey 8 comments
Dale Lee Underdahl was arrested on suspicion of drink driving and consequently submitted to a breath test which was carried out using a Intoxilyzer 5000EN breathalyzer.
During the eventual court hearing, Underdahl suggested that he needed a copy of the Intoxilyzer 5000EN source code in order to defend himself properly. he said:
"for all we know, it's a random number generator"
Amazingly, the judge granted his request.
.
Rodney
Friday 10th August 2007 | 11:26 AMWow you got away with challenging a speeding fine? Well done! I know a guy who was given a fine for doing 80 in a 60 zone, on one of those scooters... which has a top speed of 60 (which it can barely achieve). He challenged the fine on the grounds that his vehicle is incapable of doing the speed it was clocked it and still lost.
I once read in the newspaper (which may not have been true, I'll admit) of someone getting a speeding fine from a multa-nova, when the photo clearly shows them stationary in heavy traffic. The person lost the case, the first time around but was awarded back the fine later when many more erroneous fines ended up in South Australia removing multa-novas' altogether.
andrew
Friday 10th August 2007 | 07:43 PMhey jake if the guy leaned forward while doing the reading and it increases, does it work the reverse if he leans back?
Jake
Friday 10th August 2007 | 09:31 PMTheoretically, yes, absolutely. All you have to do is provide doubt, then they're putty in your hands... well not really, but once there is doubt, fact or evidence becomes questionable. Once evidence can't be trusted to mount a defense, the case can not provide supporting proof and falls over.
Bob
Monday 26th November 2007 | 12:39 PMHi, I just got a fine for 110 in 100 zone, in Vic. However at the time it says I was there I wasn't. I have phone records and witnesses to prove it. I have contested it today and we will see the results. I will take it to court if I have to, Bob.
Rodney
Monday 26th November 2007 | 02:40 PMGood luck, Bob. You may need it.
My dad got a fine for doing 100kmph in a 90kmph zone; riding a vehicle with a top speed of 60kmph.... and it was uphill.
He lost the case.
TVBIZ(BOB)
Friday 23rd October 2009 | 07:43 AM...in response to this comment by Jake. All well and good Jake but the truth of the matter is that you were probably going faster than you should have correct or not?
It really gets under my skin when people challenge a ruling only because they can even when they know that they are clearly in the wrong.
I just wish the New South Wales Government would let safe drivers fit cameras in their cars just so the Government could truly see how society couldnt give a rats butt about rules and regulation on our roads.
Jake does a red light mean stop or go to you????
I hope your answer is stop? If it is then you are only a small percentage of people who think that way.
Jake Farr-Wharton
Friday 23rd October 2009 | 07:52 AM...in response to this comment by TVBIZ(BOB). Offended much?
I'm a granny of a driver, I was terrible and utterly abnoxious as a teen driver, completely defiant. But I've learnt my lesson.
Jake
Friday 10th August 2007 | 08:47 AMWhat a brilliant defense! Well done to the man!
I've contested a speeding fine before on the grounds that the person holding the gun would need to be without motion in order to gain a 100% accurate reading. If he had leaned forward while taking the reading, it would show an increased reading, with severity dependant on the proximity of the car to the gun. The defense was enough to challenge the case and the fine was scrapped.