JW_Pepper 10 Posted June 18, 2017 Just wondering if anyone has attempted to use dashcam video footage in NJ to fight a traffic citation in court? Is this permissible as evidence and under what circumstances? Any authenticity concerns with the court? Would be interested in hearing stories, experiences, lessons learned if any. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 18, 2017 I use it all the time. Although my video is from the MVR in my patrol car. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted June 19, 2017 I use it all the time. Although my video is from the MVR in my patrol car.Good one HE....lol 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Displaced Texan 11,748 Posted June 19, 2017 44 minutes ago, High Exposure said: I use it all the time. Although my video is from the MVR in my patrol car. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander!! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted June 19, 2017 Absolutely admissibleSent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 19, 2017 Agreed. But I have never seen anyone use personal footage it in court. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Golf battery 1,223 Posted June 19, 2017 I wouldnt see why its not admissable. I just got one a few weeks ago. Im tired of other idiot drivers hitting me. Now i have some proof. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Burns 16 Posted June 21, 2017 Chain of custody might be an issue, the stuff i work with gets uploaded right to our video server via a network connection.Sent from my Z956 using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Howard 538 Posted June 21, 2017 Big deal, it is there for the Russians to hack Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted June 21, 2017 Curious let us know how it goes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
medved11 71 Posted June 21, 2017 I could see how the dashcam footage could be used to demonstrate that you did make a full stop at a stop sign or before making a right on red, or some other simple moving violation, but would the speed displayed in the footage be accepted in court if you were contesting a speeding ticket? I'm just wondering since the dashcam that I'm using currently includes my speed in the time stamp display within the recorded footage. I'm assuming that it's calculated using GPS, so I'm not sure how accurate it is compared to radar, etc. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 21, 2017 My MVR also records the speed but that isn't admissible as evidence for me. My car and radar unit has to be certified and calibrated routinely. (I think 2x a year, but I cant remember.) I also have to test my radar unit at the beginning and end of shift with tuning forks to ensure it is calibrated. I then complete a form, and submit it to the court as evidence, whenever I write a speeding ticket, attesting to the fact that I completed the tests as the radar is functioning properly. I don't know what you can do similar to show that your dashcam and cars speedometer are calibrated that would be admissible to the courts.... 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sig226GuyNJ 128 Posted June 21, 2017 12 minutes ago, High Exposure said: My MVR also records the speed but that isn't admissible as evidence for me. My car and radar unit has to be certified and calibrated routinely. (I think 2x a year, but I cant remember.) I also have to test my radar unit at the beginning and end of shift with tuning forks to ensure it is calibrated. I then complete a form, and submit it to the court as evidence, whenever I write a speeding ticket, attesting to the fact that I completed the tests as the radar is functioning properly. I don't know what you can do similar to show that your dashcam and cars speedometer are calibrated that would be admissible to the courts.... How about if you drove by speed signs to show they sink up? Still probably not admissible, but that's how I know my dashcam GPS is accurate with it's speed display. Although, my speedometer is 2 mph off, but my dashcam, speed signs, and Waze all match up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
medved11 71 Posted June 21, 2017 12 minutes ago, High Exposure said: My MVR also records the speed but that isn't admissible as evidence for me. My car and radar unit has to be certified and calibrated routinely. (I think 2x a year, but I cant remember.) I also have to test my radar unit at the beginning and end of shift with tuning forks to ensure it is calibrated. I then complete a form, and submit it to the court as evidence, whenever I write a speeding ticket, attesting to the fact that I completed the tests as the radar is functioning properly. I don't know what you can do similar to show that your dashcam and cars speedometer are calibrated that would be admissible to the courts.... That's sort of what I figured (that there is no way for someone to demonstrate that their speedometer and dashcam are actually calibrated correctly and are in synch with each other). What made me think about this is that I've noticed that my dashcam will show that I'm still moving at 1-2 mph even after I come to a complete stop (most likely due to a lag in the GPS). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 21, 2017 Sig226guyNJ Maybe? Keep in mind the providing of dash cam footage could be a double edged sword at a speeding trial. As impossible as it is to expect a driver to maintain an exact speed limit, 1MPH over is still speeding. If you pass a 50MPH sign doing 51MPH, you are technically guilty and your video is doing the Prosecutor's work for him. As far as the stopsign example above - There are two basic parts to that statute: 1) stop 2) proceed when safe Most people get the first part down. It's the second part that trips folks up. If you are involved in an accident after leaving a stop sign, it clearly wasn't safe and you didn't follow step 2, ergo, violation of 39:4-144 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,570 Posted June 21, 2017 Most people don't know that if you stop behind a car at a stop sign, then follow it into the intersection, the cars on the cross road must yield to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fishnut 2,358 Posted June 21, 2017 14 minutes ago, PK90 said: Most people don't know that if you stop behind a car at a stop sign, then follow it into the intersection, the cars on the cross road must yield to you. Wouldn't that mean that you never stopped at the stop sign? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PK90 3,570 Posted June 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, fishnut said: Wouldn't that mean that you never stopped at the stop sign? No. NJS 39:4-145. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 21, 2017 You still have to stop. You just stop behind the car in front of you (that stopped at the stop sign) instead of the stop sign. You just don't have to stop twice. One or more vehicles or street cars following directly in line with another vehicle or street car and coming to a complete stop, caused by the first vehicle or street car nearest the intersection complying with section 39:4-144 of this Title, may proceed into or across the intersecting street without again coming to a complete stop. No driver of a vehicle or street car approaching the intersection on the intersecting street shall fail to yield to the vehicle so proceeding into or across the intersecting street. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sig226GuyNJ 128 Posted June 21, 2017 40 minutes ago, High Exposure said: You still have to stop. You just stop behind the car in front of you (that stopped at the stop sign) instead of the stop sign. You just don't have to stop twice. Never knew that! Seems kind of dangerous to me though. Does this apply to red lights as well? The statute is a bit unclear in that regards. I guess intersection would mean any intersection, regardless of whether there is a stop sign or red light. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fishnut 2,358 Posted June 21, 2017 52 minutes ago, PK90 said: No. NJS 39:4-145. Interesting. Just looked through the 2017 nj drivers manual. No mention of that law, I'm guessing that's why very few people know of that law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 21, 2017 39:4-144 deals with stop signs. 39:4-81 deals with traffic lights. Two different statutes. Yeah, it can be dangerous. Personally it falls under the heading of "Just because you can, doesn't mean you always should". It also doesn't give you the right to just pull in front of a moving car because the car in front of you made it through the intersection and you came to a stop behind them - 2) proceed when safe always applies. Knowing you weren't at fault at an accident scene because you know a bit of esoteric MV law is cold comfort when you are looking at a totaled car or worse, an injured person. Its basically for those stop signs that you can clearly see in every direction, and you know that the car or cars in front of you and your car are all that on the road. 5 minutes ago, fishnut said: Interesting. Just looked through the 2017 nj drivers manual. No mention of that law, I'm guessing that's why very few people know of that law. Sometimes they refer to it as the "right of procession". May be mentioned in there that way.... 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bhunted 887 Posted June 21, 2017 Regarding odometer speed vs gps. As one mentioned, gps's have a slight lag. This amount varies depending on the amount of satellites acquired. Your speeds would very rarely sync. Another note. Turn off/mute your built in microphone if it has one. Road rage language will get you no where in court. My dashcam has everything built in. IF anything you do while driving worries you, turn off anything that might incriminate you. No sound and or no gps footage is better than nothing. Just make sure audio is on if someone gets in your face with verbal abuse.[emoji6]On the other hand, leaving everything on may end up making you a perfect driver. [emoji3] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
medved11 71 Posted June 21, 2017 This may be a dumb question but, If someone were to try and use dashcam footage to fight a ticket in court, wouldn't the prosecutor have the right to see all of the footage on the chip and not just small clip that the defendant wants to show? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maintenanceguy 510 Posted June 21, 2017 Seems like you could prove the speed on the display is correct (or prove it isn't). Pick two objects along the road. Time how long it takes for the edge of your image to get from object 1 to object 2. Measure the distance. V=d/t. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted June 21, 2017 Who is going to measure and time it? The prosecution isn't. Who is going to certify the device used to measure distance? Who is running the stopwatch? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
silverado427 10,724 Posted June 21, 2017 Question .. Why is it that nobody stops for a stop sign, or uses a turn signal. And why isn't there a ticket blitz . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites