I smell a rat.
Many media outlets have been reporting on a man in NSW who has beaten a speeding fine partially because of GPS. If you read the article fully (SMH) you will notice that how much weight the Judge gave to the GPS data is not specified only that it was admitted as evidence by the defendants. Also of note is that the Police under questioning admitted that they hadn’t relied on the radar completely as they didn’t have long enough to get a full reading, so they were using judgment to issue the fine.
What doesn’t stack up is why the man would bother to spend lots of money defending a $200 fine. His father recently spent $20,000 defending a $160 fine, without the help of GPS data, so it definitely runs in the family.
The man in question is Michael Simotas and he hired Dennis Miralis as his lawyer, who doesn’t look cheap. The Magistrates court upheld that the Police officers estimate was enough to issue a $200 fine, but it was appealed to the District Court where the Police were ruled against.
Would it surprise anyone to find out that Michael Simotas is a Distributor/Installer for EziTRAK a company that sells car security devices that use GPS to track stolen cars? Why didn’t SMH comment on this fact? Isn’t it essential to the case?
What is more concerning for me is the ease that false GPS data can be manufactured. I could quiet easily generate data files that even I couldn’t tell from truth. I could even stimulate his car’s GPS unit to think that it was under going that particular road at that time at a different speed. Sure not many have access to such hardware, but it scares me to see courts considering GPS to be admissible evidence, especially when it wasn’t collected by the police.
Follow the money young Padwan, it will lead to much truth.
PS: If the NSW Police need an expert who can testify honestly that such data is easy to manufacture (with the right tools) ask and you shall receive.