Uh ... WHAT scientific measurement are you referring to?
And I don't know about your state, but out here the cops do not have to testofy as to how a device works, only that they operated it correctly and as instructed. We don't have to "measure" anything ... unless it is the scene of a collision.
- Carl
I was not responding to you but to racer and his mockery of instrument calibration, I was referring to the instrument accuracy (calibration of the instrument and the tuning forks used to calibrate it) as well as proper technique which is influenced by knowing how the instrument works
) I agree that LEO who have no direct knowledge of how it works and if it has been calibrated should not be allowed to testify as such.
Here you are from the highway safety deskbook by NHTSA which BTW is biased for Law enforcement agencies...
http://www.eeel.nist.gov/oles/Publications/DOT%20HS-805%20254_Police_Traffic_Radar.pdf#search='Police%20Traffic%20Radar%20ISSUE%20PAPER'
Training: In September 1978, we awarded a contract for development of a model training program for police officers in the use of speed measurement devices. The training program has two elements, one covering radar speed measuring devices and one covering nonradar devices. The overall goal of the training program is to improve the effectiveness of speed enforcement through the proper and efficient use of speed measurement devices. The specific objectives of the radar course are to develop and/or improve the trainee's ability to:
• Describe the association between excessive speed and accidents, deaths and injuries and describe the highway safety benefits of effective speed control
•
Describe the basic principles of radar speed measurement
• Acquire and demonstrate basic skills in
testing and operating the specific radar instruments
•
Identify the specific radar instruments used by the trainee's agency and describe the instruments major components and their functions
• Identify and describe the laws, court rulings, regulations, policies and procedures affecting radar speed measurement and speed enforcement in general
•
Acquire and demonstrate basic skills in preparing and presenting records and courtroom testimony relating to radar speed measurement and enforcement
The radar training course is designed in a modular format to provide maximum flexibility for the user. It is comprised of eight units, each of which has specific performance objectives. The formal classroom training comprises a block of 24 instruction hours. Upon successful completion of a written exam, the trainee must undergo a minimum of 16 instruction hours of supervised field practice. After completing the course of instruction, the trainee must be able to demonstrate his operational (real world) competency before being certified to take enforcement action based on radar speed evidence. Recertification of all operators should occur within not less than one nor more than three years.
Although this course focuses on enforcement and is intended primarily for the police patrol officer, we recommend participation in the training program by traffic adjudication personnel, e.g., judges, administrative hearing officers, prosecutors, etc. Such personnel routinely decide upon the admissibility and weight of radar speed evidence, the strengths and weaknesses of the instruments and the capabilities and limitations of the operators. This type of training will provide adjudication personnel with a good working knowledge of radar speed measurement principles and an understanding of the issues relevant to judicial deliberations.
Position: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration believes that police traffic radar is an effective enforcement tool. The role of police traffic radar in traffic safety enforcement continues to be of critical importance, especially in view of the safety and fuel conservation benefits of the 55 mph speed limit and the requirement that all States must meet uniform national compliance criteria enacted by Congress. Police traffic radar provides a means of increasing enforcement effectiveness and thus enables police administrators to better cope with the scarcity of manpower resources and rapidly increasing fuel costs.
Highway safety and law enforcement officials should recognize the fallacy of purchasing radar devices solely on the basis of economy without due regard to their performance capabilities. These officials must also recognize the importance of greatly improved operator training and State-level policy guidance to ensure high quality and more uniform police radar operations throughout a State. Inaction on these issues by State and local highway safety and law enforcement officials may well result in judicial limitations governing the use of police traffic radar. It is essential that each State develop a comprehensive radar speed enforcement program which, as a minimum, embraces equipment standards, operator training, operator certification, and policy/procedural guidance. Accordingly, each State is strongly urged to:
• Adopt the forthcoming NBS/NHTSA radar speed measuring device performance standards and require police agencies to purchase devices meeting those standards
• Develop policy guidelines to ensure that radar speed measuring devices receive proper care and upkeep and establish clear procedures for programed maintenance, testing, and calibration
•
Ensure that adequate maintenance and calibration record systems (suitable for introduction as evidence in court) are developed and maintained by each agency using radar speed measuring devices
• Adopt the NHTSA radar operator training program or its equivalent as the statewide minimum training standard
• Develop a comprehensive State-level radar operator certification program and provide for periodic recertification (every 1-3 years)
• Develop police radar workshops and seminars for traffic adjudication personnel
Speed Enforcement Policy
Every police department utilizing a speed enforcement program needs written policies and formal training guidelines. The policy should contain a statement identifying at what levels discretionary mandatory enforcement will take place. In some departments less a certain number of miles per hour over the posted limit is allowed discretionary enforcement and any speed over this amount requires a mandatory ticket. If you set such a requirement as this, recognize that not all motorists have accurate speedometers, and the tolerance should allow for at least normal speedometer error. Some departments allow their officers to issue warnings at differing speeds depending on time of day and road, traffic and weather conditions. Still other departments determine the 85th percentile speed—that is, the speed at which 85 percent or greater of all traffic is traveling below, and set a tolerance for each roadway depending on that figure. All policies should include a monitoring function to ensure compliance.
A policy should include the following areas:
# Qualifications of officers
#
Recertification of speed measuring devices
# Supervision
# Selecting a Location
# Positioning the Unit
#
Operation and Calibration of radar or LIDAR
# Apprehension
# Arrest and Detention
# Prosecution
# Written Warnings
# Storage of the Radar or LIDAR Units
#
Logs (Implementation and Maintenance)
There also should be tickler files for the recertification of radar and LIDAR units and formal maintenance procedures.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the test results the report suggested several recommendations as summarized below;
Adopt radar standards and require police agencies to follow standards,
Develop policy guidelines for radar maintenance, testing, and calibration,
Keep adequate maintenance and calibration records,
Establish minimum training standards,
Develop State-level certification (renew every 1 to 3 years),
Develop radar workshops and seminars for traffic adjudication personnel,
Establish State-level policy/procedural guidelines to ensure proper use.