'Black box' information driving convictions (Automobile black boxes)

Automotive Body Repair News ^ | Oct 3, 2005 | Tim Sramcik

[Ben Mugged]

In what is becoming a familiar scene in courtrooms nationwide, information collected from a car’s “black box” was used to convict a motorist of criminal charges.

On June 30, a Peabody, Mass., District Court jury found Michelle Zimmerman guilty of misdemeanor motor vehicle homicide in the death of her front seat passenger, Kenneth Carlson. The jury concluded Zimmerman was driving negligently when she skidded out of control and struck a tree on Jan. 4, 2003. Information collected from the event data recorder (EDR), or black box, in her GMC Yukon reported that Zimmerman was driving 58 mph in a 40 mph zone—on an icy road, according to Essex Assistant District Attorney William J. Melkonian. EDR data also showed that Zimmerman never applied the brakes.

Judge Santo Ruma sentenced Zimmerman to two years in prison, one year to be served with the balance suspended for three years of probation. The conviction carries a statutory 10-year loss of license.

Defense lawyer Robert Weiner has vowed to appeal based on his claims that the EDR data was misinterpreted and that police illegally obtained the data. The case could set a legal precedent in Massachusetts and nationwide where EDR information already has been introduced in more than two-dozen cases.

[GregoryFul]

It could be that 10 years from now, your car will have a complete history of its use, and include a GPS record charting precisely where it has been. When you refuel, you will have to transfer this record to the authorities, through a broadband connection at the pump - or perhaps the data could be transmitted in real time - and if any infractions are discovered in the record (speeding, rolling through a stop sign, running a red light, staying in the passing lane for more than 30 seconds, etc), you will get a ticket in the mail.

How much more effective than red light cameras!

[unseen]

Freedom is freedom. If you do not know what it is then the government has already gotten to powerful. IMO

[unseen]

ANY computer can be hacked. Period.

[unseen]

a law is only obeyed when it is considered morally right and understood to promote the welfare of society. The constant passing of law after law foor every speicial interest makes a mockery of the legal system. No citizen anymore can even know the laws let only know if one is being obeyed or broken.

[unseen]

10000000% agree

[unseen]

disagree privacy is more important than justice. Without privacy you have no freedom. Without justice you still have freedom. So which is more important freedom or justice.

[endthematrix]

That download process of whereabouts can be via a tollway transponder called I-Pass in IL. Our socialist Gov bestowed it upon us in such a manner that it became economically feasible - he doubled the tollway fees if you failed to use it.

[unseen]

There are rules. speed limit, seat belts, signals, red lights, signs, DUI, child restraint, phones, radios levels, and on and on and on. You can pick any driver on any road in the USA and at one time they are breaking a rule or maybe many. So should we arrest every driver in the US? No of course not. Who goes 26 in a 25? and What happens if God forbid you hit a child that ran out in front of you between two cars going 26 in a 25? Should you be charged with reckless driving, speeding? You may not even know you were going 26 your speedometer is hard to read sure 25 and 30 is easy but 25 and say 27? But the black box nails it to the decimal point. So is this a good thing? If your going 50mph in a 25 and hit a kid there are several types of evidence that can be used. the tire marks, the distance the person was thrown, eye witness, impact on the car, etc . The black box is not needed. the only time a black box is any good is when the insurance company wants to deny the claim. and what if every car was tracked with a rifd and gps and cities and countries issued tickets every time you went above the sppedlimit? Is that a good thing?

[endthematrix]

There are rules, yes.

...and there are lawyers who can argue any mitigating circumstances.

I am no fan of vehicle black boxes and a privacy advocate. I just wanted to add that 2 cents.

[Issaquahking]

Hey Eastforker, make sure you are a good shot! quick read on the gestapo in Illinos...

It's a witch hunt for revenue.

Truer words were never spoken.

That's on top of a $100 per DUI arrest fee that the state remits annually to local arresting agencies across Illinois.
Why should be there an "arresting fee" charged if there is no conviction?

But because of the numerous fees faced by those charged with DUI, the law has its critics.

Donald Ramsell, a Wheaton attorney who specializes in defending DUI cases, said the new law is not only unfair, but also illegal.

I'll bet Lincoln is rolling over in his grave on some of the BS his state has come up with! Talk about a state with the law enforcement gone way over the top, Illinois is it!

Let me tell you about my litle "introduction to the state of Illinois"...

Back in 1987 when I was apprenticing in Chicago, I had a run in with a cop at a park in North Chicago. After 2 hours of false arrest, and thoroughly making an idiot out of the officer who took me down to the local precinct, the chief told me I was free to go, and that I wasn't under arrest. Foolish me to have thought the whole thing was over.

Nope, that P.O.S. that harrassed me, also had my address,where he managed to leave a ticket on my vehicle (to the point that I just threw them in the street after the first ten of his "gifts" he left me) and I was going to be his whipping boy. Over the next three months, and an ongoing court battle, the judge sided with the cop. Seeings I was only in Chicago for schooling, I simply refused to pay and told the state of Illinois to stick it.

Zoom forward to 2002, when Alaska finally went on-line with the rest of the U.S. in law enforcement. State of Alaska told me that I had suspended license per a Illinois DMV. So I called the state of Illinois and asked about what it was going to cost....end up settling for $30... instead of the well over a thousand plus the jerk judge and cop had me bent over for.

The state (Illinois) worker couldn't believe I hadn't been stopped and arrested for sometime over the past and have all the BS catch up. I told here that I've never had an arrest stick, had security clearances, had paid other tickets in other states that I had received (not a problem paying when I'm in the wrong), and nothing had ever come from it.

Sounds like the gestapo is in charge of Illinois, and if I ever have to return where they have nazis enforcing the law it will be too soon!

30 posted on 10/08/2005 3:02:04 PM PDT by Issaquahking (Americans defending the homeland....a job an illegal alien will NEVER do....)

[Issaquahking]

It's a witch hunt for revenue.

Truer words were never spoken.

That's on top of a $100 per DUI arrest fee that the state remits annually to local arresting agencies across Illinois.
Why should be there an "arresting fee" charged if there is no conviction?

But because of the numerous fees faced by those charged with DUI, the law has its critics.

Donald Ramsell, a Wheaton attorney who specializes in defending DUI cases, said the new law is not only unfair, but also illegal.

I'll bet Lincoln is rolling over in his grave on some of the BS his state has come up with! Talk about a state with the law enforcement gone way over the top, Illinois is it!

Let me tell you about my litle "introduction to the state of Illinois"...

Back in 1987 when I was apprenticing in Chicago, I had a run in with a cop at a park in North Chicago. After 2 hours of false arrest, and thoroughly making an idiot out of the officer who took me down to the local precinct, the chief told me I was free to go, and that I wasn't under arrest. Foolish me to have thought the whole thing was over.

Nope, that P.O.S. that harrassed me, also had my address,where he managed to leave a ticket on my vehicle (to the point that I just threw them in the street after the first ten of his "gifts" he left me) and I was going to be his whipping boy. Over the next three months, and an ongoing court battle, the judge sided with the cop. Seeings I was only in Chicago for schooling, I simply refused to pay and told the state of Illinois to stick it.

Zoom forward to 2002, when Alaska finally went on-line with the rest of the U.S. in law enforcement. State of Alaska told me that I had suspended license per a Illinois DMV. So I called the state of Illinois and asked about what it was going to cost....end up settling for $30... instead of the well over a thousand plus the jerk judge and cop had me bent over for.

The state (Illinois) worker couldn't believe I hadn't been stopped and arrested for sometime over the past and have all the BS catch up. I told here that I've never had an arrest stick, had security clearances, had paid other tickets in other states that I had received (not a problem paying when I'm in the wrong), and nothing had ever come from it.

Sounds like the gestapo is in charge of Illinois, and if I ever have to return where they have nazis enforcing the law it will be too soon!

[DJ MacWoW]

"Don't buy me a new car" ping

[GregoryFul]

Yep, that would work.

However, we've got do draw the line somewhere here - the technology is available to turn us all into perpetual criminals with death by a thousand cuts. The traffic laws are poorly designed and manipulated by many forces that have nothing to do with traffic safety. If most drivers were not keen on adapting to the chaotic road designs and traffic rules we would not be able to survive them.

The road I live on has a 25 mph speed limit on a 3 mile section where my house is, and a 35 mph limit further up. It is the same width, same density of houses, somewhat more curvy and hilly - it does not make sense. And if one observes the 25 mph speed limit, angry drivers take opportunities to veer around you - which is not safe at all.

Superhighways were designed for 70 mph plus, and in the 60's and 70's speed limits were 65-75 mph on these roads. But in the 70's Congress decided that we as a nation could save gas if cars traveled at 55 - so the 55 mph speed limit was imposed on the nations highways. Absolutely no consideration was given for the time value of the people being conveyed by those highways.

Then we get the know-it-all mutton heads declaring that the 55 mph speed limit was saving lives on the highways, because highway death tolls came down - of course they ignored the fact that most people pay no attention to the 55 mph limit unless a patrol car is in the vicinity - and then you get a nasty traffic snarl.

I believe that many traffic accidents are a result of poor road engineering, and can be remedied by attending to road design. Around here, I am aware of where there are high frequencies of accidents, and am quite careful while maneuvering through those spots.

For twenty years, we've had weekly crashes at one poorly controlled intersection between a highway exit (typically backed up to overflowing onto the highway during rush hour) onto a four lane overpass on a secondary route. The crashes are caused by lack of visibility, lack of traffic signals, and driver impatience and aggravation. Why aren't signals installed? I guess it is easier to blame crashes on the driver who is trying to negotiate the idiotic chaos created by the "authorities". It is clear to any thoughtful person who is familiar with the spot what the problem is. I expect that the people who crash there are unfamiliar with the spot.

So, we've got lots of design problems in our roads and traffic laws. And they will continue to be ignored by the "people in charge". (I've seen right turn on red signs qualified by multiple associated signs describing what days of the week and what times of the day it is prohibited - takes one almost as much time to read the signs as it does for the light to change: clearly we have idiots in charge).

Anyway, to be forced to comply with every idiotic nuance of the traffic laws by technology that records every infraction will cause massive, bloody revolt (I hope, I would not want to live in such tyranny).

[nightdriver]

Another reason why I prefer to keep my old beaters.

I drove a GM rental car a while back that even had the tell-tale sign of the computer controlling the starter. It means that the government, through that "NorthStar" system can disable your car for whatever reason they dream up.

[jeffers]

Guess you've never driven on ice.

I can and have many times gotten the speedometer over 60 MPH without even moving at a stop sign. The odometer agrees.

Who's to say the driving wheels didn't break traction, leading to a skid and the accident itself, while feeding falsely incriminating "data" to the recorder?

[FastCoyote]

"Most people obey the law when they know they are being watched. Now, more drivers will know they are being watched."

Then you won't mind me setting up a camera in your home office so I can make a citizen's arrest should you cheat on your tax return.

[son of caesar]

this driving is a privilge and not a right has always bothered me a bit. when the constitution was written, my happiness would probably depend on me owning a horse or two.
so if i cant drive the car since its a privilege, ill just obey my founding fathers who surely would have allowed me to ride my horse on any roads i helped pay for. bottom line, get the filthy govt out of my life one way or another, its retarded, too dam expensive and is a vastly inferior product.

[Jambe]

I think this is kind of ironic. I'll bet these boxes were installed to try to protect the auto companies for being blamed for bad drivers--and letting the drivers get sued.

Remember all the lawsuits about 10 years ago about sudden vehicle acceleration? Or false airbag deployment?

Many if not most of today's newer vehicles utilize onboard computers (several) for engine control fuel management, anti-lock breaking systems, transmission control, suspension, airbag deployment, etc. It was only a matter of time for the manufacturers to add "post mortem" memory capability in order to defend themselves from suits claiming "the systems failed".