The headlines blared, " Lewiston man has ticket dismissed after a two year fight". Most news accounts went on to report an Idaho State Court of Appeals decision filed December 1, 2009 under Opinion No. 75.

 

That case involved the issue of visual estimation of speed by the police. Being the appellant in that case this writer has some insight into what went on in that case.

 

Across the nation, courts are allowing police officers to visually estimate the speed of a vehicle whether or not there is some sort of supporting evidence such as radar or a pace to corroborate the officer's visual estimation of a motorist's speed. Therein lies the problem.

 

A police officer no longer needs to use radar as the basis for determining the speed of a vehicle. An officer merely has to stand on the side of the road and estimate the speed of a vehicle. Up to the Estes decision in December 2009, an officer's visual estimation of speed went unchallenged in Idaho.  

 

In the Estes decision, the court finally established a criteria for establishing the speed of a vehicle using visual estimation of speed. The court basically stated that an officer must undergo training on the visual estimation of speed and that officer's accuracy rate must be established and recorded. Other factors include time of day, and reference points. The court did not simply refuse to accept visual estimation of speed. That in itself is a problem.

 

To understand the problem one has to digress. Back when automobiles were first made around the 1900's law enforcement began to recognize the need to measure vehicle speed. The courts in those days demanded some sort of scientific method to measure a vehicle's speed. Stop watches were used to measure time to get from point A to Point B. One police supervisor hid an officer in a tree. The first officer would mark the time that a vehicle passed his position and radio that information to a second officer who would note the time then relay the vehicle information to a third officer if it was determined that the vehicle in question was speeding. The third officer would lower a road barrier and stop and cite the speeding motorist. Crude but effective.

 

After World War II, radar came into use. The problem with the early radar was that it could not determine which vehicle in a group of vehicles were speeding. The radar operator was taught visual estimation of speed to pick out the speeding vehicle from the group. Eventually radar was judicially noted by state courts in 1955 which meant that radar readings were sufficient to establish speed. Vusual estimation of speed was still needed to pick out a speeding vehicle in a group.

 

Starting in the 1980's courts began to accept visual estimation of speed instead of requiring government to verify a speed estimate by scientific methods which was contrary to previous rulings. The courts simply ignored sixty years of scientific advancement to establish the speed of a vehicle.

 

A clear point that is obvious in these cases is that the courts have ceased to be a barrier between government and citizens and have become a willing partner with government against the average citizen.

 

David Estes