On Monday June 16 2003 09:59, Major Variola (ret.) wrote:
(ok, from slashdot..) http://www.newhouse.com/archive/jensen061203.html
I personally find the privacy implications of EDRs rather unsettling. This story doesn't change that one bit. However, in this particular case, I don't think what the EDR said really matters. The three paragraphs from the story say a lot about what happened here: | Matos was driving the 2002 Pontiac Trans Am in a 30 mph zone of a | suburb near Fort Lauderdale, Fla., when the car driven by a teenage | girl pulled out of a driveway into his path. | | The driver and her friend died instantly. | | Defense lawyer Robert Stanziale said Matos was going about 60 mph. | Assistant State Prosecutor Michael Horowitz said that his accident | investigator calculated Matos was traveling about 98 mph. The | electronic data recorder in Matos' car showed his peak speed was 114 | mph in the seconds before the crash. The *defense* attorney said his client was going 30 mph over the limit (60 mph in a 30 mph zone)! That is a grossly inappropriate speed in a residential area. Here in Texas, a ticket for 55 mph in a 30 mph zone cannot be dismissed with DSC. Not sure how the law works in Florida but I would be surprised if it was that dissimilar. Let's assume for the moment the prosecution's accident invesitigator is totally full of bovine excrement, and that all manner of gremlins snuck into the EDR thus causing it to record a grossly inaccurate peak speed, and thus, the only version of the story we can give full credibility to is the defense's version. If I were on that jury, I'd still vote for a conviction. Matos is a scofflaw and deserves exactly what he is getting. -- Shawn K. Quinn