Reason.com
Radar Eyeballs
Cops vs. machines
When Copley, Ohio, police officer Christopher Santimarino was first asked in court how fast his radar showed Mark Jenney’s SUV was traveling the day he pulled Jenney over, Santimarino said 82 miles per hour. On cross examination, he said the figure was 83. Because of that inconsistency and Santimarino’s failure to produce documentation for the radar readings at trial, an appeals court threw out the radar evidence.
But the court still upheld Jenney’s conviction. Santimarino testified that based only on what he could see with his own eyes, he had been trained to estimate a vehicle’s speed within four miles per hour. Five members of Ohio’s six-judge supreme court said that was good enough for them: “We hold that a police officer’s unaided visual estimation of a vehicle’s speed is sufficient evidence to support a conviction…if the officer is trained…and is experienced in visually estimating vehicle speed.”
The opinion doesn’t just accept the proposition that it’s possible to train human eyes to do the work of digital radar. It assumes that officers are incapable of exaggerating on the witness stand. As Justice Terrence O’Donnell explained in his lone dissent, in ruling that officer testimony is per se evidence of guilt, the court dispenses with the idea that, as with other witnesses in a trial, an officer’s credibility should be evaluated by a judge or jury.
More Articles by Radley Balko
- Bad Boys, Radley Balko, June 27, 2011
- The Crime Rate Puzzle, Radley Balko, June 20, 2011
- Wrongful Convictions, Radley Balko, June 7, 2011
Most Popular Stories
- St. Louis Cops Worry That In-Car Cameras 'Are Being Used Against Them' (5.23)
- Here Are the 15 Senators Who Voted to Stop Armed FDA Agents From Conducting Warrantless Raids on America's Farmers (Not One of Them is a Democrat) (5.24)
- Reason "Hero of Freedom" Larry Flynt's Latest Stunt? Photoshopping a Penis into Mouth of Conservative Pundit S.E. Cupp (5.24)
- Plastic Bag Ban Will Put Los Angeles In Landfill (5.23)
- Rand Paul Introduces Amendment to End the FDA's Insane Police Powers: "I see no reason to have the FDA carrying weapons." [UPDATED] (5.24)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Get Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
Jake Syma|10.22.10 @ 12:11AM|#
Radley, have any peer-reviewed studies tested officers on this ability?
nfl jerseys|11.4.10 @ 9:35PM|#
or
nike shoes UK|8.4.11 @ 1:58AM|#
is good
mbt shoes clearances|11.12.11 @ 10:50PM|#
good