Road Safety Minister Peter Malinauskas says speed cameras are accurate, confident that landmark case won’t create legal precedent

SAPOL has conceded the bungled mobile camera testing regime that led to a man avoiding a high range speeding charge was“regrettable”.

• Ruling throws thousands of speeding fines in doubt
• READ THE FULL SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT HERE

SAPOL has conceded the bungled mobile camera testing regime that led to a man avoiding a high range speeding charge was“regrettable”.

Road Safety Minister Peter Malinauskas has sought to assure South Australians that handheld speed cameras are accurate and remained confident that this “unusual” case would not create a legal precedent for successful challenges of speeding fines.

As reported in Advertiser.com.au, the Supreme Court upheld Adam Dean Butcher’s acquittal on charges of driving at 102km/h in a 50km/h zone in 2012, caused by the failure to adequately record the testing of the camera.

SAPOL spokesman Stuart McLean expressed disappointment that the failure of a police officer to follow procedure in recording testing lead to the acquittal.

He said that the camera used in the matter in question was accurate and was tested, and this could have been proven had witnesses been allowed by the court.

However the mechanics of the trial — and specifically SAPOL’s agreement to the facts of case — prevented this from occurring.

“On this occasion, (the testing) wasn’t recorded correctly, and they weren’t able to satisfy the court that the testing was done to the required standard,” he said.

“Naturally we want to get it right, that’s why we have these detailed processes in place.

“On this particular occasion it wasn’t followed, and that is regrettable.”

Mr Malinauskas described the court’s finding as an “incredibly unusual judgment” and revealed that advice from SAPOL shows that the current regime is “robust”.

Road Safety Minister Peter Malinauskas has sought to assure South Australians that handheld speed cameras are accurate.

He said that speeding remains an “incredibly dangerous act” and “we don’t want anyone speeding on our roads”.

However he would not agree to an inquiry into the accuracy of the speeding guns.

Liberal spokesman David Pisoni said the fact that Government has rejected the inquiry proves that “speed guns are little more than mobile pickpockets working for the Government”.

“It is highway robbery for the Weatherill Government to be cashing in on faulty speed gun readings,” he said.

Mr Butcher’s lawyer, Karen Stanley, said yesterday (Thursday) the ruling had “huge ramifications” for motorists and she urged drivers to challenge their fines in court if they had doubts.

“The devices police use to detect speed are not 100 per cent accurate,” she said.

“If you have been charged with a speeding offence or have received an expiation notice for a speeding fine, you may wish to challenge them.”

Mr Malinsauskas was adamant that use and testing of the handheld cameras was “compliant with Australian standards and best practice that exists within Australia.”

Mr McLean said cameras were tested at the start and end of every shift in five stages, but said he did not have the technical experience to provide details about or description of each stage.

He also declined to provide information about the police officer who had failed to appropriately record the testing.

“I don’t think this is one of those matters where we want to actually punish someone,” he said.

“This is about reviewing what we learn from this, and how to we improve what we do.”