Stupid Attorney taling about GPS's

[Gerald Sylvester]

I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
moronic comment of:
-------------
Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
within a few feet.

"If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
--------------

I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>

My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.




Gerald

[Dave S]

Yea.. I caught that in the news too... Either the attorney is stupid, or
he is intentionally lying to try and save poor Scotty's ass.. Maybe the
prosecution should subpoena an FAA representative to refute those
claims. Of COURSE they mouthpiece is comparing apples to oranges. Cars
use GPS primarily for horizontal guidance. They are quite accurate in
that regard when they get a good signal. What is it.. within 10 feet now
with SA turned off for the past few years??

Airplanes get the same great horizonal guidance, and GPS has been used
for YEARS and approved in an enroute, terminal and approach environment.
The only thing keeping GPS from being used to "land airplanes" is the
vertical guidance component. 200 Feet astray from an airway centerline
is no biggie. 200 feet low on a precision approach to minimums is likely
worth a paragraph or two in the obituary section. I guess thats why all
the big fuss about WAAS, LAAS, RAIM and other cool terms like that.

I havent seen a single car crash proven to be caused by the GPS showing
the wrong altitude. <grin> Likewise, just cause GPS isnt able to give
precision approach quality vertical guidance to the whole of aviation
just yet doesnt mean its not accurate enough to show what 100 square
foot block of land poor Scotty's car happened to be in... or how many
times he parked near or drove by where they found his wife and kids
body.. Poor Scott didnt even know the cops had planted covert GPS
recievers on each of his 4 vehicles when he did all this. The next crop
of cell phones will be able to help you be tracked pretty closely too.
The ability was legislated so enhanced 911 systems could locate a
caller. The same ability can be used to locate a suspect. The moral? If
you are gonna do something bad, turn off your cell phone for a while :)

Good call on the judge allowing the evidence.

Wow.. big rant this time.
Dave


Gerald Sylvester wrote:

>
>
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> moronic comment of:
> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> --------------
>
> I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
> I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
> on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
> I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>
>
> My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
> feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
> New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.
>
>
>
>
> Gerald
>
>

[Tarver Engineering]

"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> moronic comment of:
> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> --------------
>
> I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
> I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
> on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
> I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>
>
> My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
> feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
> New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.

Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Dave S" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Yea.. I caught that in the news too... Either the attorney is stupid, or
> he is intentionally lying to try and save poor Scotty's ass.. Maybe the
> prosecution should subpoena an FAA representative to refute those
> claims.

All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as registered by
the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be well on
his way to giving testimony illegally.


Of COURSE they mouthpiece is comparing apples to oranges. Cars
> use GPS primarily for horizontal guidance. They are quite accurate in
> that regard when they get a good signal. What is it.. within 10 feet now
> with SA turned off for the past few years??
>
> Airplanes get the same great horizonal guidance, and GPS has been used
> for YEARS and approved in an enroute, terminal and approach environment.
> The only thing keeping GPS from being used to "land airplanes" is the
> vertical guidance component. 200 Feet astray from an airway centerline
> is no biggie. 200 feet low on a precision approach to minimums is likely
> worth a paragraph or two in the obituary section. I guess thats why all
> the big fuss about WAAS, LAAS, RAIM and other cool terms like that.
>
> I havent seen a single car crash proven to be caused by the GPS showing
> the wrong altitude. <grin> Likewise, just cause GPS isnt able to give
> precision approach quality vertical guidance to the whole of aviation
> just yet doesnt mean its not accurate enough to show what 100 square
> foot block of land poor Scotty's car happened to be in... or how many
> times he parked near or drove by where they found his wife and kids
> body.. Poor Scott didnt even know the cops had planted covert GPS
> recievers on each of his 4 vehicles when he did all this. The next crop
> of cell phones will be able to help you be tracked pretty closely too.
> The ability was legislated so enhanced 911 systems could locate a
> caller. The same ability can be used to locate a suspect. The moral? If
> you are gonna do something bad, turn off your cell phone for a while :)
>
> Good call on the judge allowing the evidence.
>
> Wow.. big rant this time.
> Dave
>
>
> Gerald Sylvester wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> > trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> > to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> > and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> > scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> > is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> > moronic comment of:
> > -------------
> > Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> > through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> > signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> > within a few feet.
> >
> > "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> > a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> > --------------
> >
> > I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
> > I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
> > on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
> > I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>
> >
> > My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
> > feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
> > New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Gerald
> >
> >
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as registered by
> the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be well on
> his way to giving testimony illegally.

1. Attorneys do not "give testimony".
2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements. They aren't under
oath.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Bill Denton]

Uhhhh, guys?

The GPS was placed on Scott's car by the police; it wasn't a factory
install.

The argument was that the antenna wasn't properly located and the evidence
flawed.

But the judge just said the prosecution could use the GPS evidence...


"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> moronic comment of:
> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> --------------
>
> I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
> I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
> on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
> I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>
>
> My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
> feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
> New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.
>
>
>
>
> Gerald
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dave S wrote:
>
> Good call on the judge allowing the evidence.

What evidence? Gerald's post simply stated that an attorney made an obviously
incorrect statement. What did I miss?

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Peter Gottlieb]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...

> 2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements.

If there was, courtrooms would become awfully quiet all over the country.

[R.Hubbell]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:52:39 GMT Gerald Sylvester > wrote:

>
>
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> moronic comment of:
> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.


The technique is known as "casting a shadow of doubt". It works
wonderfully well. Jurors eat it up. He's doing his job.


R. Hubbell


> --------------
>
> I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
> I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
> on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
> I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>
>
> My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
> feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
> New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.
>
>
>
>
> Gerald
>
>

[AES/newspost]

How did the GPS units installed in Scott Peterson's car transmit the
location information back to the police?

Some kind of continuous real-time transmitting capability? (Is this
built into the GPS system itself?)

Or did they have to surreptitiously recover the units from time to time
and downloaded data stored in memory? (And if so, are such units
available to the general public?)

[Tarver Engineering]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
> >
> > All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as registered
by
> > the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be well
on
> > his way to giving testimony illegally.
>
> 1. Attorneys do not "give testimony".

Clinton was disbarred over his attorny giving false testimony before the
court.

> 2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements. They aren't
under
> oath.

you are mistaken.

[Tarver Engineering]

"AES/newspost" > wrote in message
...
> How did the GPS units installed in Scott Peterson's car transmit the
> location information back to the police?

The same way new cell phones and those "house arrest" braceletts do.

> Some kind of continuous real-time transmitting capability? (Is this
> built into the GPS system itself?)

The GPS system doesn't care.

[Jay Smith]

AES/newspost wrote:
> How did the GPS units installed in Scott Peterson's car transmit the
> location information back to the police?
> Some kind of continuous real-time transmitting capability? (Is this
> built into the GPS system itself?)
> Or did they have to surreptitiously recover the units from time to time
> and downloaded data stored in memory? (And if so, are such units
> available to the general public?)

There are several commercial tracking operations in business providing
the service. There are different methods of obtaining the tracking data.
Some are realtime transmitters, others are via interrogation.
Some services on high value rental cars will remotely shut the engine
off when the vehicle gets within so many miles of the Mexican border to
prevent auto theft.
Others, like OnStar, can detect airbag inflation, unlock car doors, etc.

[C J Campbell]

The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what he
thinks of the jury.

[C J Campbell]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what he
> thinks of the jury.
>
>

And as a further comment, why would he not think that? Juries are made up of
people who have nothing better to do than watch Oprah. Not only that, but
they actually believe the idiocy spewing from people like Oprah. Anybody
smart enough to actually do something productive for a living either is
excused from jury duty or is excluded by an attorney who does not want
anyone with critical thinking skills on the jury.

The last time I was in a jury pool I told the judge the truth when he asked
whether I would serve on a jury. I told him that no attorney would accept my
presence on a jury because I had an IQ greater than that of a meatloaf
(granted, it is not a lot greater). I said that I had been called for jury
many times and that I had never been allowed to serve on a jury for that
reason. He agreed and excused me, somewhat to the discomfiture of those
already selected to the jury.

The jury is made up of your peers only if you are a complete moron.

[Tarver Engineering]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> > The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what
he
> > thinks of the jury.
> >
> >
>
> And as a further comment, why would he not think that? Juries are made up
of
> people who have nothing better to do than watch Oprah. Not only that, but
> they actually believe the idiocy spewing from people like Oprah. Anybody
> smart enough to actually do something productive for a living either is
> excused from jury duty or is excluded by an attorney who does not want
> anyone with critical thinking skills on the jury.

In fact, laser based surveying is the accepted means for accurate surveying
measurments in California Courts.

> The last time I was in a jury pool I told the judge the truth when he
asked
> whether I would serve on a jury. I told him that no attorney would accept
my
> presence on a jury because I had an IQ greater than that of a meatloaf
> (granted, it is not a lot greater). I said that I had been called for jury
> many times and that I had never been allowed to serve on a jury for that
> reason. He agreed and excused me, somewhat to the discomfiture of those
> already selected to the jury.

I just say, "I am a registered professional engineer" and they tell me to go
home.

> The jury is made up of your peers only if you are a complete moron.

I think the prosecution can afford to stipulate to the 7.2 meter maximum
error. (unaugmented)

[Dave]

> Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
>

Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
> > Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
> >
>
> Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.

My data comes from GPS World, a source far far superior to the WAAS peddlers
at sat.geo.satellite-nav. The sat.geo.satellite-nav newsgroup is known to
be dishonest WRT GPS.

[jls]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what he
> thinks of the jury.

What jury? Geragos and the DA are still in pretrial motions.

[jls]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Tarver Engineering wrote:
> > >
> > > All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as
registered
> by
> > > the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be well
> on
> > > his way to giving testimony illegally.
> >
> > 1. Attorneys do not "give testimony".
>
> Clinton was disbarred over his attorny [sic] giving false testimony before
the
> court.

You are inaccurate in several respects. Clinton's license was suspended
for a specific period of time; he was not disbarred. He negotiated a
settlement with the Arkansas bar which had served him with a grievance
complaint for giving false testimony in a _Jones v. Clinton_ deposition.
>
> > 2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements. They aren't
> under
> > oath.
>
> you are mistaken.

An attorney who knowingly misleads a court violates the canons of
professional ethics and is subject to discipline by the court and the bar.
He does not have to be under oath. However, if an attorney gives
materially false testimony while under oath he is also guilty of perjury,
ordinarily a felony.

[Tarver Engineering]

" jls" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > >
> > > Tarver Engineering wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as
> registered
> > by
> > > > the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be
well
> > on
> > > > his way to giving testimony illegally.
> > >
> > > 1. Attorneys do not "give testimony".
> >
> > Clinton was disbarred over his attorny [sic] giving false testimony
before
> the
> > court.
>
> You are inaccurate in several respects. Clinton's license was suspended
> for a specific period of time; he was not disbarred. He negotiated a
> settlement with the Arkansas bar which had served him with a grievance
> complaint for giving false testimony in a _Jones v. Clinton_ deposition.

No, Clinton was disbarred for his Attorney giving false testimony in Federal
District Court. If the Jones v clinton lawsuit had been reopened, clinto
would have forfeited his Attorney client rights.

> > > 2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements. They
aren't under
> > > oath.
> >
> > you are mistaken.
>
> An attorney who knowingly misleads a court violates the canons of
> professional ethics and is subject to discipline by the court and the bar.
> He does not have to be under oath. However, if an attorney gives
> materially false testimony while under oath he is also guilty of perjury,
> ordinarily a felony.

If your Attorney gives false information before the Court and you are aware
of it, Arkansas Law holds the client liable.

[Dennis O'Connor]

Ahhh Gerald, you are confusing common sense and common knowledge with an
American court room... For GPS to be introduced into a capital case there
either has to be a precedent ruling at the appellant level on it's
admissibility (I am unaware of any such ruling), or experts have to be
called to testify so that the judge can rule on admissibility in this
case... This for your and my protections, not just this Scott guy...

Unfortunately, this is a big game of 'gotcha' where each side tries to trip
the other up, not on the basis of scientific fact, but on the basis of, 'you
forgot to say mother may I'... Scott's Lawyers have a good bet going, for
excluding the gps/lo-jacker readouts... Look at the courts recent
revisiting of finger prints because a sharp defense lawyer realized there
never was an appellant level ruling made on the science, in spite of a
hundred years of acceptance by the courts... Look at the humbling of the
FBI forensic lab, whose preeminent expert proved to be a liar and a
charlatan...

OTOH, jurists insistence of ruling on the basis of rulings made a hundred
years ago, in totally different areas of science long since disproved, as
the basis for their current rulings, forms a vast LaBrea tar pit for pilots
accused by an FAA inspector, and is directly why the FAA/DOT can rule
against a pilot and then appeal to themselves if confronted... This ruling
made long ago about the courts deferring to the FAA (CAA in those days), and
long before numerous more recent rulings limiting the power of the
government to avoid judicial revue, continues to allow federal judges to
turn a blind eye to the FAA/DOT's daily violations the constitutional rights
of pilots... And now Secy Ridge continues the 'family tradition', of raping
any innocent who blunders into a TFR.....

Anyway, back to Scott - guilty or not? I suspect that 99% say guilty...
But 99% thought Rep. Condit was guilty in the Chandra Levy case during the
early going, yet the place and manner of the finding of her corpse now makes
his guilt unlikely... And how many convicted rapists are now being found
innocent by DNA typing...
denny

"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS."

[Wdtabor]

In article <20040218083913.322b40c6@fstop>, "R.Hubbell"
> writes:

>
>> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
>> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
>
>
>The technique is known as "casting a shadow of doubt". It works
>wonderfully well. Jurors eat it up. He's doing his job.
>

I would think he would be questioning what business the police had tracking
Peterson's whereabouts AFTER the crime was commited.

It seems the prosecution is trying him with character assasination after the
fact rather than with evidence of the crime itself. He'll probably wind up
being the first person executed for having an affair.

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Morgans]

" jls" > wrote

However, if an attorney gives
> materially false testimony while under oath he is also guilty of perjury,
> ordinarily a felony.
>
Unless your name is Bill Clinton. I still can't believe we didn't throw
that clown out on his ear, then throw him in jail. Now, unless you stick
yur "dickie" in someone, it isn't sex. Jeeesh .
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.580 / Virus Database: 367 - Release Date: 2/6/04

[Peter Duniho]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
> Unless your name is Bill Clinton. I still can't believe we didn't throw
> that clown out on his ear, then throw him in jail.

I still can't believe you're not in my killfile yet.

As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history. Get over it. Move on. Get
on with your life, assuming you have one.

[Ron Lee]

Dave S > wrote:

>Airplanes get the same great horizonal guidance, and GPS has been used
>for YEARS and approved in an enroute, terminal and approach environment.
> The only thing keeping GPS from being used to "land airplanes" is the
>vertical guidance component.

Even WAAS will not "land" an aircraft. GPS supports non-precision
approaches today.

Ron Lee

[Ron Lee]

"Dave" > wrote:

>> Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
>>
>
>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
>
>
Probably not a bad number.

Ron Lee

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ron Lee" > wrote in message
...
> Dave S > wrote:
>
> >Airplanes get the same great horizonal guidance, and GPS has been used
> >for YEARS and approved in an enroute, terminal and approach environment.
> > The only thing keeping GPS from being used to "land airplanes" is the
> >vertical guidance component.
>
> Even WAAS will not "land" an aircraft. GPS supports non-precision
> approaches today.

WAAS adds little to no value to aviation.

The CNX-80 demonstrates the rip off WAAS is. (not a complaint about the
CNX-80)

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ron Lee" > wrote in message
...
> "Dave" > wrote:
>
> >> Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
> >>
> >
> >Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.

> Probably not a bad number.

GPS augmented with WAAS is accurate to within 3.6 meters longitudinally.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Peter" > wrote in message
news:ruUYb.349212$xy6.1742195@attbi_s02...
> Ron Lee wrote:
> > "Dave" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Probably not a bad number.
>
> Only if the usual caveats are added; i.e. 95% of the time and assuming the
> receiver has good reception conditions. Any attorney trying to discredit
> GPS evidence will naturally focus on the 5% of the time when the position
> could be off by more than the nominal accuracy and on obstructions,
> multi-path reflections, RFI, etc. that can degrade performance,
> particularly in a covert installation where the antenna is unlikely to be
> optimally placed for good reception.

False.

The convergence of the GPS Jacobian does not occur for the conditions you
describe. One of the major advantages of GPS over current ground based
navigation is the difficulty of spoofing the system.

[Peter]

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> "Peter" > wrote in message
> news:ruUYb.349212$xy6.1742195@attbi_s02...
>
>>Ron Lee wrote:
>>
>>>"Dave" > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Probably not a bad number.
>>
>>Only if the usual caveats are added; i.e. 95% of the time and assuming the
>>receiver has good reception conditions. Any attorney trying to discredit
>>GPS evidence will naturally focus on the 5% of the time when the position
>>could be off by more than the nominal accuracy and on obstructions,
>>multi-path reflections, RFI, etc. that can degrade performance,
>>particularly in a covert installation where the antenna is unlikely to be
>>optimally placed for good reception.
>
>
> False.
>
> The convergence of the GPS Jacobian does not occur for the conditions you
> describe. One of the major advantages of GPS over current ground based
> navigation is the difficulty of spoofing the system.
>

I suggest you read your "GPS World" issues some more. Improvement of
integrity monitoring was one of the main reasons for requiring augmentation
of GPS. Evidence already presented in this court case also indicates
some of the problems cited above which resulted in momentary errors of
miles rather than meters.
I'm an advocate of GPS navigation but it is not infallible and carries no
absolute 7 m accuracy guarantee.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Peter" > wrote in message
news:0YUYb.349393$xy6.1743180@attbi_s02...
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> > "Peter" > wrote in message
> > news:ruUYb.349212$xy6.1742195@attbi_s02...
> >
> >>Ron Lee wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Dave" > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Probably not a bad number.
> >>
> >>Only if the usual caveats are added; i.e. 95% of the time and assuming
the
> >>receiver has good reception conditions. Any attorney trying to
discredit
> >>GPS evidence will naturally focus on the 5% of the time when the
position
> >>could be off by more than the nominal accuracy and on obstructions,
> >>multi-path reflections, RFI, etc. that can degrade performance,
> >>particularly in a covert installation where the antenna is unlikely to
be
> >>optimally placed for good reception.
> >
> >
> > False.
> >
> > The convergence of the GPS Jacobian does not occur for the conditions
you
> > describe. One of the major advantages of GPS over current ground based
> > navigation is the difficulty of spoofing the system.
> >
>
> I suggest you read your "GPS World" issues some more. Improvement of
> integrity monitoring was one of the main reasons for requiring
augmentation
> of GPS.

False.

The failure to monitor the integrity of the WAAS signal is why the test bit
remained set until recently. The integrity issues were WAAS integrity
issues with no relevence to GPS.

> Evidence already presented in this court case also indicates
> some of the problems cited above which resulted in momentary errors of
> miles rather than meters.

A maomentary error with what equipment?

> I'm an advocate of GPS navigation but it is not infallible and carries no
> absolute 7 m accuracy guarantee.

So far you are zero for two.

[john price]

But was it TSO'd and permanently installed by a certificated
avionics technician??? If not how could it possibly be at all
accurate????

John Price
CFII/AGI/IGI
http://home.att.net/~jm.price


"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> moronic comment of:
> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> --------------
>
> I don't know if they are approved for auto-landing but
> I'm fairly certain it can get me a few hundred feet AGL
> on the exact glideslope of an airport 8000 miles away.
> I'd generally consider that accurate enough. <grin>
>
> My handheld GPS-V for my car has lead me to within a few
> feet of the front *main* door of places in Amsterdam, Rome,
> New York and San Francisco. I'd generally consider that accurate.
>
>
>
>
> Gerald
>
>

[Peter]

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> "Peter" > wrote in message
> news:0YUYb.349393$xy6.1743180@attbi_s02...
>
>>Tarver Engineering wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Peter" > wrote in message
>>>news:ruUYb.349212$xy6.1742195@attbi_s02...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Ron Lee wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Dave" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Probably not a bad number.
>>>>
>>>>Only if the usual caveats are added; i.e. 95% of the time and assuming
>
> the
>
>>>>receiver has good reception conditions. Any attorney trying to
>
> discredit
>
>>>>GPS evidence will naturally focus on the 5% of the time when the
>
> position
>
>>>>could be off by more than the nominal accuracy and on obstructions,
>>>>multi-path reflections, RFI, etc. that can degrade performance,
>>>>particularly in a covert installation where the antenna is unlikely to
>
> be
>
>>>>optimally placed for good reception.
>>>
>>>
>>>False.
>>>
>>>The convergence of the GPS Jacobian does not occur for the conditions
>
> you
>
>>>describe. One of the major advantages of GPS over current ground based
>>>navigation is the difficulty of spoofing the system.
>>>
>>
>>I suggest you read your "GPS World" issues some more. Improvement of
>>integrity monitoring was one of the main reasons for requiring
>
> augmentation
>
>> of GPS.
>
>
> False.
>
> The failure to monitor the integrity of the WAAS signal is why the test bit
> remained set until recently. The integrity issues were WAAS integrity
> issues with no relevence to GPS.

Unaugmented GPS has insufficient integrity monitoring.
http://www.cts.cv.ic.ac.uk/html/ResearchSeminars/seminarDetails.asp?seminarID=62
:
"The assessment results also indicated that the current GPS system cannot
meet the RNP in most of the cases and the current integrity monitoring
mechanism is inadequate for providing the necessary integrity monitoring
capability. Therefore, this study suggests that augmentation systems are
needed to support the navigation function for all phases of flight." Jan.
28, 2004, Imperial College, London, Dr. Shaojun.
>
>
>> Evidence already presented in this court case also indicates
>>some of the problems cited above which resulted in momentary errors of
>>miles rather than meters.
>
>
> A maomentary error with what equipment?

Apparent position errors recorded by the monitoring equipment used in the
investigation being discussed.
>
>
>>I'm an advocate of GPS navigation but it is not infallible and carries no
>>absolute 7 m accuracy guarantee.
>
>
> So far you are zero for two.

The "Standard Positioning Service Performance Standard," Table 3.6
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/2001SPSPerformanceStandardFINAL.pdf
gives the post-SA specification for horizontal position as being within 13m
95% of the time assuming the receiver can see all signals from satellites
above the horizon. The vertical spec. is 22m, 95% of the time. Actual
performance has exceeded these specifications but AFAIK the specification
has not been updated.
Feel free to cite any GPS specification that guarantees 7 m accuracy 100%
of the time regardless of reception conditions.

[Richard Hertz]

He had to pardon all his buddy criminals (like Mr. Rich, etc)

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> " jls" > wrote
>
> However, if an attorney gives
> > materially false testimony while under oath he is also guilty of
perjury,
> > ordinarily a felony.
> >
> Unless your name is Bill Clinton. I still can't believe we didn't throw
> that clown out on his ear, then throw him in jail. Now, unless you stick
> yur "dickie" in someone, it isn't sex. Jeeesh .
> --
> Jim in NC
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.580 / Virus Database: 367 - Release Date: 2/6/04
>
>

[Richard Hertz]

Huh,

I was under the impression that the GPS signals are fairly weak and
intentional interference is a serious issue.
Is that not correct?

Can you provide some sources for your statements?

thanks

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter" > wrote in message
> news:ruUYb.349212$xy6.1742195@attbi_s02...
> > Ron Lee wrote:
> > > "Dave" > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>>Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Probably not a bad number.
> >
> > Only if the usual caveats are added; i.e. 95% of the time and assuming
the
> > receiver has good reception conditions. Any attorney trying to
discredit
> > GPS evidence will naturally focus on the 5% of the time when the
position
> > could be off by more than the nominal accuracy and on obstructions,
> > multi-path reflections, RFI, etc. that can degrade performance,
> > particularly in a covert installation where the antenna is unlikely to
be
> > optimally placed for good reception.
>
> False.
>
> The convergence of the GPS Jacobian does not occur for the conditions you
> describe. One of the major advantages of GPS over current ground based
> navigation is the difficulty of spoofing the system.
>
>

[RK]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:52:39 GMT, Gerald Sylvester
> wrote:
>
>I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
>trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
>to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
>and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
>scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
>is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
>moronic comment of:
>-------------
>Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
>through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
>signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
>within a few feet.
>
>"If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
>a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
>--------------

Since the original report, there has been a second news release after the
defense got the actual records from the prosecution. In several instances, the
GPS readings had Peterson's truck at two different locations hundreds of miles
apart in 6 or 7 minutes, at an equivalent ground speed of something like 260
mph. The errors occurred often enough that the defense thought they ought to
challenge all of the GPS data. Another problem was the GPS transmitted
constantly to the police through cell phone connections which may have distorted
the data.

All the proceeding comments were taken from TV media reports, so take their
accuracy with a grain of salt.

Ron

[R.Hubbell]

On 18 Feb 2004 18:56:17 GMT (Wdtabor) wrote:

> In article <20040218083913.322b40c6@fstop>, "R.Hubbell"
> > writes:
>
> >
> >> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> >> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> >
> >
> >The technique is known as "casting a shadow of doubt". It works
> >wonderfully well. Jurors eat it up. He's doing his job.
> >
>
> I would think he would be questioning what business the police had tracking
> Peterson's whereabouts AFTER the crime was commited.

Not following the trial but....
What's wrong with that? It's common for them to watch someone. What they
do can speak volumes even if it is not admissable it might lead them to
something else.

The defense should just keep casting doubts. Those doubts will stick in the
jurors' craw.


>
> It seems the prosecution is trying him with character assasination after the
> fact rather than with evidence of the crime itself. He'll probably wind up
> being the first person executed for having an affair.

The guy has been tried in the media and found guilty. A lot of what they have
sounds circumstantial. There are a few twists to the case that are unusual.

His name was on a list of suspects that the police talked to about a missing
co-ed while he was at college.

There have been other cases of pregnant women that were killed and have
not had much attention at all.



R. Hubbell

>
> Don
>
> --
> Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
> PP-ASEL
> Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Cub Driver]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:52:39 GMT, Gerald Sylvester
> wrote:

>Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
>through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
>signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
>within a few feet.
>
>"If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
>a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.

Well, that's how a defense attorney earns his cat food. I rather liked
the quote :)

(Note that the bit about "dozens of satellites" was almost certainly
written by the reporter, and is not a quote from the lawyer.)
all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:33:31 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> wrote:

>At that point Scott's Attorney would be well on
>his way to giving testimony illegally.

The lawyer wasn't giving testimony! He can say any damn thing he
pleases, subject to being shut up by the judge.

Sheez. You're on this newsgroup, too?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history.

And you've forgiven Nixon, right?

Clinton, like Nixon, was among the worst blots ever to stain the
American presidency.

Far from "getting over it" or "moving on," I would say: "Those who do
not study history are condemned to repeat it."


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 02:38:41 GMT, "john price"
> wrote:

>But was it TSO'd and permanently installed by a certificated
>avionics technician??? If not how could it possibly be at all
>accurate????

I was stopped by the police on my way to a flying lesson. The copper
ended his (cheery) lecture by saying "Mr. Doppler is never wrong!"

I told this to my flight instructor, formerly an engineer. He said:
"That would be true only if Doppler callibrated the instrument."


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 03:10:41 GMT, Peter > wrote:

>Unaugmented GPS has insufficient integrity monitoring.
>http://www.cts.cv.ic.ac.uk/html/ResearchSeminars/seminarDetails.asp?seminarID=62
>:
>"The assessment results also indicated that the current GPS system cannot
>meet the RNP in most of the cases and the current integrity monitoring
>mechanism is inadequate for providing the necessary integrity monitoring
>capability. Therefore, this study suggests that augmentation systems are
>needed to support the navigation function for all phases of flight." Jan.
>28, 2004, Imperial College, London, Dr. Shaojun.
>>

I looked at the link you posted. It seems to be a summary of what is
intended to be presented at a seminar, with no associated evidence. It is
also not clear as to what Shaojun's definition of "inadequate" is.

It is not clear to me what method of integrity monitoring is going on in
the British airspace to which Shaojun refers, but it seems to be
unaugmented RAIM.

The summary indicates that his study "route" was London to New York. But
my understanding is that trans-oceanic flights have to have multiple
navigation systems, only one of which can be GPS.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Dennis O'Connor]

Yup, and there is the 60mph bank, where every time the radar gun is at a
certain spot the bank registers at 60 mph... <microwave motion detector at
the bank leaking radiation that mixes with the gun's frequency to produce
the spoofed reading>
Oh, the officer will tell you that can't be... Ask him, what do you think
that the ECM box on an F 14/15/16/18/22/117 fighter does when an enemy fire
control radar tries to lock on...
denny

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 02:38:41 GMT, "john price"
> > wrote:
>
> >But was it TSO'd and permanently installed by a certificated
> >avionics technician??? If not how could it possibly be at all
> >accurate????
>
> I was stopped by the police on my way to a flying lesson. The copper
> ended his (cheery) lecture by saying "Mr. Doppler is never wrong!"
>
> I told this to my flight instructor, formerly an engineer. He said:
> "That would be true only if Doppler callibrated the instrument."
>
>
> all the best -- Dan Ford
> email:
>
> see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
> and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Gary Drescher]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history.
>
> And you've forgiven Nixon, right?

That's a preposterous analogy, for a couple of reasons:

1) How many off-topic posts do you see on this newsgroup spontaneously
complaining about Nixon? I can't think of any.

2) Nixon slaughtered hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese because they
had the temerity to defend themselves against a US invasion, as they had
done previously against the French and the Japanese. He subverted the US
constitution by using federal agencies to commit crimes against his
political opponents. He resigned the presidency in the face of imminent
overwhelming votes for impeachment and conviction. He would have gone to
prison (as did 25 members of his administration, including four cabinet
members), had he not been preemptively pardoned by his own former vice
president.

> Far from "getting over it" or "moving on," I would say: "Those who do
> not study history are condemned to repeat it."

Good principle, preposterous instantiation. You think it's important for
people to continue to complain to an aviation newsgroup about Clinton's sex
scandal in order to protect the Republic from the possibility that another
president will get a blow job and lie about it?

--Gary

[Dennis O'Connor]

Our system of lifetime professional politicians attracts those with huge
egos and a burning desire to forego gainful employment.. The public feed
trough attracts these types like moths to a burning flame... It will only
end if we 'ever' put strict term limits on every elected position above dog
catcher..
denny
"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history.
>
> And you've forgiven Nixon, right?
>
> Clinton, like Nixon, was among the worst blots ever to stain the
> American presidency.
>
> Far from "getting over it" or "moving on," I would say: "Those who do
> not study history are condemned to repeat it."
>
>
> all the best -- Dan Ford
> email:
>
> see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
> and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
...
> Our system of lifetime professional politicians attracts those with huge
> egos and a burning desire to forego gainful employment.. The public feed
> trough attracts these types like moths to a burning flame... It will only
> end if we 'ever' put strict term limits on every elected position above
dog
> catcher..

And with term limits the populace will vote in the same characters with
different names.

Until the authority to spread money and favors (an authority they never
really had) is revoked, expect more of the same regardless of who is in
power or how many terms they (self)served.

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message ...
>

> And with term limits the populace will vote in the same characters with
> different names.
>

I was never a Beavis and Butthead fan, but the other day I caught a few minutes
of the movie while flipping through the channels. They arrive at the Capitol and
make a PA announcement that they are looking for a girl with big boobs. The
entire house chamber then starts emitting the "heh heh heh" laugh.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Peter" > wrote in message
news:ROVYb.217372$U%5.1284734@attbi_s03...
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> > "Peter" > wrote in message
> > news:0YUYb.349393$xy6.1743180@attbi_s02...
> >
> >>Tarver Engineering wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Peter" > wrote in message
> >>>news:ruUYb.349212$xy6.1742195@attbi_s02...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Ron Lee wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Dave" > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Probably not a bad number.
> >>>>
> >>>>Only if the usual caveats are added; i.e. 95% of the time and assuming
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>>receiver has good reception conditions. Any attorney trying to
> >
> > discredit
> >
> >>>>GPS evidence will naturally focus on the 5% of the time when the
> >
> > position
> >
> >>>>could be off by more than the nominal accuracy and on obstructions,
> >>>>multi-path reflections, RFI, etc. that can degrade performance,
> >>>>particularly in a covert installation where the antenna is unlikely to
> >
> > be
> >
> >>>>optimally placed for good reception.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>False.
> >>>
> >>>The convergence of the GPS Jacobian does not occur for the conditions
> >
> > you
> >
> >>>describe. One of the major advantages of GPS over current ground based
> >>>navigation is the difficulty of spoofing the system.
> >>>
> >>
> >>I suggest you read your "GPS World" issues some more. Improvement of
> >>integrity monitoring was one of the main reasons for requiring
> >
> > augmentation
> >
> >> of GPS.
> >
> >
> > False.
> >
> > The failure to monitor the integrity of the WAAS signal is why the test
bit
> > remained set until recently. The integrity issues were WAAS integrity
> > issues with no relevence to GPS.
>
> Unaugmented GPS has insufficient integrity monitoring.

See the CNX-80.

Buy a vowel, get a clue, call your mommy.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 03:10:41 GMT, Peter > wrote:
>
> >Unaugmented GPS has insufficient integrity monitoring.
>
>http://www.cts.cv.ic.ac.uk/html/ResearchSeminars/seminarDetails.asp?seminar
ID=62
> >:
> >"The assessment results also indicated that the current GPS system cannot
> >meet the RNP in most of the cases and the current integrity monitoring
> >mechanism is inadequate for providing the necessary integrity monitoring
> >capability. Therefore, this study suggests that augmentation systems are
> >needed to support the navigation function for all phases of flight." Jan.
> >28, 2004, Imperial College, London, Dr. Shaojun.
> >>
>
> I looked at the link you posted. It seems to be a summary of what is
> intended to be presented at a seminar, with no associated evidence. It is
> also not clear as to what Shaojun's definition of "inadequate" is.

What is clear is that Peter has a tad more ego than knowledge.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Richard Hertz" > wrote in message
...
> Huh,
>
> I was under the impression that the GPS signals are fairly weak and
> intentional interference is a serious issue.
> Is that not correct?

Intentional jamming of GPS is difficult for newer units, as a simple filter
algorithm will remove most jamming signals. Do you know the difference
between spoofing and jamming?

[Tarver Engineering]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:33:31 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> > wrote:
>
> >At that point Scott's Attorney would be well on
> >his way to giving testimony illegally.
>
> The lawyer wasn't giving testimony! He can say any damn thing he
> pleases, subject to being shut up by the judge.

No.

[Peter]

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> "Peter" > wrote in message
> news:ROVYb.217372$U%5.1284734@attbi_s03...
>
>>Tarver Engineering wrote:

>>>The failure to monitor the integrity of the WAAS signal is why the test
>
> bit
>
>>>remained set until recently. The integrity issues were WAAS integrity
>>>issues with no relevence to GPS.
>>
>>Unaugmented GPS has insufficient integrity monitoring.
>
>
> See the CNX-80.
>
> Buy a vowel, get a clue, call your mommy.
>
http://www.avionicsplace.com/ApolloCNX80.htm :
"The FAA’s new Wide Area Augmentation System or WAAS dramatically improves
the accuracy, integrity, and availability of GPS. The CNX80 incorporates a
new 15-channel WAAS receiver designed by UPS Aviation Technologies
specifically for airborne applications."

[Dennis O'Connor]

Interesting... Must be local... Just this past 6 week jury session our very
well known circuit judge, had to cancel trials so he could sit on jury
duty... After having sat on two cases, and not dismissed by preemptory
challenge, he was then relieved by an alternate for having completed his
jury duty, and went back to his court room... In a newspaper article he
said he found it extremely interesting to actually get to sit in the jury
room during deliberations as he is barred from there otherwise...
"I often wondered what they talk about.", he said...
denny

The other time I mentioned that I also took 2 semesters of "Business Law".
Gone!

[Tarver Engineering]

"Peter" > wrote in message
news:305Zb.345746$I06.3635492@attbi_s01...
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> > "Peter" > wrote in message
> > news:ROVYb.217372$U%5.1284734@attbi_s03...
> >
> >>Tarver Engineering wrote:
>
> >>>The failure to monitor the integrity of the WAAS signal is why the test
> >
> > bit
> >
> >>>remained set until recently. The integrity issues were WAAS integrity
> >>>issues with no relevence to GPS.
> >>
> >>Unaugmented GPS has insufficient integrity monitoring.
> >
> >
> > See the CNX-80.
> >
> > Buy a vowel, get a clue, call your mommy.
> >
> http://www.avionicsplace.com/ApolloCNX80.htm :
> "The FAA’s new Wide Area Augmentation System or WAAS dramatically improves
> the accuracy, integrity, and availability of GPS.

Nope, but a salseman needs to sell. If you look at the difference in
minimums for the VNAV, you will note that WAAS gives the operator little to
nothing in increased capabilities.

WAAS was a scam run on aviation to remove tens of $billions from the
aviation trust fund; from that perspective WAAS is a tremendous success.
WAAS is the reason sci.geo.satellite-nav is a discredited and dishonest
newsgroup. Ron Lee being a possible exception.

[Morgans]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history.
>
> And you've forgiven Nixon, right?

Nope. Only good thing about Nixon, was , he got things done. The end does
not justify the means.

Remember, he got nailed for a coverup, of an operation he did not authorize.
He was too protective of his own people. He should have fed them to the
wolves, then he would have gone down in history as a great president.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.580 / Virus Database: 367 - Release Date: 2/7/04

[Dennis O'Connor]

ahhhh!!!!

"Nomen Nescio" ]> wrote in message
...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: "Dennis O'Connor" >
>
> >Interesting... Must be local... Just this past 6 week jury session our
very
> >well known circuit judge, had to cancel trials so he could sit on jury
> >duty... After having sat on two cases, and not dismissed by preemptory
> >challenge, he was then relieved by an alternate for having completed his
> >jury duty, and went back to his court room... In a newspaper article he
> >said he found it extremely interesting to actually get to sit in the jury
> >room during deliberations as he is barred from there otherwise...
> >"I often wondered what they talk about.", he said...
> >denny
>
> >>>The other time I mentioned that I also took 2 semesters of "Business
Law".
> >>>Gone!
>
> I live in Massachusetts.
> 'Nuff said??
>
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.2
>
> iQCVAwUBQDUkt5MoscYxZNI5AQFzjgP+IBmK57AZLK0v/JpdlmpbvelRkNbUQ5//
> TjxUfo3jjTgzQYbGfj5Bbvc+/y0YrjlzI6dgl5re1Laay4qRMFf4GVrGUJB1/c0s
> IGERAkTV/w6H3WFijr6Fft3m7tmxpa8Hz7p1CqFRyRzdirNYYeADt6l7e5y N2xVT
> Y3e81opNJe4=
> =C4jY
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>

[Dave S]

The actual news article goes into this detail. After Laci Peterson was
reported missing, the police department placed covert GPS tracking
devices on all of his vehicles and monitored the vehicle (and therefore
Scott's) whereabouts pretty much constantly. This explains how they
thought he was headed for Mexico to flee the country. The defense
attorney is trying to get this surveillance data thrown out/disallowed..
and in trying to do so invoked the claim that if GPS wasnt accurate
enough to land airplanes, it wasnt iron-clad enough to be used as
evidence in a capital case.

Dave

G.R. Patterson III wrote:
>
> Dave S wrote:
>
>>Good call on the judge allowing the evidence.
>
>
> What evidence? Gerald's post simply stated that an attorney made an obviously
> incorrect statement. What did I miss?
>
> George Patterson
> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
> you look forward to the trip.

[Dave S]

>
> A maomentary error with what equipment?
>
>


The equipment that was in use for surveillance on Mr Peterson.

If you are going to discuss a thread based on current events, wouldnt it
be a good idea to be familiar with the context its being discussed in?

Dave

[Dave S]

>
> I would think he would be questioning what business the police had tracking
> Peterson's whereabouts AFTER the crime was commited.

At the time the devices were PROBABLY placed, this was a missing persons
case, and Scott was PROBABLY the prime suspect. The police (and I'm sure
a judge agreed at some point) were trying to surveil a suspect by using
these devices.

but... thats just speculation on my point.
Dave
>
> It seems the prosecution is trying him with character assasination after the
> fact rather than with evidence of the crime itself. He'll probably wind up
> being the first person executed for having an affair.
>
> Don
>

[Richard Hertz]

No, but I am sure you will enlighten us. I have a fairly good idea, but I
am not sure what those specific terms mean in the world of GPS. By the way,
I did not use those terms - you did. I used the broader term:
"interference."


"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Richard Hertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Huh,
> >
> > I was under the impression that the GPS signals are fairly weak and
> > intentional interference is a serious issue.
> > Is that not correct?
>
> Intentional jamming of GPS is difficult for newer units, as a simple
filter
> algorithm will remove most jamming signals. Do you know the difference
> between spoofing and jamming?
>
>

[Tarver Engineering]

"Richard Hertz" > wrote in message
...
> No, but I am sure you will enlighten us. I have a fairly good idea, but I
> am not sure what those specific terms mean in the world of GPS. By the
way,
> I did not use those terms - you did. I used the broader term:
> "interference."

GPS is a spread spectrum hahn waveform and has good resistance to
interference.

I could not make that same specific claim for the data link used by police.

[Gerald Sylvester]

> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> --------------

I expected 1 or 2 replies but not 1 or 2 *hundred*.

Well not to start a legal thread in R.A.P but here is another
great one I read about in an article about the
Martha Stewart trial:

<begin>
Under cross-examination, Bacanovic's lawyer, Richard Strassberg, tried
to shake up the ink expert's credibility by saying, "You are aware of
the ASTM standards for ink analysis."

"Yeah, I wrote them," Stewart replied. The courtroom burst into laughter.
<end>

amazing.

Gerald

[SD]

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:42:41 -0500, "Dennis O'Connor"
> wrote:

>Yup, and there is the 60mph bank, where every time the radar gun is at a
>certain spot the bank registers at 60 mph... <microwave motion detector at
>the bank leaking radiation that mixes with the gun's frequency to produce
>the spoofed reading>
>Oh, the officer will tell you that can't be... Ask him, what do you think
>that the ECM box on an F 14/15/16/18/22/117 fighter does when an enemy fire
>control radar tries to lock on...
>denny
>
As a side note to your comment, When I was an officer on patrol, I
was out by the airport running radar when an F-16 was doing low
approaches. Curiousity got to me so I pulled the radar out of its
mount and got out of the car and pointed it at him. Once he got into
my range (speed or distance, I dont know because it started reading
199 which is the highest it will go) I started clocking him, If I
recall correctly as he was about to execute the missed, he was doing
about 140mph. I sat there for a little while longer to watch him
come back again. I again started tracking him with my radar. My LED
readout then showed JAMMED. I had to laugh as I could just see him
shooting me the bird as he flew by.

Scott

[Dennis O'Connor]

Jeez, I dunno for sure... Call the Chinese embassy and ask...
denny
"Nomen Nescio" ]> wrote in message
...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: "Dennis O'Connor" >
>
> >Oh, the officer will tell you that can't be... Ask him, what do you think
> >that the ECM box on an F 14/15/16/18/22/117 fighter does when an enemy
fire
> >control radar tries to lock on...
> >denny
>
> Just curious. Does the F117 carry ECM? Seems like it would defeat the
whole
> "stealth" thing.
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.2
>
> iQCVAwUBQDXeEJMoscYxZNI5AQFiXwQAqie5fteNeTJd4QqADW r7hsKSAyuF21j2
> k5B43QfQn41x2SmzkukqGD95EjKypuyvZ2Bc+yyYtdtkSYBSBN jkInAjk3IEB4Ce
> xQ8Gi638SqAY3o9fG1e0VkGisjVBwbnyuACj65rgcyC4OemOTk r5S6RneLs14nhp
> 6VR+5o6xoSw=
> =X40B
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

In article . net>,
Dave S > wrote:
>The actual news article goes into this detail. After Laci Peterson was
>reported missing, the police department placed covert GPS tracking
>devices on all of his vehicles and monitored the vehicle (and therefore
>Scott's) whereabouts pretty much constantly. This explains how they
>thought he was headed for Mexico to flee the country. The defense
>attorney is trying to get this surveillance data thrown out/disallowed..
>and in trying to do so invoked the claim that if GPS wasnt accurate
>enough to land airplanes, it wasnt iron-clad enough to be used as
>evidence in a capital case.
>
On its face, this is a bit disturbing. Did the police have the sanction
of the courts before emplacing these devices? If not, it smacks of
unlawful search, etc. On the other hand, if a court issued the moral
equivalent of a search warrant permitting the use of them, he's just in
deep doodoo...

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/

[Dennis O'Connor]

There is a story I have read that concerns a couple of english constables on
road patrol near an RAF airbase... As a pair of the base's Tornados in tight
formation, came low along the road, the officers tilted their dash unit and
got a radar speed reading <well above the posted limit obviously>... On a
lark, one officer drove out to the airbase and asked to speak to the flight
commander... He then advised the officer he wanted to give the pilots a
warning ticket for speeding...
The flight commander laughed and said the pilots had mentioned that they had
a sudden 'radar lock alarm' on their ECM panels, and the only reason the
officer was able to be there was that their ECM Auto Protect was in standby
mode, otherwise he would have gotten a HARM missile (high speed
antiradiation missile) up his <ahem> radar gun...

Don't know the truth in this story, but it is amusing...
denny

"SD" <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message My LED
> readout then showed JAMMED. I had to laugh as I could just see him
> shooting me the bird as he flew by.
>
> Scott
>

[Dennis O'Connor]

There is a trial rule taught to all sophomore law students, "Never ask a
question on court you don't already know the answer to>"
He obviously forgot the rule...

"Gerald Sylvester" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> > -------------
> > Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> > through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> > signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> > within a few feet.
> >
> > "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> > a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> > --------------
>
> I expected 1 or 2 replies but not 1 or 2 *hundred*.
>
> Well not to start a legal thread in R.A.P but here is another
> great one I read about in an article about the
> Martha Stewart trial:
>
> <begin>
> Under cross-examination, Bacanovic's lawyer, Richard Strassberg, tried
> to shake up the ink expert's credibility by saying, "You are aware of
> the ASTM standards for ink analysis."
>
> "Yeah, I wrote them," Stewart replied. The courtroom burst into laughter.
> <end>
>
> amazing.
>
> Gerald
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> No, but I am sure you will enlighten us.

Well, I will, in any case. Jamming a signal blocks it in such a way that it is
pretty much useless. Jam the GPS signals, and your receiver can't tell where it
is. Spoofing signals causes the receiver to report an incorrect location while
"thinking" that everything's working correctly.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Dennis O'Connor" > wrote in message
...
> There is a story I have read that concerns a couple of english constables
on
> road patrol near an RAF airbase... As a pair of the base's Tornados in
tight
> formation, came low along the road, the officers tilted their dash unit
and
> got a radar speed reading <well above the posted limit obviously>... On a
> lark, one officer drove out to the airbase and asked to speak to the
flight
> commander... He then advised the officer he wanted to give the pilots a
> warning ticket for speeding...
> The flight commander laughed and said the pilots had mentioned that they
had
> a sudden 'radar lock alarm' on their ECM panels, and the only reason the
> officer was able to be there was that their ECM Auto Protect was in
standby
> mode, otherwise he would have gotten a HARM missile (high speed
> antiradiation missile) up his <ahem> radar gun...
>
> Don't know the truth in this story, but it is amusing...


Urban Legend :~(

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/techno/radar.htm

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Michael Houghton" > wrote in message
...
> Howdy!
>
> In article . net>,
> Dave S > wrote:
> >The actual news article goes into this detail. After Laci Peterson was
> >reported missing, the police department placed covert GPS tracking
> >devices on all of his vehicles and monitored the vehicle (and therefore
> >Scott's) whereabouts pretty much constantly. This explains how they
> >thought he was headed for Mexico to flee the country. The defense
> >attorney is trying to get this surveillance data thrown out/disallowed..
> >and in trying to do so invoked the claim that if GPS wasnt accurate
> >enough to land airplanes, it wasnt iron-clad enough to be used as
> >evidence in a capital case.
> >
> On its face, this is a bit disturbing. Did the police have the sanction
> of the courts before emplacing these devices? If not, it smacks of
> unlawful search, etc. On the other hand, if a court issued the moral
> equivalent of a search warrant permitting the use of them, he's just in
> deep doodoo...
>
They're performing surveillance, not conducting a search.

[Big John]

Nomen

Check Popular Mechanics and the other magazines like that. I've seen
them advertised in some of the pubs.

That being said, any device that radiates is illegal without a license
(which you cannot get) so you will go from the frying pan into the
fire if caught with a jammer :o(

A number of years ago I designed and built a corner reflector system
that was rotated by the wind stream as the car drove along. It rotated
at a speed based on wind stream and the theory was that it would
reflect the radar signal back to gun and show an off scale reading. I
also tried a slower speed so the returned signal would show a lower
speed than vehicle actual. Since the signal being reflected was the
same principal as the return from the vehicle (no active radiator) it
would be legal.

Bottom line, I found that if I made the corner reflectors a reasonable
size, then they did not reflect a larger signal than the automobile.
They would have had to been so large to work they would have been
impracticable to mount on the automobile (front bumper, etc.)

My device was wind driven and had a rather slow rotational speed.
Maybe one of these days will modify and drive the system with a 12V DC
motor and gearing to get a rotational speed of 5K-10K so effective
area will exceed the return from the automobile reflective area.

Interesting project and may one of these days do some further work on
other legal methods of blocking/modifying radar gun signals. <G> Have
also been making some napkin drawings of using the Luneberg Lens
principles. Also a method of shifting the radar return frequency
(passively) to give legal speed readings (or a zero reading on
officers gun).

Now what does this have to do with flying. System could be placed on
aircraft to change (augment, eliminate or modify) return.of pulse type
radar.

Big John


On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:30:03 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
]> wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>From: SD <sdatverizondot.net@>
>
>> I again started tracking him with my radar. My LED
>>readout then showed JAMMED. I had to laugh as I could just see him
>>shooting me the bird as he flew by.
>
>Where can I get one of them ECM thingys for my car?
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: 2.6.2
>
>iQCVAwUBQDXcgpMoscYxZNI5AQGi8wQAo4J6wJGA2y8AHFmWcl EzHpzSwWPDZvkh
>8WDSwO7jlKR3IQUR0F4m7BP6r6s68BuslrRmWi9aMiufSn2oAI PZsSE9sErW2+hn
>87Bl6KCPez29DyxNwzZ4o+o+yYKk2QNdFyYIh9u5jaMuy1dLs+ GhtdKJhOlBB9qh
>D5+4DflEdYM=
>=GDYq
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

[Gig Giacona]

"Michael Houghton" > wrote in message
...
> Howdy!
>
> In article . net>,
> Dave S > wrote:
> >The actual news article goes into this detail. After Laci Peterson was
> >reported missing, the police department placed covert GPS tracking
> >devices on all of his vehicles and monitored the vehicle (and therefore
> >Scott's) whereabouts pretty much constantly. This explains how they
> >thought he was headed for Mexico to flee the country. The defense
> >attorney is trying to get this surveillance data thrown out/disallowed..
> >and in trying to do so invoked the claim that if GPS wasnt accurate
> >enough to land airplanes, it wasnt iron-clad enough to be used as
> >evidence in a capital case.
> >
> On its face, this is a bit disturbing. Did the police have the sanction
> of the courts before emplacing these devices? If not, it smacks of
> unlawful search, etc. On the other hand, if a court issued the moral
> equivalent of a search warrant permitting the use of them, he's just in
> deep doodoo...
>

I'm quite sure if the action was even bordering on Mr. Peterson's rights his
attorney would have been using that to get the tracking thrown out.

[SD]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:02:48 -0500, "Dennis O'Connor"
> wrote:

>There is a trial rule taught to all sophomore law students, "Never ask a
>question on court you don't already know the answer to>"
>He obviously forgot the rule...
>
This is so very true but most lawyers I believe tend to forget this
rule sometimes. Another story while I was an officer, I had to attend
a DWI case that was finally going to court after about 3 years. While
I was up on the stand, the defense attorney was asking me questions
about the reasons I decided to take the defendant to jail. When the
question about his speech came up. The attorney made the comment
about his dialect and the part of the state that he was from and asked
me if I took this into account. I told him that I do take such things
into account. He then asked me "So officer, How many people do you
know from XYZ, Texas". At first I thought this question was a joke.
I then looked over at the jury and gave my answer... Well, including
myself and my family and all the people I went to school with as a
kid... A whole lot of other people! The jury rolled. The attorney
sat down and had no further questions.
The defendant was found guilty.

Scott

[Gig Giacona]

"Nomen Nescio" ]> wrote in message
...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: "Dennis O'Connor" >
>
> >Oh, the officer will tell you that can't be... Ask him, what do you think
> >that the ECM box on an F 14/15/16/18/22/117 fighter does when an enemy
fire
> >control radar tries to lock on...
> >denny
>
> Just curious. Does the F117 carry ECM? Seems like it would defeat the
whole
> "stealth" thing.
>

I would bet they do. They just don't turn it on unless the get hit above
their detection threshold.

Gig G

[Robert M. Gary]

Gerald Sylvester > wrote in message et>...
> I never read anything about this Scott Petersen murder
> trial before. I saw a headline about a "GPS." I started
> to read it and I guess the guys car had a GPS in it
> and the prosecution is trying to place him at the murder
> scene. Well the defense attorney is saying the GPS
> is inaccurate due to a malfunction and made the
> moronic comment of:
> -------------
> Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that the information gathered
> through global positioning system technology was not accurate. GPS uses
> signals from dozens of satellites to show a receiver's position to
> within a few feet.
>
> "If the FAA will not approve GPS for the landing of an aircraft, how can
> a court of law approve its forensic use in a capital case?" he said.
> --------------

The attorney's job is to protect his client. 90% of law is procedural
and most cases are won/lost on procedure. Perhaps he's afraid the GPS
will put his client at the location. However, I'd be surprised if the
GPS actually kept any data.

-Robert

[Wdtabor]

>
>The attorney's job is to protect his client. 90% of law is procedural
>and most cases are won/lost on procedure. Perhaps he's afraid the GPS
>will put his client at the location. However, I'd be surprised if the
>GPS actually kept any data.
>

As I understand this, the GPS devices were put on his car to track his
movements AFTER Laci was missing.

I don't see how that can place him at the scene. It can only support the
evidence of his affair.

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

In article >,
Gig Giacona > wrote:
>
>"Michael Houghton" > wrote in message
...
>> Howdy!
>>
>> In article . net>,
>> Dave S > wrote:
>> >The actual news article goes into this detail. After Laci Peterson was
>> >reported missing, the police department placed covert GPS tracking
>> >devices on all of his vehicles and monitored the vehicle (and therefore
>> >Scott's) whereabouts pretty much constantly. This explains how they
>> >thought he was headed for Mexico to flee the country. The defense
>> >attorney is trying to get this surveillance data thrown out/disallowed..
>> >and in trying to do so invoked the claim that if GPS wasnt accurate
>> >enough to land airplanes, it wasnt iron-clad enough to be used as
>> >evidence in a capital case.
>> >
>> On its face, this is a bit disturbing. Did the police have the sanction
>> of the courts before emplacing these devices? If not, it smacks of
>> unlawful search, etc. On the other hand, if a court issued the moral
>> equivalent of a search warrant permitting the use of them, he's just in
>> deep doodoo...
>>
>
>I'm quite sure if the action was even bordering on Mr. Peterson's rights his
>attorney would have been using that to get the tracking thrown out.
>
I would not be so blindly confident in his attorney's attention to detail.

How would you feel about the police secreting a GPS tracker on your vehicles?
If they were doing it on their own recognizance, I'd expect information
so gathered to be tainted. If they convinced a judge that it needed done,
they would be on firmer ground. ...and tame judges can be found in most
jurisdictions.

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/

[Peter R.]

Wdtabor ) wrote:

> I don't see how that can place him at the scene. It can only support
> the evidence of his affair.

According to one news report, the GPS log supposedly shows that he twice
returned to a beach near the location where his wife's body washed up.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Gig Giacona]

"Michael Houghton" > wrote in message
...
> Howdy!
>
> In article >,
> Gig Giacona > wrote:
> >
> >"Michael Houghton" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Howdy!
> >>
> >> In article . net>,
> >> Dave S > wrote:
> >> >The actual news article goes into this detail. After Laci Peterson was
> >> >reported missing, the police department placed covert GPS tracking
> >> >devices on all of his vehicles and monitored the vehicle (and
therefore
> >> >Scott's) whereabouts pretty much constantly. This explains how they
> >> >thought he was headed for Mexico to flee the country. The defense
> >> >attorney is trying to get this surveillance data thrown
out/disallowed..
> >> >and in trying to do so invoked the claim that if GPS wasnt accurate
> >> >enough to land airplanes, it wasnt iron-clad enough to be used as
> >> >evidence in a capital case.
> >> >
> >> On its face, this is a bit disturbing. Did the police have the sanction
> >> of the courts before emplacing these devices? If not, it smacks of
> >> unlawful search, etc. On the other hand, if a court issued the moral
> >> equivalent of a search warrant permitting the use of them, he's just in
> >> deep doodoo...
> >>
> >
> >I'm quite sure if the action was even bordering on Mr. Peterson's rights
his
> >attorney would have been using that to get the tracking thrown out.
> >
> I would not be so blindly confident in his attorney's attention to detail.
>
> How would you feel about the police secreting a GPS tracker on your
vehicles?
> If they were doing it on their own recognizance, I'd expect information
> so gathered to be tainted. If they convinced a judge that it needed done,
> they would be on firmer ground. ...and tame judges can be found in most
> jurisdictions.
>
> yours,
> Michael

In this case there are multiple attorneys working for his side. I'm pretty
sure if there wasn't a warrant or some pretty strong precedence on the
matter somebody on the defense team would have though of it [We did] or had
it brought to their attention.

GigG

[Dennis O'Connor]

Oh gawd, blew his own cajones off, right in public... That's hysterical...
In a previous lifetime I spent time covering the jail, so I got to hear, and
see, a lot of stories...

One night I'm working the hospital ER, the jail crew brings in Juan, who I
have seen at the jail a number of times, trussed up like a roasting
chicken... Seems he got into a punch up with the guards over something or
other..He has a cut on his head and some on his hands I need to sew up... I
tell them they have to remove the cuffs... They are incredulous and tell me
he is a bad ass and he will punch me... I insist and finally they do, and
stand back smirking...
I lean over Juan and I say, "Juan, if you punch me, you know what I am going
to do?"
Juan looks at me with a steely glint in his eyes, "What you gonna do, doc?",
he challenges me...
"I'm going to fall down and bleed all over you.", I say, wagging my finger
under his nose...
He blinks a few times, then his lips start to quiver, and then he snorts,
and finally he becomes helpless with laughter...

After I get done suturing his cuts, and the guards put his cuffs back on and
link them to his ankle bracelets, and are ready to lead him out, he looks
over at me...
"Hey doc, you OK for a grrriingo... Anyone gives you trouble, you let me
know... I weel take care of them." And out he went...
About a year later I saw in the paper where he bled to death on a street
corner...
Kind of spoiled my day... He was sociopath but he could be likeable at
times...
denny

"SD" <sdatverizondot.net@> wrote in message He then asked me "So officer,
How many people do you
> know from XYZ, Texas". At first I thought this question was a joke.
> I then looked over at the jury and gave my answer... Well, including
> myself and my family and all the people I went to school with as a
> kid... A whole lot of other people! The jury rolled.

[Robert M. Gary]

Peter R. > wrote in message >...
> Wdtabor ) wrote:
>
> > I don't see how that can place him at the scene. It can only support
> > the evidence of his affair.
>
> According to one news report, the GPS log supposedly shows that he twice
> returned to a beach near the location where his wife's body washed up.

Did he know about the GPS in his car? ****, if he did I can't imagine
he'd be that dumb. There is evidence that this isn't the first time
he's done this. Another girl he was interested in about 10 years ago
also disappeared and was never heard of again. Sounds like he's a pro.

-Robert

[Phil Payne]

You should be naming JFK and LBJ for the killings in Vietnam, not Nixon.
The war was winding down when Nixon took office.

Phil Payne

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
news:b73Zb.77780$uV3.535651@attbi_s51...
> "Cub Driver" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > >As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history.
> >
> > And you've forgiven Nixon, right?
>
> That's a preposterous analogy, for a couple of reasons:
>
> 1) How many off-topic posts do you see on this newsgroup spontaneously
> complaining about Nixon? I can't think of any.
>
> 2) Nixon slaughtered hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese because
they
> had the temerity to defend themselves against a US invasion, as they had
> done previously against the French and the Japanese. He subverted the US
> constitution by using federal agencies to commit crimes against his
> political opponents. He resigned the presidency in the face of imminent
> overwhelming votes for impeachment and conviction. He would have gone to
> prison (as did 25 members of his administration, including four cabinet
> members), had he not been preemptively pardoned by his own former vice
> president.
>
> > Far from "getting over it" or "moving on," I would say: "Those who do
> > not study history are condemned to repeat it."
>
> Good principle, preposterous instantiation. You think it's important for
> people to continue to complain to an aviation newsgroup about Clinton's
sex
> scandal in order to protect the Republic from the possibility that another
> president will get a blow job and lie about it?
>
> --Gary
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Phil Payne wrote:
>
> You should be naming JFK and LBJ for the killings in Vietnam, not Nixon.
> The war was winding down when Nixon took office.

Really? That's why it took six years and the biggest demonstrations ever seen
in the U.S. to get the ******* to honor his campaign promises?

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Gary Drescher]

"Phil Payne" > wrote in message
...
> You should be naming JFK and LBJ for the killings in Vietnam, not Nixon.
> The war was winding down when Nixon took office.

On the contrary, Nixon greatly expanded the US invasion, secretly (from the
US public) bombing Cambodia, for instance, unleashing thousands of B-52
sorties there, often in heavily populated areas.

But yes, Johnson was a monstrous war criminal as well--though I can't
imagine how you think that exonerates Nixon. They each inflicted far
greater atrocity than Saddam Hussein ever did.

--Gary


> Phil Payne
>
> "Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
> news:b73Zb.77780$uV3.535651@attbi_s51...
> > "Cub Driver" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > >As far as Clinton goes, it's ancient history.
> > >
> > > And you've forgiven Nixon, right?
> >
> > That's a preposterous analogy, for a couple of reasons:
> >
> > 1) How many off-topic posts do you see on this newsgroup spontaneously
> > complaining about Nixon? I can't think of any.
> >
> > 2) Nixon slaughtered hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese because
> they
> > had the temerity to defend themselves against a US invasion, as they had
> > done previously against the French and the Japanese. He subverted the
US
> > constitution by using federal agencies to commit crimes against his
> > political opponents. He resigned the presidency in the face of imminent
> > overwhelming votes for impeachment and conviction. He would have gone
to
> > prison (as did 25 members of his administration, including four cabinet
> > members), had he not been preemptively pardoned by his own former vice
> > president.
> >
> > > Far from "getting over it" or "moving on," I would say: "Those who do
> > > not study history are condemned to repeat it."
> >
> > Good principle, preposterous instantiation. You think it's important
for
> > people to continue to complain to an aviation newsgroup about Clinton's
> sex
> > scandal in order to protect the Republic from the possibility that
another
> > president will get a blow job and lie about it?
> >
> > --Gary
> >
> >
>
>

[Tarver Engineering]

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
news:JA2_b.35289$4o.52406@attbi_s52...
> "Phil Payne" > wrote in message
> ...
> > You should be naming JFK and LBJ for the killings in Vietnam, not Nixon.
> > The war was winding down when Nixon took office.
>
> On the contrary, Nixon greatly expanded the US invasion, secretly (from
the
> US public) bombing Cambodia, for instance, unleashing thousands of B-52
> sorties there, often in heavily populated areas.

The Ho Chi mihn Trail was through the jungle and bombing it saved thousands
of American lives.

> But yes, Johnson was a monstrous war criminal as well--though I can't
> imagine how you think that exonerates Nixon. They each inflicted far
> greater atrocity than Saddam Hussein ever did.

Nixon took over LBJ's war, after Lady Bird's company had made hundreds of
millions of dollars on Vietnam. If you want to know who killed JFK, just
follow the money.

[Mike Walton]

GPS evidence proved that Scott Peterson, who was falsely accused of
murdering Laci, was concerned about the course of the investigation.
As a matter of fact, he evidently went to the Bay, more out of
disbelief about the course of the investigation, than out of fear that
the police would discover his wife's body. When Scott Peterson went to
the Bay, he only stayed 2 or 3 minutes each time, and that is clearly
not a man who was concerned about what the police were doing. The
police had already shocked and isolated Scott Peterson by treating him
like a guilty suspect, and Scott didn't need any more than 2 or 3
minutes to confirm the fact the police were not investigating the
disappearance of Laci, they were merely seeking to confirm their
suspicions at best and pursuing the leads that the real murderers were
advancing, at worst.

Perhaps the police are angry at Scott Peterson because he was aware of
the fact that they were tailing him to the marina and having made fun
of them, they think that GPS tracking devices prove that the police
essentially duped a confession. They did not.

Since when is Scott denied the opportunity to observe the
investigation into his own wife's murder? -- if anybody cares to call
tailing Scott Peterson, an "investigation". In the final analysis, the
police were tracking Scott Peterson when they should have been looking
for Laci, and they are pursueing Scott at all cost, to evade the
simple truth.

http://www.geocities.com/justicewell/scott.htm

[Tom Sixkiller]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Phil Payne wrote:
> >
> > You should be naming JFK and LBJ for the killings in Vietnam, not Nixon.
> > The war was winding down when Nixon took office.
>
> Really? That's why it took six years and the biggest demonstrations ever
seen
> in the U.S. to get the ******* to honor his campaign promises?
Six years?

Nixon took office in January, 1969 and the "armistice" was signed in
January, 1973. That after three years of gradual withdrawal. It was
Operation Linebacker in September, 1972 that brought NV back to the table
(for real) and the war ended within about four months.

It was 1975 (six years later) when the North violated the armistice and
overran the South. It was then we had Kerry's "peace" and the result (IIRC)
was 500,000 to 1,000,000 deaths in the "re-education" camps (more than
actually died during the fighting).

Tom -- one of the last ones out in March, 1973

[Tarver Engineering]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Phil Payne wrote:
> > >
> > > You should be naming JFK and LBJ for the killings in Vietnam, not
Nixon.
> > > The war was winding down when Nixon took office.
> >
> > Really? That's why it took six years and the biggest demonstrations ever
> seen
> > in the U.S. to get the ******* to honor his campaign promises?
> Six years?
>
> Nixon took office in January, 1969 and the "armistice" was signed in
> January, 1973. That after three years of gradual withdrawal. It was
> Operation Linebacker in September, 1972 that brought NV back to the table
> (for real) and the war ended within about four months.
>
> It was 1975 (six years later) when the North violated the armistice and
> overran the South. It was then we had Kerry's "peace" and the result
(IIRC)
> was 500,000 to 1,000,000 deaths in the "re-education" camps (more than
> actually died during the fighting).

Not to mention the slaves delivered to the Soviet Union to settle Vietnam's
debt.

[Mike Walton]

GPS evidence proved that Scott Peterson, who was falsely accused of
murdering Laci, was concerned about the course of the investigation.
As a matter of fact, he evidently went to the Bay, more out of
disbelief about the course of the investigation, than out of fear that
the police would discover his wife's body. When Scott Peterson went to
the Bay, he only stayed 2 or 3 minutes each time, and that is clearly
not a man who was concerned about what the police were doing. The
police had already shocked and isolated Scott Peterson by treating him
like a guilty suspect, and Scott didn't need any more than 2 or 3
minutes to confirm the fact the police were not investigating the
disappearance of Laci, they were merely seeking to confirm their
suspicions at best and pursuing the leads that the real murderers were
advancing, at worst.

Perhaps the police are angry at Scott Peterson because he was aware of
the fact that they were tailing him to the marina and having made fun
of them, they think that GPS tracking devices prove that the police
essentially duped a confession. They did not.

Since when is Scott denied the opportunity to observe the
investigation into his own wife's murder? -- if anybody cares to call
tailing Scott Peterson, an "investigation". In the final analysis, the
police were tracking Scott Peterson when they should have been looking
for Laci, and they are pursueing Scott at all cost, to evade the
simple truth.

http://www.geocities.com/justicewell/scott.htm

[Peter Gottlieb]

What is your connection to this case?

"Mike Walton" > wrote in message
om...
> GPS evidence proved that Scott Peterson, who was falsely accused of
> murdering Laci, was concerned about the course of the investigation.
> As a matter of fact, he evidently went to the Bay, more out of
> disbelief about the course of the investigation, than out of fear that
> the police would discover his wife's body. When Scott Peterson went to
> the Bay, he only stayed 2 or 3 minutes each time, and that is clearly
> not a man who was concerned about what the police were doing. The
> police had already shocked and isolated Scott Peterson by treating him
> like a guilty suspect, and Scott didn't need any more than 2 or 3
> minutes to confirm the fact the police were not investigating the
> disappearance of Laci, they were merely seeking to confirm their
> suspicions at best and pursuing the leads that the real murderers were
> advancing, at worst.
>
> Perhaps the police are angry at Scott Peterson because he was aware of
> the fact that they were tailing him to the marina and having made fun
> of them, they think that GPS tracking devices prove that the police
> essentially duped a confession. They did not.
>
> Since when is Scott denied the opportunity to observe the
> investigation into his own wife's murder? -- if anybody cares to call
> tailing Scott Peterson, an "investigation". In the final analysis, the
> police were tracking Scott Peterson when they should have been looking
> for Laci, and they are pursueing Scott at all cost, to evade the
> simple truth.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/justicewell/scott.htm