Penality Points & Abuse Of Power. Advise Please.

Little CuChulainn

GM228 wrote: »

Sending and receiving data is not the same as sending or receiving a message.



The part in bold requires that the person is capable of performing an interactive communication function with the device, not that the device is performing an interactive function.

GPS devices do not send any data, they lock onto at least three satellites which transmit radio signals and use these to determine their location using a process known as Trilateration.

The GPS device is not presenting any information to the user which it has received, it is transmitting information which is pre-programmed into it which it's also worth noting is one-way communication, not interactive communication as per the quote from the SI.

The GPS is presenting information it has received. That's how it shows your location. Like I said, you're entitled to your opinion but I can't see how you can be so dismissive of my counter opinion without any reference to case law to back it up.

whippet

Depending on the model Sat Navs can display SMS messages, live traffic reports etc .. Which would fall under the definition in the legislation.

GM228

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The GPS is presenting information it has received.

It isn't.

GPS device dosn't actually present the information it receives to the user, your location isn't the information it receives, it presents information already pre-loaded onto the device which the device determines based on it's lock on the GPS satellites, GPS satellites send precise (atomic) time and their location to the GPS receiver, this information is not given to the person using it.

This may seem petty to point out but it's important to point out and very valid to show that the person is not sending or receiving any messages/data that the device has received as that's impossible.

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, you're entitled to your opinion but I can't see how you can be so dismissive of my counter opinion without any reference to case law to back it up.

Case law isn't required, to come under the act the message must be oral or written, the data received by a GPS is neither, the person using the device must be capable of sending or receiving the measage which in this case they are not and the message must be an interactive communication which it isn't.

As the act dosn't define the meaning of "message" then it has it's ordinary meaning. To establish the ordinary meaning you can have recourse to any common dictionary.

But if there is more than one possible meaning then fair enough the court will decide which meaning is best suited/intended for the act as a whole, but there is no meaning of message which relates to "data" in any dictionary I can find.

More importantly the SI requires that the message is sent or received in oral or written form, no oral or written message is received from the GPS satellite so even if a court did decide that message was construed as data received it still isn't oral or written data that has been received-again that's not possible.

And another important note, the other point I previously raised is that the communication must be "interactive" as per the SI. An interactive communication is a continuous two-way communication which is not the case with a SatNav and the "person" must be able to send and receive the interactive communication not just the device.

whippet wrote: »

Depending on the model Sat Navs can display SMS messages, live traffic reports etc .. Which would fall under the definition in the legislation.

In that case yes the SatNav would come under the legislation as I already pointed out, but not all SatNavs can do that so it's depending on the model.

Little CuChulainn

GM228 wrote: »

It isn't.

GPS device dosn't actually present the information it receives to the user, your location isn't the information it receives, it presents information already pre-loaded onto the device which the device determines based on it's lock on the GPS satellites, GPS satellites send precise (atomic) time and their location to the GPS receiver, this information is not given to the person using it.

This may seem petty to point out but it's important to point out and very valid to show that the person is not sending or receiving any messages/data that the device has received as that's impossible.

I disagree. The Sat Nav is presenting the data it receives to the user in the form of a representation of their location. Yes it goes through some process to convert the data to a dot but so this a text message go through a process to convert the data it receives into a readable form.

GM228 wrote: »

Case law isn't required, to come under the act the message must be oral or written, the data received by a GPS is neither, the person using the device must be capable of sending or receiving the measage which in this case they are not and the message must be an interactive communication which it isn't.

As the act dosn't define the meaning of "message" then it has it's ordinary meaning. To establish the ordinary meaning you can have recourse to any common dictionary.

But if there is more than one possible meaning then fair enough the court will decide which meaning is best suited/intended for the act as a whole, but there is no meaning of message which relates to "data" in any dictionary I can find.

More importantly the SI requires that the message is sent or received in oral or written form, no oral or written message is received from the GPS satellite so even if a court did decide that message was construed as data received it still isn't oral or written data that has been received-again that's not possible.

What SI are you referring to? I've been referring to S3 of the RTA 2006. In any case. The Sat Nav receives info (i.e. your location) and uses that info to convey a written and oral message to the user (i.e. turn left)

GM228 wrote: »

And another important note, the other point I previously raised is that the communication must be "interactive" as per the SI. An interactive communication is a continuous two-way communication which is not the case with a SatNav and the "person" must be able to send and receive the interactive communication not just the device.

And again I disagree. A sat nav is absolutely interactive. It requires the user to interact with it and input data to function as a navigation device.

foggy_lad

whomitconcerns wrote: »

Problem is nothing you say below would prove you didn't have the phone in your hand. So lot of work for nothing. Coincidence that it was pulled.

The op stated that the rear and side rear windows are heavily tinted so the Gardai would not have been able to see them using a phone unless right beside his car, they looked across and saw him reading the sat nav and assumed he was on his mobile and went in bull-headed.

OP you should get your mobile data for that day and make an appointment to see the superintendent, also don't give the Gardai any original documents like your phone usage data in case they lose it!

ohnonotgmail

foggy_lad wrote: »

The op stated that the rear and side rear windows are heavily tinted so the Gardai would not have been able to see them using a phone unless right beside his car, they looked across and saw him reading the sat nav and assumed he was on his mobile and went in bull-headed.

OP you should get your mobile data for that day and make an appointment to see the superintendent, also don't give the Gardai any original documents like your phone usage data in case they lose it!

phone usage data wont help. the offence is holding a device not using it.

GM228

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I disagree. The Sat Nav is presenting the data it receives to the user in the form of a representation of their location. Yes it goes through some process to convert the data to a dot but so this a text message go through a process to convert the data it receives into a readable form.

Whilst a text message and data may be received in a similar form, that does not in any way make them both a message, they are sent it different ways at different wave lenghts, data a SatNav receives is not a form of "communication" as defined by Irish and EU law, and as per the SI the oral or written message must be an interactive communication. Whilst a message isn't defined what is a communication is in the relevant acts.

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What SI are you referring to? I've been referring to S3 of the RTA 2006.

The same one as you, why would you think I may be referring to another SI?

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

In any case. The Sat Nav receives info (i.e. your location) and uses that info to convey a written and oral message to the user (i.e. turn left)

A SatNav does not receive your location, you may be surprised by that. No information it receives is displayed to the user in oral or written form.

Most (but not all) SatNavs present their directions via symbols/arrows etc rather than in written form so the written part is very debatable, however voice directions don't count as speech is not considered to be a valid form of electronic communication under Irish law unless the speech has gone through voice recognition software, SatNavs don't use voice recognition software.

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

And again I disagree. A sat nav is absolutely interactive. It requires the user to interact with it and input data to function as a navigation device.

Indeed a SatNav is an interactive device, I never said it wasn't, but it's not a communications device and it dosn't enable the user to have an interactive communication, an interactive device and an interactive communication is not the same!

A SatNav is not a communications device and the data it receives is not a form of communication as per other relevant acts which defines what a communication is. Data to a SatNav is not sent via a public available electronic communications service.

“communication” means any information exchanged or conveyed between a finite number of parties by means of a publicly available electronic communications service, but does not include any information conveyed as part of a broadcasting service to the public over the electronic communications network except to the extent that the information can be related to the identifiable subscriber or user receiving the information;

It's also worth nothing that another act does define what a message is in relation to a VAT matter, it says a message is an invoice, credit note, debit note, settlement voucher or document which is sent electronically.

Although not in the same act I would argue that it has relevance because a text message, MMS message, e-mail etc could be considered to be a document.

But I think it's safe to assume that the literal meaning of "message" is the intended meaning in the relevant act and would be something like:-

Collins Dictionary wrote:

a communication, usually brief, from one person or group to another

Cambridge Dictionary wrote:

​short ​piece of ​information that you give to a ​person when you cannot ​speak to them ​directly:

For the act to be applicable a device must be:-

A "communication device" (which a SatNav isn't), with which a person is capable of making or receiving a call or performing an interactive "communication" function (which a person can't do with a SatNav and and directions given by a SatNav don't count as per the definition of a communication).

It's also worth nothing that as the SI distinguished between a "call" and "an interactive communication" function it's safe to assume that a message under the interactive communication heading is an SMS, MMS or e-mail.

At this stage if we still can't agree I'll agree to disagree wirh you!

foggy_lad

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

phone usage data wont help. the offence is holding a device not using it.

So they seen him holding a device that they can't prove was a phone through heavily tinted glass in a moving vehicle in traffic?

MarkAnthony

foggy_lad wrote: »

So they seen him holding a device that they can't prove was a phone through heavily tinted glass in a moving vehicle in traffic?

They're obviously yanking the OPs chain a bit. Presumably something was done to annoy Mr. and Ms. Plod, they're annoying back. This thread was answered By Fred and expanded upon by Carawaystick in the first few minutes/hours of it going up.

I'm not trying to stifle the discussion just pointing out it's a fairly simple answer. My gut reaction is it probably isn't in the best faith but the OP is going to have to waste a day going along and arguing his case if he doesn't want the points.

ohnonotgmail

foggy_lad wrote: »

So they seen him holding a device that they can't prove was a phone through heavily tinted glass in a moving vehicle in traffic?

i dont think you understand. their evidence will be that they seen the op holding something that looked like a mobile phone. The OP will testify otherwise. the judge will then make his mind up as to who is telling the truth. its not an episode of CSI.

Kepler 186f

Based on what you say you weren't committing the offence of "holding a mobile phone while driving". I personally would not pay the fine.
Option 1) Depending on the time status of receiving the ticket, write into the Superintendent of the Garda Station responsible for the alleged offence location appealing the ticket. If you're more pressed for time, ring ahead and request a meeting.
Failing that there's Option 2) If you just don't pay the ticket you will be summonsed to Court where you can state your innocence and produce whatever evidence you can to support same, however this obviously will cost you the days lost wages. But on principal if I didn't commit an offence, I wouldn't accept guilt by paying the fine. While the fine costs 80euro and 2 penalty points I think, if found guilty in Court both will increase

2012paddy2012

Go to court and tell the truth.
That's the way the system works. No need to be a drama queen.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.