Statement from Tele-Traffic (UK) Ltd On the limited information ...

Contrary to any claims, we do not believe there has been a successful
challenge to the integrity or accuracy of our equipment in the Courts. Those
cases that have been successfully defended have concerned operating or
procedural errors and not equipment failure.
Despite the claims of these experts and their contrived, frankly Heath
Robinson like tests, the fact remains that even when appearing as defence
experts they steadfastly refuse to challenge the independent Type Approval
process. Why? If they honestly believe their hypothesis, testing the Type
Approval for the LTI 20.20 will answer these issues once and for all.
However, once done the lucrative business of the defence expert would
rapidly disappear.
Similarly the tests demonstrated in this programme have been shown to be
scientifically unsound. In a recent report an eminent NASA scientist
concludes: -
“Mr. Clark’s overall approach violates many of the traditional rules of scientific
investigation. He sets out with the intention of achieving a particular preferred
outcome. He also selects among the results for evidence that favors his
hypothesis, and he ignores, discards or omits results that conflict with it.
My executive summary and full analysis detail several examples of Mr. Clark’s
veiled approaches to make a reader believe that laser speed meters (in
particular the LTI 20-20) are so prone to producing erroneous results that the
instruments malfunction more often than not. His purpose seems to be to
make the exception appear to be the rule.
In my opinion, the net result of Mr. Clark’s technical report does not constitute
a scientifically sound or compelling argument that the LTI 20-20 is inaccurate
or unreliable.”
A full copy of this report will be published (free) on our web site
www.teletrafficuk.com on Wednesday 24 th October we would urge anyone
considering utilising experts on the evidence of this programme to fully
consider the report.
Tele-Traffic (UK) Ltd is a supplier of equipment and has no part in the
operational use of that equipment.
………. ENDS ……….