SCURRILOUS CHALLENGES TO
DR. MICHAEL A. G. CLARK
JUST HOW FAR ARE THE CROWN PREPARED TO GO TO DEFAME INDEPENDENT EXPERT WITNESSES?
It has come to our attention that the Crown and certain bodies within the UK are undertaking an orchestrated program of lies and deceit to discredit one of the countries leading independent experts on laser speed enforcement.
The level of attack is quite mind blowing with suggestions that:
1 Dr Michael Clark is a disgraced expert witness who has no credibility in the Courts.
2 Dr Michael Clark is a charlatan and liar.
3 Dr Michael Clark has no qualifications in his subject.
4 Dr Michael Clark is untrustworthy and has been exposed in Court for his lies.
CPS and Prosecution Circulated Document.
The suggestion of Dr Clark being discredited is being repeated in certain lower Court circles. This scurrilous rumour appears to be the result of the circulation of a certain document that can be downloaded, with applied disclaimer, from the Tele-Traffic Ltd website.
It is suggested that credibility is granted to the publication given it has been handed into Courts or left on view and when examined, certain ACPO statements and documents are linked to it.
We would direct anyone interested in learning the true status of Dr Clark to click on the Tele-Traffic link below which takes you to the Tele-Traffic “News and Events!” page which containing a Laser Tech Times entry.
If there was any credence to this document, which has been suggested by lawyers to be libellous, one has to ask, why have LTI has distanced itself from the content by adding a disclaimer? Which, if reading it correctly would seem their sole UK importer is breaching.
If the publication was worthy of merit, wouldn’t the manufacturer and sole importer/retailer be standing by a report that is freely published on the web and therefore publishing?
The Tele-Traffic published / LTI document would appear to be a straight ‘lift’ from the Laser Tech Times, an American publication which can be viewed/read without disclaimer by clicking on the image below:
The publication is a critique of a copyright confidential technical note provided by Dr Clark to both the Home Office and the Courts in support of his findings of known defects to the LTi 2020 and other laser speed meters. The content of the manufacturers web publication been used in cases as well as being circulated worldwide, the document is being promoted as an accurate representation of Dr Clark’s inability to act as a credible expert witness and seriously questions both his qualifications and the status of the UK’s most senior professional engineering body.
The content of the report sits in in stark contrast to actual comments of the sole owner of Tele-Traffic who, when acting as the Crown’s Expert Witness at the Preston Crown Court, gave oral evidence in which he agreed that Dr Clark’s findings were true and he accepted the evidence as accurate (Crown v Wiltshire 19.1.2007 Preston Crown Court).
Given that the findings of Dr Clark are corroborated by the owner of the UK importing company, one has to ask, why then is the industry seeking to discredit his findings and comments?
The Crown expert’s admission has been published publicly, the comment above is an extract from the Crown Court transcript (extracts of his cross examination by Barrister Ms Kathryn Hodson are available from a national motoring paper by clicking on the link below).
Whilst the firm Tele-Traffic Ltd web distributors of the American document are the sole importers/retailers of the LTi 2020 and Ultralite, but they are also contracted by the Home Office to provide free expert evidence in support of the equipment they sell..
To further clarify the position and set the record straight there are a number of points to raise:
1. Expert reports have to be worded in a manner that allows a lay person to understand
complex and scientific data be they Judges, Magistrates or Juries.
2. Such reports must be easily understood and peer examination is undertaken by the
employment of qualified experts who the rebut the position.
3. It is not for an expert to set out difficult and complex matters in a manner that would
be unintelligible without explanation to those involved in the legal process.
All these points are set out in UK Case Law and 2006 legislation applying to expert witnesses and their evidence.
With regard to Dr Michael A. G. Clark’s qualifications we have been provided with copies of a number of certificates which are set out below, Qualifications in the field of engineering are presented as qualifications of Philosophy, in the UK it is not possible to obtain a Doctorate without having first graduated with a Bachelor Degree. We are advised this may not apply in the American education system.
Additionally, not all scientists publish reports after they receive their Doctorates, many move into private industry and the commercial sector. We trust the provision of the good Doctors certificates and association will clarify certain points.
Additionally, as a Fellow of the IET, Dr Clark is recognised nationally, any person wishing to confirm his Fellowship should access the site from the link provided below:
It is anticipate that as most of the challenge appears to be emanating from America the authors may not be aware of the existence and status of the IET in the United Kingdom. The Institute having changed its name in 2006 from the IEE (Institute of Electrical Engineers), though this is something that could have been easily ascertained in a general search.
