Looking at the article and the links that were posted here,
1. It appears that the defense won only because the prosecution did not come
up with an expert to refute the defense expert. He could have argued based
on Goedel's Theorem or the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and the case
would have go
On Aug 10, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:29:38PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The facts are very scrambled but I like it.
The brief TV reports from lawyers were more factual.
Motorist wins case after maths whizzes break speed camera code
http
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:29:38PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The facts are very scrambled but I like it.
> The brief TV reports from lawyers were more factual.
>
> Motorist wins case after maths whizzes break speed camera code
>
http://www.faqs.org/qa/rfcc-1420.html
P
The facts are very scrambled but I like it.
The brief TV reports from lawyers were more factual.
Motorist wins case after maths whizzes break speed camera code
Sydney Morning Herald
By Andrew Clark
August 11, 2005
A team of Chinese maths enthusiasts have thrown NSW's speed cameras
system
