Dash it, where’s my camera?

IF only she had a dashcam installed in her car. That way, Sam Ke Ting would have been able to prove her innocence in the terrible accident that happened in Johor Baru at 3.20am on Feb 18, 2017.

Or not.

Because, conversely, the video recording could have shown the opposite: that the 27-year-old clerk had indeed driven recklessly and therefore deserved to be punished for causing the death of eight teenagers who were racing on their modified bicycles on the highway.

Sam was acquitted in 2019 by Magistrate’s Court judge Siti Hajar Ali who ruled she was driving responsibly and carefully as she was not under the influence of alcohol, was not using her phone and had her seatbelt on, which was what the police had concluded in their investigations. The police also found she was in the far left lane and she was not speeding.

Justice Siti Hajar also noted that it was a dark, hilly and winding road where the driver could not foresee that there would be a basikal lajak gang on the road at 3am, and added that the teens had put themselves in danger.

But last Wednesday, High Court judge Abu Bakar Katar found Sam guilty because he decided her defence was “a bare denial and an afterthought”.

He reportedly said the magistrate was wrong to accept Sam’s defence that she did not know that there were cyclists on that road during the wee hours which gave her the excuse to drive recklessly by going beyond the 50km per hour speed limit.

So which judge was right? We will have to await the Court of Appeal’s decision but a dashcam recording would have certainly shed light on the tragedy.

Surveillance cameras on that stretch of road would also have helped but I guess there were none installed.

Public opinion has been overwhelming and online petitions calling for justice for Sam garnered over a million signatures in a matter of days.

People are sympathetic because they believe a group of young teens racing on modified bicycles at 3am on a dimly-lit highway is not something a normal driver would expect.

In fact, all drivers, no matter how careful, can never be totally prepared for the unexpected, like suddenly finding an animal in the middle of a rural road, a child dashing across the street or a vehicle swerving into one’s lane at high speed.

But back in 2017, I believe very few vehicles had dashcams installed. Since then, more cars have them and there has certainly been an increase in the uptake rate after Sam’s guilty verdict but there are no available statistics on its popularity.

I had a dashcam installed in my previous car. When I sold it and bought a new one two years ago, I asked the car salesman for a dashcam as part of the deal.

I got a front camera model but I never got round to getting it installed. While I believe a dashcam is useful, my experience with the one in my previous car made me a little casual about it. I never once used the recordings for anything as I was lucky not to have had any accidents. Over time, I didn’t even check if the dashcam was working.

But Sam’s ordeal has made me rethink the importance of the device. I should treat it like my car insurance. I never want to use it but it’s something that could aid me in an accident.

By the same token, it’s about time the authorities, vehicle owners and insurance companies take dashcams more seriously.

Two years ago, in September 2020, Transport Minister Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong said his ministry would conduct a study on the use of dashcam footages in court and would consider making the device compulsory in cars.

He was reported as saying dashcam recordings of accidents had been proven to be useful as evidence.

I wonder how that study is going and when the results will be made known.

I would also urge Dr Wee to indeed push for mandatory dashcam legislation, just like helmets for motorcyclists and safety belts, third brake lights and airbags in cars. All these measures are meant to make roads safer for users, so it’s time for dashcams to be added.

While dashcams do not directly contribute to reducing death and injury in accidents, studies have shown that it can make motorists more conscious of how they drive.

And that kind of driving behaviour is what insurance companies should want to encourage. Since dashcam recordings show accountability in accidents, it is especially useful when ascertaining insurance claims.

According to Gary Humphreys, group underwriting director for Britain’s Markerstudy Group who is quoted in a fuelgenie.co.uk article, “Camera technology adds a visual element in helping insurers decide fault in the event of an accident (and) has proven vital in determining liability and has enabled us to avoid long drawn-out disputes.”

Not only that. He adds that the cameras help protect drivers against “crash for cash” scams. We saw a graphic example of this when The Star frontpaged screen shots from a dashcam recording of a man wilfully throwing himself onto a car bonnet and smashing the windscreen (“Dashcam to the rescue: Scammers’ hopes of a quick buck dashed”, April 15; online at bit.ly/star_scammer).

Other scams, says Humphreys, include deliberate severe braking in front of a driver to instigate a “slam on” and subsequent whiplash injury claims, and flashing to let another out of a junction and then crashing into them on purpose.

There are, of course, important implications involved when making dashcams mandatory; namely, privacy infringement and admissible evidence.

What countries like France and Belgium have done is to legalise dashcams for private use but ban the uploading of the footage publicly online. German courts accept dashcam footage as evidence but licence plates and faces unrelated to the case must be blurred to protect privacy.

Formulating legislation takes time but insurance companies can get the ball rolling.

Korean drama fans will be familiar with how dashcams are often shown to provide video evidence or leads that help the authorities solve accidents and criminal cases. That is based on reality because even though there is no legal requirement, it is considered an essential accessory in vehicles. All insurance companies in South Korea provide incentives like discounts for vehicle owners to install them.

Thailand’s Office of Insurance Commission requires insurance companies to give a 5% to 10% discount in motor insurance premiums, valid for all vehicle classes, on the condition the dashcam must be functional during the entire period of insurance coverage.

So c’mon Malaysian insurance companies, take the lead since it benefits you as well, as Humphreys has shared.

Over the weekend, I persuaded my son to install a dashcam in his car as he often stays out late and he has to travel interstate for his job.

There are many models at different prices to choose from. Since the device is so widely used in South Korea, I wanted him to take a Korean brand with front and rear cameras with superb HD resolution. The device can record 24 hours even when the car engine is turned off, just like in my K dramas. But it was a whopping RM1,200.

In the end, he settled for a RM200 Japanese model that was on sale with front and rear cameras, decent resolution quality but with limited recording hours and fewer functions. It certainly has usability issues but my son says it still does the job and that’s what matters to him. I do hope he never needs to use any of the recordings.

I plan to get one installed in my car in the next few days too.

In South Korea, 92% of people surveyed in 2019 agreed that the cameras helped to reduce traffic crimes while 80% of British vehicle owners with a dashcam said it gave them peace of mind if they’re ever involved in an accident. That’s a price worth paying.

The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.