The Techno-Fix Versus The Fair Cop: Procedural (In)Justice and Automated Speed Limit Enforcement

While the use of technology to monitor and punish suspected ‘ risky ’ populations is likely to increase, the experience of being on the receiving end of such enforcement has received relatively little attention. This paper presents research that considered one particular criminal justice ‘ techno-fi x ’ — the speed camera — from the perspective of those who encounter the technology as offenders. Such enforcement is commonly described by drivers as being ‘ unfair ’ and ‘ unjust ’. Speeding drivers ’ experiences of being ‘ techno-fi xed ’ are considered with reference to the antecedent elements of a procedurally just experience proposed by Tyler amongst others. Drivers ’ preferences for fairer methods of speed limit enforcement are then analysed, before the potential for reconciling the ‘ techno-fi x ’ with procedurally just enforcement is considered. Part 1: Techno-Fixing Crime Risks A shift toward ‘ risk ’ as a focus and rationale for enforcement has produced changes in the way criminal justice systems operate ( Sparks 2000; Hudson 2003). This has had consequences for the processes and methods that underpin criminalization, including an increase in the use of ‘ techno-fi xes ’ to identify so-defi ned ‘ risky ’ behaviour ( Haggerty 2004 a: 494). Techno-fi xes can be found at the centre of ‘ projects that position technology as a key