Man hit by car at 100km/h: Expert

Dr Ian Calhaem gave evidence in court, suggesting that the car involved in a hit-and-run was going at a speed of 100km/h.

An expert witness told a Tauranga jury that he estimated the average speed of a vehicle allegedly involved in a hit-and-run moments before impact was about 100km/h.

Dr Ian Calhaem, who was giving evidence in the High Court at Tauranga yesterday for the prosecution at the Raymond Green murder trial, told the court that he had analysed the CCTV footage taken from three security cameras at the Welcome Bay Foodmarket.

The cameras had a clear line of sight to the point of impact.

Green, 33, who has denied one count of murder, is accused of mowing down Ilya Olegovich Kojevnikov in Welcome Bay Rd on February 2, 2015.

Dr Calhaem, who is a qualified expert in video analysis, said he also had the benefit of an ESR laser scan image of the scene, and visited the area at least twice.

He had analysed the raw data taken from the CCTV footage frame by frame and also at pixel level to ensure he had eliminated potential irrelevant data.

Dr Calhaem said he was able to calculate the position of the vehicle on the road and its average speed going up the road at 65km/h. He calculated the same vehicle travelled back down the road 1.5 times faster.

Dr Calhaem said before braking, the vehicle's velocity was calculated at 132km/h "give or take 40km/h" and after braking 117km/h (plus or minus 40km/h), for an average velocity of around 100km/h.

He was able to determine the position of the car and the victim at the point of impact.

Dr Calhaem said the driver-side wheels came within the median strip on the return trip down the road, and the victim, who was walking along with his foot on the edge of median strip, had taken one step.

"However, the headlight beams of the vehicle would have reached the victim well before the brake lights went on. At least one car length.

"We can see immediately prior to impact, the person, the victim standing on the road, well lit by the headlights," he said.

During cross-examination, Green's lawyer Tony Rickard-Simms put it to Dr Calhaem that the difficulty with his conclusions using the CCTV footage was that the jury was being asked to rely on distorted images. Dr Calhaem said any distortion would be consistent across all of the images, and he had also used the ESR data and personally measured from the CCTV cameras to the point of impact.

The defence put the victim close to the median line and also taking a significant step towards the car before impact, Mr Rickard-Simms said.

Dr Calhaem said he would not say it was a significant step, but the victim moved his right foot back towards the centreline just before impact.

The trial continues today.