Querying a speed ticket - should I expect to receive proof of the radar reading?

[Akzle]

fight it oi. the more of the cops' time you waste, the less time he's spending collecting donut vouchers.
write HEAPS and don't bother replying unless they address EVERY point in your letters. find every minute little bitch manoeuvre. just waste their time. all of it.

From the Coromandel/Tauranga exit 477 to almost the Ngatea turn-off is mostly 90kphr zone now.

"safer speed area"


(they're fucking doing it (reducing speeds) farther and farther from auckland,
those fucking morons take traffic on holiday with them, and then drive into it. fucking dumbcunt motherfuckers cant drive for shit.)

[marmel]

fight it oi. the more of the cops' time you waste, the less time he's spending collecting donut vouchers.
write HEAPS and don't bother replying unless they address EVERY point in your letters. find every minute little bitch manoeuvre. just waste their time. all of it.



"safer speed area"


(they're fucking doing it (reducing speeds) farther and farther from auckland,
those fucking morons take traffic on holiday with them, and then drive into it. fucking dumbcunt motherfuckers cant drive for shit.)

Do you think the cops care about someone defending a speeding ticket, fuck no. They have about 13,000 staff and government coffers to back them up. The cop won't give a shit, he'll be getting paid anyway, the file will be all done for him by another department, all he has to do is turn up, spend 5 minutes giving evidence and piss off.

All this guy is going to get at court is even more fucked off than he is now and an extra $130 to really rub it in. Like it or not unless he comes up with a really good reason he is going to get convicted.

If every person who got a ticket decided to defend them it might be a different story but that's not the case.

Defending the ticket on any of the reasons set out so far in this topic is a complete waste of time, his time that is.

[Gremlin]

No one has been able to answer the question of whether radar readings are kept. Has anyone fought the law and lost? What was the court cost of contesting if anything?

If anything? Unless you win, you will be liable for court costs, usually $130.

No, there is no requirement to show you a radar reading.

It sounds like it will be your word against his, in which case I suggest you piss into the wind... at least you'll get something out of it. A mate went to court in front of JPs, had a full presentation, wrong lane, wrong colour bike, wrong colour gear etc. Still guilty. Had to take 3 days off work as it got deferred when it ran late, than an incident the next day closed court etc etc.

You might have a chance in front of a judge with good evidence, but to win against police in front of JPs?

[Virago]

...For the record I probably was going over the limit but cant be sure as my eyes tend to be focussed on whats ahead and around me not what my speedo is reading. If I was speeding then it was not excessive and was safe and appropriate for the conditions...

Tell that to the judge.

You've admitted you were speeding. You're now desperately grasping for some triumphant technicality to get you off. Man up and just pay the bloody fine.

[Hugo Nougo]

Good on ya Jin, if you think you've got a got a case go for it, if nothing else you'll learn exactly how the system works.
I've got about a 50 50 win rate on the tickets I've contested over the year's, my advice would be to write in as per the instructions on the ticket, if you get off great if not no extra cost. Talk to a qualified person (lawyer) if you do want to take it further, citezen's advice is free, you will get no clarity here.
Anyway have a laugh at this, and fuck the pompous gits on here, especially the one that takes the time to post admonishing you for wasting his time!.

http://youtu.be/6w3BwLm0IiM

[Oakie]

I have a half hatched thought that logically makes a bit of sense...........
Claim the officers radar is accurate, admit his radar screen showed 102km/h, but deny your true ground speed was anywhere above 90km/h. The front profile of a motorbike consists largely of the front tire. If you were radared from front on, the only possible way the police officer got a reading higher than my actual speed would be if the officers radar was mistakenly aimed somewhere at the top half of the tire. The top of the tire travels at double the ground speed of the vehicle, the bottom of the tire is stationary on the ground. The officer has proof of the number his radar displayed, the officers word is enough. The officer knows the radar was pointed at you when it displayed the number. However, how could a police officer prove what part of the motorbike the radar/laser beam hit?

I think your science is wrong. The radar works by measuring the time it takes for the laser pulse to be reflected back off it's target ... and we are talking nanoseconds. So really simplified ... it fires a pulse which bounces back and you can tell how far away the target is from the time it takes to get the reflection. It then fires another (now milliseconds later) and again can tell how far away the target is now. Simple maths then to work out how far the target has travelled between the two readings and in what time to work out the speed. Wouldn't make a difference if the wheel is spinning backwards or forwards. Pretty sure they'd be firing their beam at the headlight as it has a nice reflector on the back, just right for reflecting laser pulses.

[Madness]

...the chips are the best bit.

Pretty hard to conceal a big-fuck-off cockroach in a maccas chip too.

Just pay the ticket and have a beer you dumb shit

You know, for a munter, you type some sensible shit sometimes.

I probably was going over the limit but cant be sure as my eyes tend to be focussed on whats ahead and around me not what my speedo is reading. If I was speeding then it was not excessive and was safe and appropriate for the conditions.

Oh, sweet Jesus.

Maybe you could try tilting your head sideways when you're riding. It might help your eyes focus on the speedo, both when the conditions are appropriate for breaking the speed limit and when they're not. Just a thought.

[EJK]

Welcome to KiwiBiker Jin

[Akzle]

If every person who got a ticket decided to defend them it might be a different story but that's not the case.

the longest journeys start with a single step...

[Mike.Gayner]

If you were radared from front on, the only possible way the police officer got a reading higher than my actual speed would be if the officers radar was mistakenly aimed somewhere at the top half of the tire. The top of the tire travels at double the ground speed of the vehicle, the bottom of the tire is stationary on the ground.

The fuck? Don't leave school mate. With respect to the bike the tire is exactly stationery at all points. Your tyres are moving (relative to the road) at exactly the same pace as the bike. The radar doesn't magically pick a point on the tyre and say "measure this bit twice in a fraction of a second". The radar will measure exactly the point it's aimed at twice (or multiple times in fact), and the surface of the tyre it's measuring is stationery with respect to the bike.

[R650R]

And the alleged crime was doing 102 in a 90 zone. A perfectly straight road no traffic bright sunny afternoon. Officer claimed this was a high risk zone

From what others have intimiated it sounds like the Maramarua area on SH2. BTW I got done there for the same 'low margin' of 82 in 70 zone at 4am in morning in Truck on a deserted road.

Although none of us like tickets that road is a high risk area (if that's where it was) and has claimed many lives over the years, partly because of the high traffic volume ( you are exposed to more chances of error by others) and that 'nearly home' factor where people relax and stop concentrating on road and cross centre line. I hate these lower limits they out in like these as they are a blunt tool to cover what is often a risk window only on certain times of day and holidays etc. But we see the sign and have to suck it up and play their game.

[Voltaire]

I was caught in a Police 'set up' once where they ticketed people who were blocking Campbell Road intersection when the

lights changed.

They picked on me out of a group of several cars and wrote me a ticket, the 'good' cop said that I could take it to court if I

liked.

I came back and photographed the intersection and this was before digital cameras, paid extra for fast development too

Wrote a letter and posted it saying I wanted my day in court.

Took a morning off work and went to the District Court.

Waited and waited and waited as all the wrongly accused came and went...

They delayed mine as the Cop had not turned up, apparently they had to come if you contested it.

The Police Lawyer came up and told me that I was really wasting my time as it was open and shut.

Well the JP got tired of waiting and I was told to state my case which I did.

JP thought it was reasonable and I was a free man.

Police Lawyer said that " I was lucky that the Cop was too busy fighting crime to attend" ( or something like that)

Lesson I got was, pay the fine and move on., what a waste of time.

[Erelyes]

We are all innocent unless proven guilty and officer plods word is not proof. At least it shouldnt be.

First off, you ain't even read what has been said. Officer plods word is evidence. So what is your evidence that you were obeying the speed limit?

You know what happens in cases where one party has evidence and the other doesn't? They rule on the evidence provided.

As for the 'it shouldn't be' bullshit, did you even bother to rub your two brain cells together to think about what you're proposing before writing it? Say you're out on your bike, and as you're halfway through an intersection, a red light runner (who was clearly doing twice the posted limit) comes screeching along, tyres smoking, hits you just before stopping, knocking you and your bike over. Officer plod who was behind you pops his window down, drives past slowly, and says "Sorry guv... my word's not good enough any more, you'll have to sort it out between yourselves'.

Fuck it, go on then. Go to court, bitch. Get laughed at and lighten your wallet by the court costs. Fools and their money are easily parted

[Erelyes]

Talk to a qualified person (lawyer) if you do want to take it further, citezen's advice is free, you will get no clarity here.
Anyway have a laugh at this, and fuck the pompous gits on here, especially the one that takes the time to post admonishing you for wasting his time!.

And you were making sense up til the end there. CAB are generally not legally trained. So if he wants free legal advice then he wants a Community Law Centre not CAB. Reading your 'you will get no clarity here' makes sense in context of the sentence

[Maha]

You Got Caught
Pay The Fucking Fine
And Ride Another Day

God there's some twatling dribble in this thread.