Police withdraw speeding ticket.

[jaykay]

It is with great pleasure that I can report the police withdrew (another) speeding ticket in Rangiora court this morning.

The alleged crime was 112k on 1st November 2008.

As usual I requested a hearing. As usual the police said I was too late.

It then took the court eighteen months to chase it up, by sending a baillif to my house. As I was out the wife thought she was being helpful by paying it. So I had to get the payment reversed (yes, a cheque back from the courts), and a hearing was granted.

After some more cock ups on the way the whole thing was dropped.

Call me cynical but I suspect this is a police tactic to avoid having to pay out any costs - so it will be off to the High Court (as usual) to point out to the judge that the reason I am back is because the police ignored the last High Court Judge in a case of mine a couple of years ago.

C'est la vie in NZ.

[Berries]

So were you doing 112 when pinged ?

[R6_kid]

even if he was, do you think he'd go through all that effort just to make a post on here that could cock it all up for him?

[Berries]

Probably, considering some of the admissions that get posted on KB. It’s just that the post indicates nothing about the circumstances around the ticket other than it not being the first time this has played out this way for jaykay. Call me cynical, but it could be just someone requesting a hearing to slow down the process to get off it, even though they were speeding. Fair play if that is the case. But then if he was doing 95 and they claimed 112 it would be a different matter altogether.

[John_H]

It is with great pleasure that I can report the police withdrew (another) speeding ticket in Rangiora court this morning.

The alleged crime was 112k on 1st November 2008.

As usual I requested a hearing. As usual the police said I was too late.

It then took the court eighteen months to chase it up, by sending a baillif to my house. As I was out the wife thought she was being helpful by paying it. So I had to get the payment reversed (yes, a cheque back from the courts), and a hearing was granted.

After some more cock ups on the way the whole thing was dropped.

Call me cynical but I suspect this is a police tactic to avoid having to pay out any costs - so it will be off to the High Court (as usual) to point out to the judge that the reason I am back is because the police ignored the last High Court Judge in a case of mine a couple of years ago.

C'est la vie in NZ.

Mate, if you were speeding and you were caught, just pay the bloody fine. You deserve it. Not saying I don't ever speed but if I'm caught I would just pay it, lifes too bloody short!

[thepom]

Hey Johnny,innocent untill proven guilty is,nt it?

[=cJ=]

Mate, if you were speeding and you were caught, just pay the bloody fine. You deserve it. Not saying I don't ever speed but if I'm caught I would just pay it, lifes too bloody short!

No. Life's too short to roll over.

[Ocean1]

Hey Johnny,innocent untill proven guilty is,nt it?

It is not. Not for traffic infringements at least.

[Kickaha]

Mate, if you were speeding and you were caught, just pay the bloody fine. You deserve it. Not saying I don't ever speed but if I'm caught I would just pay it,

You're advocating accepting personal responsibility for your actions, don't be so stupid

[Littleman]

Could you not do that Jaykay?

I pay a shitload of taxes to beneificiaries and other people who 'can't help themselves'.

Conduct your crusade with your own money.

Cheers.

[ajturbo]

this is interesting...

[Coldrider]

Yep, got off one one myself because the cop was retarded.

[Taz]

Yep, got off one one myself because the cop was retarded.

Aren't they all?

[Coldrider]

Aren't they all?

Shhhhhh, aren't they all.

[rastuscat]

It is not. Not for traffic infringements at least.

Yes it is. Guilty only happens when

1. You pay the fine
2. A court finds you guilty.

FFS, get your facts straight.

So there.

[Max Preload]

Yes it is. Guilty only happens when

1. You pay the fine
2. A court finds you guilty.

FFS, get your facts straight.

So there.

What he meant was even though there is no evidence other than a claim made by a cop, you'll have to prove you weren't doing what he says you were to get JPs to believe you. Your statement doesn't hold anywhere near the sway of the cop's. A system open to abuse.

[davereid]

What he meant was even though there is no evidence other than a claim made by a cop, you'll have to prove you weren't doing what he says you were to get JPs to believe you. Your statement doesn't hold anywhere near the sway of the cop's. A system open to abuse.

My personal experience has always been the reverse.

I have found both J.P.s and Judges to be courteous, and interested in my case, as well as being very happy about ruling in my favour if the evidence comprises simply my word against the Traffic Officers.

Your mileage may vary, but I would suggest that you defend a ticket every time, if you are not guilty.

[CookMySock]

What he meant was even though there is no evidence other than a claim made by a cop, you'll have to prove you weren't doing what he says you were to get JPs to believe you. Your statement doesn't hold anywhere near the sway of the cop's. A system open to abuse.A system open to change, in my opinion. People are just getting really bloody sick of being shit on.

It's not just the police, theres ACC going up, rates never stop going up, RUC keeps going up, perhaps you can add a few yourself. It's pretty plain its just a big money grab.

Steve

[Rogue Rider]

Aparently, and this is only from here say talk, but I had it from the words of a fellow plod who was a dear mate. About 40% + of traffic infringements appearing at court get released/ let go for a number of reasons....

1. Cops no show due to day off, or other appearances
2. insufficient evidence
3. time allocations
4. incorrect data recorded
5. misscomunication and negligence.
6. popo being of reduced demeanor at presentation or not following issues protocols.

Police in court must present everything in a clear and concise presentation. Evidence must be clear, and due process followed to the letter of the law. There are often discrepancies and technicalities that can go in the favour of the defendant.....

The statistics show, flip, challenge it and take the 40% chance of getting ticket annulled. Its your right, and the chance is pretty high. Regardless of innocence, police need to get the basics right. If you pay it, demerits guaranteed and money gone.

Is it worth contesting, well, if I get another ticket one day, I'll give it a wurl.

[Neshi]

It's just plain stupid to abuse the system to get your ticket annuled while you were fined for a traffic infringement you commited. Like it's been already said, WE are ALL paying for it.
It would be a whole lot easier to just pay up if you commited the infringement.

"You made your bed, now you have to lie in it" is the saying... just man up and take responsibility for your actions.

[Toaster]

I find not speeding saves me so much money, time and effort in the long run... oh and I enjoy the ride not worrying if Mr Plod is around the next corner or in the next parked van.

Save it for the track Rossi.

[scumdog]

I find not speeding saves me so much money, time and effort in the long run... oh and I enjoy the ride not worrying if Mr Plod is around the next corner or in the next parked van.

Save it for the track Rossi.

Likewise.

Not having to fear a ticket is very relaxing.

[Max Preload]

It's just plain stupid to abuse the system to get your ticket annuled while you were fined for a traffic infringement you commited. Like it's been already said, WE are ALL paying for it.
It would be a whole lot easier to just pay up if you commited the infringement.

"You made your bed, now you have to lie in it" is the saying... just man up and take responsibility for your actions.

What a funny world you must live in where to "man up" is actually bending over and getting fucked up the arse. Make sure you wear your sailor suit.

[rustic101]

Most criminals are caught due to their inability to keep their mouths shut after the fact....Point in case on here time after time where clowns spout off about breaching the 'laws', then bitch and moan about fighting the 'man' for Justice.

Inevitably, what they do not understand is that, while it is their 'right' to defend their self generated actions, they are tying up valuable resources that could be used to prevent, resolve or deal with more serious crime affecting real victims caused by offenders, rather than some opinionated prick (general terms not the OP) who thinks they have been hard done by.

IMO - Its not about 'manning up', its about being an adult and acepting the consqences of our actions.

An unusual experience in man engenders the need to talk
Carl Jung

[Max Preload]

IMO - Its not about 'manning up', its about being an adult and acepting the consqences of our actions.

In the case of speeding the 'consequences' are entirely manufactured when there has actually been no harm done to another person or property. I'm glad I can tell the difference between right/wrong and what's legal.

[Neshi]

Its not about 'manning up', its about being an adult and acepting the consqences of our actions. In my opinion that is the same thing, just put in different words.

The consequences of speeding aren't manufactured. It might be that you can handle the speed you're going, but it's the rest of the traffic you have to worry about. That is why there is a speedlimit, to keep everything at roughly the same pace, otherwise the speed difference would be just too damn high. Seeing as people tend to drive in New Zealand I figure the limit of 100km is about right, that's as much as most of you can handle. Most cagers don't anticipate at all, not at 50km/h and sure as hell not at the 100km/h on the motorway.
Consequence of speeding the possibility of a ticket. Is it worth getting on your destination 5 minutes earlier...?

You know exactly when you are going faster than is allowed, so if you get that ticket you just pay it. that's as simple as it is.
Just like when you steal, you might get caught and go to prison or be fined, whatever. That is the consequence and you know that before you commit the crime. Even though you do no harm to another person or property (insurance pays for it) you know it is against the rules and therefore wrong. You don't start moaning when you get caught, or do you. Seeing your last post, you probably will...

[Max Preload]

The consequences of speeding aren't manufactured.

They are. The consequences (a bill to pay and some demerit pointsa) are entirely man-made. And those are the sole consequences when you're stopped for speeding and issued an infringement offence notice. Nobody was affected by your speeding.

[Neshi]

Isn't everything manufactured then? Getting a fine for running a red light, parking in a no parking zone, stuff on the roof that sticks out too far...
Nothing of this affects somebody, but it has the potential to.
See where I'm going? It doesn't have to affect somebody at this very moment, because that is exactly what we are trying to avoid... and by keeping people from getting hurt and to ensure they don't just do as they please, they fine the infringements. Just like you would punish your child for doing something bad.

[p.dath]

What a funny world you must live in where to "man up" is actually bending over and getting fucked up the arse. Make sure you wear your sailor suit.

Touche. To "man up" is to accept responsibility for your actions. The road is a public resource paid for by the public, and has had rules created by the public for its use. You may not like those rules, but when given a licence to use this public resource you accepted those rules. You even sat a test to show your understanding of those rules. Be a "man" - stick to your word - even if you don't like it. That's part of being a "man".


In the case of speeding the 'consequences' are entirely manufactured when there has actually been no harm done to another person or property. I'm glad I can tell the difference between right/wrong and what's legal.

There is only no "consequence" if no speed related accident happens. The current regime pushes the message that there is a relationship between speed and accidents - and I guess you have to agree if you accept the extremes - but the focus on speed is to great (in my opinion). We don't operate at extremes most of the time. I keep relfecting back to Great Barrier Island where they operate almost exclusively with an open road speed limit and leave it up to the road users to determine what the "best" speed to travel at is (and that is often only 30km/h).

Some roads are "5 star" roads and I think could be used at much higher speed.

So I guess I partly support you on this one. Any moving object hitting something has a consequence, but the solution is not to simply concentrate on the fact that it is moving.

[scumdog]

In the case of speeding the 'consequences' are entirely manufactured when there has actually been no harm done to another person or property.

Sort of like a driver with a blood alcohol level of 680mgm per litre of blood eh?

HE hasn't done any harm but 'somebody' decided that anything over 400 was dangerous - even when 'no harm was done to another person or property', obviously the 'consequences' here too are entirely manufactured.:whistle:

[Jantar]

...You know exactly when you are going faster than is allowed, so if you get that ticket you just pay it. that's as simple as it is. ......
I must have missed something here. Where did the OP say he was going faster than allowed? He did admit to getting a ticket, but as far as I can see, he has never admitted to exceeding the speed limit. It appears that you have found him guilty merely on the officer's say so.

[Rogue Rider]

What a funny world you must live in where to "man up" is actually bending over and getting fucked up the arse. Make sure you wear your sailor suit.

LoL..... mmm, some people live in a perfect world perhaps, me, I have good intentions, but ultimately I make mistakes..... Why should I take it on the chin, if I make a mistake. MOT had grace, and demerits were lower. POPO, well, they be mean most of the time and are always "outa Huntin" like bubba from the bayou huntin some gators.......

[Neshi]

I must have missed something here. Where did the OP say he was going faster than allowed? He did admit to getting a ticket, but as far as I can see, he has never admitted to exceeding the speed limit. It appears that you have found him guilty merely on the officer's say so.

I was replying to Max Preload, not the OP...

[Maha]

So were you doing 112 when pinged ?

I got off a 119kph ticket, what I didn't mention on here was, the cop said to me '' I beleive you were going quicker than that, but I locked you on at 119''.
He was correct, but at the end of the day, it did not matter, he got me at 119 and then those above him let me off.
I said in my thread, a ticket is just the starting point.

[Berries]

My question was an innocent one aimed at the OP. We have no idea from the post whether it was a fair cop and he got off on a technicality or it was a complete BS charge. Without any indication either way it is a bit of a pointless post. Do we blame the cops for being bastards, or do we go rar rar rah for fighting the system ? I guess we’ll never know, the OP has gone all quiet.


Why should I take it on the chin, if I make a mistake.
Because that's life ?

[Max Preload]

So you lot are quite happy with the concept of punishment for acts that haven't actually affected anyone? Pathetic.

[Neshi]

Why does always someone have to get hurt before something is valid...
something with locking the barn and a stolen horse.. :no:

[davereid]

It's just plain stupid to abuse the system to get your ticket annuled while you were fined for a traffic infringement you commited. Like it's been already said, WE are ALL paying for it. It would be a whole lot easier to just pay up if you commited the infringement. "You made your bed, now you have to lie in it" is the saying... just man up and take responsibility for your actions.

Its not abusing the system to plead not guilty.

In fact, that is the Raison d'être for having a legal system.

Actual guilt is not relevant, a not guilty plea does not mean you did not do the crime, indeed it is not even a claim you did not do the crime. It means you believe the allegation cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Many will be convicted of crimes they did not commit. Many will not be convicted of crimes they did commit.

You are accused according to the laws of the land. You have no choice on them. The same laws also allow you the right to plead not guilty.

You may chose not to exercise your half of the law. But it is foolish to criticise those who do.

[Neshi]

that's just laywer talk to talk stuff that is wrong, right in my opinion.
Like stating that their client is innocent till proven guilty although they KNOW he is guilty, just so they can sleep at night.

You know you comitted the crime. It does not matter they can't prove it to the letter of the law. You know it, the policeman that gave you the ticket knows it. That's enough for me. If I commit a crime, i'll have the balls to face whatever consequences there may be. I won't crawl in all possible directions to get out of it. But hey, that's my opinion.
Just go ahead and plead not guilty while in fact you are. I don't care at all... I just think taxpayers money can be spend better than cases like this. I think it is just hyprocritical to do this with a right mind, and then moan about where all that ACC money is going you all are paying. Probably to cagers that think along the same lines as you.

[davereid]

There is no moral argument against what you are saying.

But, it's simply how it works.

Recently, we watched half a dozen policemen, batoning and pepper spraying a disturbed prisoner. The footage was widely circulated and it was very clear that the police had done what was alleged.

But they exercised their right to plead not guilty, and the court agreed that they had the right to use force against the prisoner.

Everyone knew that the prisoner was disturbed.
Everyone knew that he did not need to be controlled.
Everyone knew that all the police need to do was shut the door, turn the stereo up, and ignore him.

But the police had the right to use force to control him.

Its the same for you.

Its a legal system, not a justice system.
Sometimes the tide is against you. Sometimes its not. You choose which way you want to swim, and when.

Personally, if I want to to back to the beach, and that's the way the tide is going, that's the way I will swim.
Even if I don't deserve to get back to the beach. Cos there will be plenty of times I do deserve to get back there, but the tide is sweeping me out to sea.

[p.dath]

So you lot are quite happy with the concept of punishment for acts that haven't actually affected anyone? Pathetic.

By the time someone is affected it's too late.

That's like saying your not going to bother stearing around corners because it doesn't have any effect - until you hit something - and then it is too late.

I also assume you are pro-drink driving? Because it doesn't have any effect, till someone is killed?

[davereid]

You know you comitted the crime. It does not matter they can't prove it to the letter of the law.

So at what point does it change ?

For example....

(a) You NEVER break the law
(b) You break the law, and will immediately go to the police station and confess
(c) You break the law, and will not worry about it if not caught
(d) You break the law, and if caught will just pay up
(e) You break the law and won't cough up if it can't be proven

I think you are just assuming the moral high ground by choosing option (d). But in fact, you only hold the moral high ground if you choose option (a) or possibly (b).

[Neshi]

we're talking about complaining about it and pleading not guilty after being caught. that has nothing to do with the options you give.

[scumdog]

So you lot are quite happy with the concept of punishment for acts that haven't actually affected anyone? Pathetic.

You're dead right - only punish drink-drivers if they actually kill or injure somebody eh!:shifty:

[Patrick]

A system open to change, in my opinion. People are just getting really bloody sick of being shit on.

It's not just the police, theres ACC going up, rates never stop going up, RUC keeps going up, perhaps you can add a few yourself. It's pretty plain its just a big money grab.

Steve

Out of these, there is one "money grab" that is easily avoided, and by far the easiest to avoid.... but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....... still they speed and still they moan.... and blame all sorts of things for it. I am more interested in finding the prick who was holding the gun to their head, forcing them to speed. He is an elusive bugger.


What a funny world you must live in where to "man up" is actually bending over and getting fucked up the arse. Make sure you wear your sailor suit.

Is that why people speed? They like sailor suits and anal sex? Weird.......


In the case of speeding the 'consequences' are entirely manufactured when there has actually been no harm done to another person or property. I'm glad I can tell the difference between right/wrong and what's legal.


So you lot are quite happy with the concept of punishment for acts that haven't actually affected anyone? Pathetic.

Like that stupid bitch on the cop show late last night? Pissed out of her tree, had made it home.... "But I didn't hit anyone or anything." She hadn't affected anyone.... well... kind of..... she affected the person following her, who rang the Police to say she had crossed the centre line a number of times, oncoming traffic and all.... Was well over twice the limit - but hey, she didn't really "affect anyone."

So I take you are supporting drink driving then?

[myvice]

Good luck, I for one, hope you get off it.
Now, is this aiding and abetting, moral support, or the anarchic drive toward the downfall of society?


Save it for the track Rossi.

112? Where do you race? Round your kitchen?

[Jantar]

If you are going to dredge up an old thread then at least read it. The cops withdrew the ticket, so he is already off it.

[Patrick]

But hang on Jantar.... MOre importantly, DB and Max didn't reply to my last.... perhaps that was his aim?