Speeding ticket advice?

[FROSTY]

hey guys I'm all for the whole do the crime -do the time thing. But I have to ask a strictly legal type question.
If ou are pulled over by a patrol car for a speeding offence and you Quite specifically request to sight the speed reading.
If the officer is unuable to show you the locked radar,speedo etc where do you stand legally.
The specific situation was that i was on the motorway in the "fast" lane and a car was in front doing 90-95 km/h.
After following for a distance with no sighn of the other driver pulling over I pulled left and accellerated to 110-115km/h-Mrs kaz was beside me and noticed the speed. Local patrol car was following -pulled us over and claimed I was doing 127 km/h.
I said nope maybee 115 during the overtake but no more. Can I see the locked speedo reading. officer said nope I unlocked it after locking at 127 "I dont lie"
Again hey no question it was a fair cop at 110 maybee 115 but not 127.

[Gremlin]

I don't believe a cop is required to show you the reading.

I use a GPS as an independent third party...

[Road kill]

It makes no difference to anything if you see the read out or not.

People have probably got off tickets because the cop couldn't prove his case in the face of some really cunning lawyer,,,but inless your name is Bob Jones or Sir some other such cunt it just becomes the cops word against the yours,,,,so your fucked aye.

[PeeJay]

hey guys I'm all for the whole do the crime -do the time thing. But I have to ask a strictly legal type question.
If ou are pulled over by a patrol car for a speeding offence and you Quite specifically request to sight the speed reading.
If the officer is unuable to show you the locked radar,speedo etc where do you stand legally.
The specific situation was that i was on the motorway in the "fast" lane and a car was in front doing 90-95 km/h.
After following for a distance with no sighn of the other driver pulling over I pulled left and accellerated to 110-115km/h-Mrs kaz was beside me and noticed the speed. Local patrol car was following -pulled us over and claimed I was doing 127 km/h.
I said nope maybee 115 during the overtake but no more. Can I see the locked speedo reading. officer said nope I unlocked it after locking at 127 "I dont lie"
Again hey no question it was a fair cop at 110 maybee 115 but not 127.

No requirement to show you anything.
The proof that you were speeding at 127km/hr is simply he said you were, end of story.
In this case you are accused and assumed guilty. You want to get off you have to prove your innocence, or cast serious doubts on the officers accusation. The state/police dont have to prove your guilt.
At the end of the day it comes down to his word against yours.
And in the grand scheme of things your word counts for very little.
Unless you can come up with something to show the cop may have been "mistaken", eg gps logs, TV crew happened to be filming nearby you dont have a show.
If you take it to court and accuse him of lying you better be able to back it up.
End result, another pissed off person whose respect for the police drops a notch.

[Berries]

Local patrol car was following -pulled us over and claimed I was doing 127 km/h.
If I am going to undertake at 130km/h I'll check the mirrors first for any plain Holdens or 'cars of interest'.

If I really was only doing 110 then I'd argue it but one person against a sworn officer isn't going to work unless some lawyer finds a bit of previous on him. And if you have previous speeding offences on your licence then I'd say suck it up. How many times have you got away with 160km/h plus?

[Edbear]

A. GPS records max speed so a good witness. Only make sure you zero the record before each trip of you have gone too fast or it may be used in evidence against you. :Police:

[FJRider]

If you choose to fight it and take it to court ... the judge will choose between taking your word or the Cops. If you admit to "exceeding the posted speed limit" ... which is the minimum, and with you asking to see the readout (and refused) would be most likely.
However ... the likely fine will NOT be the same as if the Cop had issued a ticket for that traffic infringement. It would probably end up a lot more than the one he DID issue ... especially with costs added.
Pay the fine and moan here on KB. It will be the cheaper solution.

But YOUR choice though ...

[davereid]

No locked reading = reasonable doubt.

There are several previous decisions by the courts about this.

Police v McHerron Sept 2004 is the latest, and it was based on a previous high court decision.

Unless the policeman has other evidence - like he asked you why you were speeding and you answered in a manner that could be taken to be a confession, the ticket is junk. Unfortunately, admitting to 115 may put you in this category.

However, don't write to the police about. The place to dispute tickets is a court room.

[caspernz]

Meh, this story would be better if the slow car in the fast lane was a mufti unit to elicit said behaviour from an impatient driver coming up behind. You took the bait...

Sadly the boys in blue don't need to invent tactics to achieve their quota, for there's so many of us out there just waving that 'nab me' flag, including me on the odd occasion...:devil2:

[rastuscat]

No locked reading = reasonable doubt.

There are several previous decisions by the courts about this.

Police v McHerron Sept 2004 is the latest, and it was based on a previous high court decision.

Unless the policeman has other evidence - like he asked you why you were speeding and you answered in a manner that could be taken to be a confession, the ticket is junk. Unfortunately, admitting to 115 may put you in this category.

However, don't write to the police about. The place to dispute tickets is a court room.

Lots of defended tickets since 2004. That must have been a really good decision, to be the latest.

Absolutely agree, the place to argue tickets is the court, not the Popo, and not KB.

[Scuba_Steve]

legally the cops has to prove your guilt, they way our corrupt system works you have to prove innocence
If all you want to do is lower your speed usually courts are pretty easy with that most time you don't even have to show just a write in. They want a "success" so they can move up the corruption ladder they don't really care the value of "success".
But if you want to lower it just goto court accept that you were "speeding" but argue that the numbers too high, give your number & usually the cop there will accept it making it even easier again cause then there's an agreement & the judge just has to go 'OK' rather than make a decision.

[kiwifruit]

I've gotten off tickets like this before. It can be a bit of work but quite doable.

[Banditbandit]

Most of the above ... the best you will be able to do is convince the courts that your were only doing 115 - which wil be a lower fine and fewer demerit points ...

But what were you doing??? Didn't you check the rearview mirror before accelerating !!!!

[Haggis2]

Whats the difference in punishment between 115 and 127? Is it worth disputing? Is your speedo accurate?

[DEATH_INC.]

I lost my licence because of a lying asshole like you have encountered. His word as a cop was all it took. Next time do a runner.

[c4.]

Next time just lean on the horn and flash your high beam, most civilised countries the slowpoke will pull over. I'm on a personal crusade in Auckland to educate overtaking lane hogs.

Or you could tell the courts you were under the amerous attentions of your fine lady wife and a leg cramp hit where you temporarily exceeded the posted speed limit before you safely returned to 100kms, luckily no one was hurt. Think of the children.. Why does no one think of the children????

But seriously, have you got that bike to the track yet, been watching for ya but haven't seen you.....yet.
Respect
C4

[scumdog]

Whats the difference in punishment between 115 and 127? Is it worth disputing? Is your speedo accurate?

Extra $110 and 15 more demerits (from memory...)

[scracha]

Been there, done that. You're pretty much fucked and unless you're getting enough points to lose your license it's not worth the time off work or risk of additional court costs. Also agree that writing to the fuzz is a waste of fuckin time. If you're gonna argue it...you gotta do it in court.

The lying popo's (luckily the minority) are gonna get caught on cam one day.

[Berries]

Absolutely agree, the place to argue tickets is the court, not the Popo, and not KB.
Nah, KB is exactly the place to argue it. Entertainment with a capital F.

[BigAl]

If I was overtaking that would be a speed I would get up to or even more as the longer you have to spend on the other side of the road the more likely you are to end up dead in a head on. With this being in the left lane the urgency from a safety perspective is not there so a lower overtaking speed could be understandable. Why does in the case of an overtaking manuevere the speed limit not be allowed higher I wonder?

'cause even if one is overtaking, one is not supposed to exceed the speed limit. :weird:

Obviously safety is not an important factor in this proceedure.

[Scouse]

hey guys I'm all for the whole do the crime -do the time thing. But I have to ask a strictly legal type question.
If ou are pulled over by a patrol car for a speeding offence and you Quite specifically request to sight the speed reading.
If the officer is unuable to show you the locked radar,speedo etc where do you stand legally.
The specific situation was that i was on the motorway in the "fast" lane and a car was in front doing 90-95 km/h.
After following for a distance with no sighn of the other driver pulling over I pulled left and accellerated to 110-115km/h-Mrs kaz was beside me and noticed the speed. Local patrol car was following -pulled us over and claimed I was doing 127 km/h.
I said nope maybee 115 during the overtake but no more. Can I see the locked speedo reading. officer said nope I unlocked it after locking at 127 "I dont lie"
Again hey no question it was a fair cop at 110 maybee 115 but not 127.you are a weasly chock nob suck it up you were speeding end of story

[davereid]

After following for a distance with no sighn of the other driver pulling over I pulled left and accellerated to 110-115km/h-Mrs kaz was beside me and noticed the speed. Local patrol car was following -pulled us over and claimed I was doing 127 km/h.
I said nope maybee 115 during the overtake but no more. Can I see the locked speedo reading. officer said nope I unlocked it after locking at 127 "I dont lie"

Its almost 100% certain he lied.

The Radar cant lock fastest target, only strongest target. This is because the manufacturer recognises that doppler radar can't be used when there are multiple vehicles in the beam. There are a lot of technical reasons for this, but if the policeman has claimed he locked you, when you were the fastest target, but a larger slower target - the car was there, he is telling a fib.

[scumdog]

Its almost 100% certain he lied.

The Radar cant lock fastest target, only strongest target. This is because the manufacturer recognises that doppler radar can't be used when there are multiple vehicles in the beam. There are a lot of technical reasons for this, but if the policeman has claimed he locked you, when you were the fastest target, but a larger slower target - the car was there, he is telling a fib.

Really??:confused:

[red mermaid]

Here is your expert witness.

Get him to court and he will help you get off, without charging you a cent.

Yeah Right!


Its almost 100% certain he lied.

The Radar cant lock fastest target, only strongest target. This is because the manufacturer recognises that doppler radar can't be used when there are multiple vehicles in the beam. There are a lot of technical reasons for this, but if the policeman has claimed he locked you, when you were the fastest target, but a larger slower target - the car was there, he is telling a fib.

[davereid]

Here is a screen shot of the NZ Police Stalker Manual. It seems pretty clear.

[red mermaid]

Not really, how about you explain from your point of view.

[Madness]

I lost my licence because of a lying asshole like you have encountered. His word as a cop was all it took. Next time do a runner.
Hehehe. You haven't become cynical in your old age have you bud?


I'm on a personal crusade in Auckland to educate overtaking lane hogs.C4
So far you're failing miserably. As a Wellingtonian living in Auckland (I always get that out there IRL) I find the attitude of Auckland motorway users quite shocking in this regard. I think it's time for large caliber firearms.


Not really, how about you explain from your point of view.
This thread is heading towards epic.

:corn:

[scumdog]

Here is a screen shot of the NZ Police Stalker Manual. It seems pretty clear.

:jerry::whistle:

[Swoop]

Damn, a missed opportunity to issue a ticket for failing to keep left.

Not like that ever happens in NZ though.


Frosty, the NW is a real bad example of retards who can't "keep left". Sadly.

[rastuscat]

Here is a screen shot of the NZ Police Stalker Manual. It seems pretty clear.

It was pretty clear until the latest model handset appeared. The new handset can lock the fastest reading.

[red mermaid]

What you mean Davidreid is using out of date information, or just making stuff up?

[Coldrider]

One smartphone with on board gps, how common and cheap are they?, installed with free app 'my tracks', is all that is needed.

[red mermaid]

Really?

You may need to read the rules of evidence if you are going to push that barrow.

[davereid]

What you mean Davidreid is using out of date information, or just making stuff up?

I accept my manual is a couple of years old, I have just requested the latest one, plus guidelines for radar use.

But made it up ? Nope. I can always back up everything I say.

Unlike the cop who is alleging 127 km/hr after apparently locking it then deleting it.

Sort of begs the question though doesn't it.

If the radar is capable of locking the reading, and the cop says he did lock the reading, why would he delete the reading unless the evidence was a lower speed or didn't exist at all ?

[Zedder]

I accept my manual is a couple of years old, I have just requested the latest one, plus guidelines for radar use.

But made it up ? Nope. I can always back up everything I say.

Unlike the cop who is alleging 127 km/hr after apparently locking it then deleting it.

Sort of begs the question though doesn't it.

If the radar is capable of locking the reading, and the cop says he did lock the reading, why would he delete the reading unless the evidence was a lower speed or didn't exist at all ?

Good post and very good question about deleting the reading.

[Coldrider]

Really?

You may need to read the rules of evidence if you are going to push that barrow.what evidence?

[Coldrider]

Really?

You may need to read the rules of evidence if you are going to push that barrow.how does a privately owned speed camera become evidence for a conviction or more?

http://www.christchurchstar.co.nz/news/private-speed-camera-catches-boy-racers/1009205/

link to the dudes other case mentioned re gps http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3596433

[davereid]

how does a privately owned speed camera become evidence for a conviction or more?http://www.christchurchstar.co.nz/news/private-speed-camera-catches-boy-racers/1009205/link to the dudes other case mentioned re gps http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3596433

Good articles, which demonstrate that the courts will accept a motorists GPS data.

It also shows that the court is also aware that doppler radar, (as I have raved before) cannot identify the target vehicle.

A motorcycle 100m from the radar may well have a reflection smaller than the truck 400m away.

[Coldrider]

Years ago you used to be able to get off if the cop was unable to prove radar "Calibrabtion" in the last 6months or other specific shedualed period. Maybe today's computerised systems do not need frequent calibration.Its probably being calibrated in Masterton today against the WW2 Lufftwaffe aircraft it was designed to detect.