A question for Spudchucka

[pete376403]

Spud, I was on the Hutt Road on Friday, and noted a police operation in progress - one guy with a laser hiding in the bushes, a number of HP cars and a bike down the road ticketing. The question is, if this went to court, who is the prosecution witness - the ticket writer or the laser operator. If the ticket writer, isn't his evidence hearsay? ("I was told by xxx that this car was speeding, etc") as he has never seen the laser readout.
Or can police write out tickets on behalf of others?

If one of these things ever went as far as a jury trial it should be possible for a defence lawyer to get the charge dismissed - reasonable doubt and so on. Where is the evidence that could be presented to the court?

[matthewt]

Spud, I was on the Hutt Road on Friday, and noted a police operation in progress - one guy with a laser hiding in the bushes, a number of HP cars and a bike down the road ticketing. The question is, if this went to court, who is the prosecution witness - the ticket writer or the laser operator. If the ticket writer, isn't his evidence hearsay? ("I was told by xxx that this car was speeding, etc") as he has never seen the laser readout.
Or can police write out tickets on behalf of others?

If one of these things ever went as far as a jury trial it should be possible for a defence lawyer to get the charge dismissed - reasonable doubt and so on. Where is the evidence that could be presented to the court?

I've been done like this before. Clocked by guy with a laser in a parked car and then chased by a cop on a bike. I asked to see the read-out and he said it would of been gone by now and anyway they didn't have to show it to me.

[dangerous]

I've been done like this before. Clocked by guy with a laser in a parked car and then chased by a cop on a bike. I asked to see the read-out and he said it would of been gone by now and anyway they didn't have to show it to me.

So true......... the other day I watched from work a little sting going down, one cop up a private drive with a laser and radio telephone, shoting then radioing ahead the results. Now what if he got somthing wrong? nowdays you cant fight the law its there word against yours.

As they were parked outside work when setting up I counted 8 bods and 6 cars....... shit what a lot of wages to pay for one speed trap :argh:

[k14]

So true......... the other day I watched from work a little sting going down, one cop up a private drive with a laser and radio telephone, shoting then radioing ahead the results. Now what if he got somthing wrong? nowdays you cant fight the law its there word against yours.

As they were parked outside work when setting up I counted 8 bods and 6 cars....... shit what a lot of wages to pay for one speed trap :argh:

I wouldn't worry, I'm sure they made more than enough to pay the wages and the friday afternoon drinks :2guns:

[Skyryder]

Spud, I was on the Hutt Road on Friday, and noted a police operation in progress - one guy with a laser hiding in the bushes, a number of HP cars and a bike down the road ticketing. The question is, if this went to court, who is the prosecution witness - the ticket writer or the laser operator. If the ticket writer, isn't his evidence hearsay? ("I was told by xxx that this car was speeding, etc") as he has never seen the laser readout.
Or can police write out tickets on behalf of others?

If one of these things ever went as far as a jury trial it should be possible for a defence lawyer to get the charge dismissed - reasonable doubt and so on. Where is the evidence that could be presented to the court?

The court would take the officers word on the grounds that he/she would have no reason to lie whereas the court would hold the view that you do, so as to save yourself from a conviction and a court imposed fine. You would need to raise issues about the officers integrity for a defence or proove that the equipment was defective and gave an innaccurate readout. If there was a history of harrassment from the ticketing officer or the radar shooter that too would be useful for a defence.

Skyryder

[k14]

What about the quota system? Wouldn't that be a reason to lie? So that they don't have to work overtime to reach their quota??

[Skyryder]

What about the quota system? Wouldn't that be a reason to lie? So that they don't have to work overtime to reach their quota??

No it would not. You would have to supply evidence that if the officer did not reach his quota disciplinary action would be taken against the officer. Not very likely. Even if you could proove that the officer was operating to a quota the Police have stats that would show that x number of offences occur in x number of days hours, whatever. This is where the quota figures would come from if indeed they exist or you could proove that they exist. The simple fact K14 is, if comes to your word against a Police Officer's then the court, in the absent of conflicting evidence, will give more creedence to the Officer than to yourself on the grounds previously stated.

Skyryder

[Ghost Lemur]

So much for innocent until proven guilty aye. This looks very much like a case of guilty as soon as a cop decides you are. There is nothing stopping them from abusing this power (I'm not saying they do), and there seems to be a lacking in safety measures.

[DEATH_INC.]

So much for innocent until proven guilty aye. This looks very much like a case of guilty as soon as a cop decides you are. There is nothing stopping them from abusing this power (I'm not saying they do), and there seems to be a lacking in safety measures.

I've been done (and lost my licence) by a :Police: who made up a bullshit story.The judge simply said 'he's an officer with X years experience' and that was good enough for him.Unless you have witnesses to help you they will win.
JUSTICE system?NOT!!! :finger: :angry2:

The real annoying thing is he could have prolly got me legally if he'd followed me a bit longer.... :whistle: :o

[scumdog]

I've been done (and lost my licence) by a :Police: who made up a bullshit story.The judge simply said 'he's an officer with X years experience' and that was good enough for him.Unless you have witnesses to help you they will win.
JUSTICE system?NOT!!! :finger: :angry2:

The real annoying thing is he could have prolly got me legally if he'd followed me a bit longer.... :whistle: :o

If that story is true Death inc then that sucks on at least two counts (1) it's immoral and unethical/illegal and (2) it's going to make the next cops job more difficult when he has to speak to you, regardless of how decent he actually is.
Sorry to hear your story :argh:

[DEATH_INC.]

If that story is true Death inc then that sucks on at least two counts (1) it's immoral and unethical/illegal and (2) it's going to make the next cops job more difficult when he has to speak to you, regardless of how decent he actually is.
Sorry to hear your story :argh:

Yeah it's true,it was about 4 yrs ago now but I won't forget it.I take each officer as I meet them though,I've met some decent one's since,but I'm afraid it has (also a few other things)killed my faith in the cops and the justice system.....
This is also a large part of the reason I often don't stop anymore......

[riffer]

SOP for the Welly police, unfortunately Pete.

It's happened to me - 35 demerits and $170, iirc.

See http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=2056 for more.

[wkid_one]

Be warned - they also do this on Petone Esplanade - the park in the Power Building on the left hand side heading to the motorway and laser people over the bushes then politely ask you to pull over.

Friday's one was a monster effort tho - good on them.....I counted 6 people pulled over on my way out of town and 5 news ones on my way back in to town....

Interestly enuf - I 'may have' blazed past them all while talking on my cellphone (my hands free kit wasn't working) - which I would consider to be a worse offence than - speeding? (should I have been talking on it of course :innocent: :innocent:

[spudchucka]

Spud, I was on the Hutt Road on Friday, and noted a police operation in progress - one guy with a laser hiding in the bushes, a number of HP cars and a bike down the road ticketing. The question is, if this went to court, who is the prosecution witness - the ticket writer or the laser operator. If the ticket writer, isn't his evidence hearsay? ("I was told by xxx that this car was speeding, etc") as he has never seen the laser readout.
Or can police write out tickets on behalf of others?

If one of these things ever went as far as a jury trial it should be possible for a defence lawyer to get the charge dismissed - reasonable doubt and so on. Where is the evidence that could be presented to the court?
The evidence that would convict the speeder in that instance is the evidence provided by the operator of the laser. The cop who wrote the ticket is just taking care of the administrative portion of the infringement notice. If it went to Court then the tapes from the communication centre would have to be disclosed. This would have recoreded the radio transmission stating the description / registration number of the vehicle and its speed. The ticket writer would have to be called to Court as well as he would be the person to ID the driver, the laser operator could not reasonably do that.

Could you argue that this was hearsay? Possibly but there are times when hearsay evidence is admissable. I don't think this would be a strong defence but then I'm not a lawyer - they tend to think somewhat differently.

[spudchucka]

What about the quota system? Wouldn't that be a reason to lie? So that they don't have to work overtime to reach their quota??
No. If a cop was found to be lying in Court he would undoubtedly be charged and his career would be toast. Even if he managed to salvage his career his credability would be shot. Why would anyone put their career on the line for a poxy traffic ticket?

[marty]

it's not hearsay, as ticket writer is simpky doing a task that he has been instructed to do - the laser operator gives the evidence of the offence - the ticket writer gives the evidence of ID. in any case, ID is not really the issue, for a couple of reasons. 1. dock ID's 8 months after the fact, when the cop may have dealt with 100's of motorists since, are not usually held to be reliable and 2, if the accused is denying the offence as he wasn't the driver, the ID issue would have been sorted out long before. it is unlikely that anyone would get away with simply stating 'it wasn't me, i dunno who it was, but it wasn't me', especially if they tried to say that - for the first time - in the dock.

the 2 cop evidence thing is no different to a camera operator giving evidence as to a camera ticket (they operated the camera), and the O/C bureau giving evidence that the ticket was produced by his office, or one cop seeing an offence (say, 2 people fighting), and calling another officer to arrest that person. that scenario happens all the time on the cameras in the cities.

[Indo]

This is also a large part of the reason I often don't stop anymore......

Err, how does this make you any different than the dickhead up North who killed the young girl and himself because he would rather risk the lives of others than face up to the consequences of his actions...

If you don't like the law either get out of the country or do something to change it. Otherwise your nothing more than your typical run of the mill criminal who needs to spend some time in jail.

[Lou Girardin]

Unfortunately some cops do lie in court. The classic one is identification of the offender months after he was originally caught. I've seen furtive discussions over which guy in court was him, because the cop just didn't know.
The 'why would you risk your job for a traffic ticket' rational doesn't work. People risk their jobs to look at porn at work, human nature is a strange beast.
Lou

[spudchucka]

Unfortunately some cops do lie in court. The classic one is identification of the offender months after he was originally caught. I've seen furtive discussions over which guy in court was him, because the cop just didn't know.
The 'why would you risk your job for a traffic ticket' rational doesn't work. People risk their jobs to look at porn at work, human nature is a strange beast.
Lou
Perhaps you were prepared to lie and risk your career for a traffic ticket or check out porn sites at work but don't assume others are. What have you got to back that statement up?

ID is always an issue that gets played out in Court when the hearing is months after the incident. There is little chance that a cop will remember with clarity the person he wrote a speeding ticket to 12 months before but like Marty said if ID is an issue it will be raised well before it gets to Court. As for arrest matters there are always photographs and fingerprints to clear up issues of ID if the cop does not remember what the offender looked like or they have significantly altered their appearance by the time they get to Court.

Cops deal with dozens of similar incident every week and by the time a year rolls around they have probably dealt with hundreds of people over similar matters. The public on the other hand recalls with great clarity these incident because it does not happen to them every day.

[marty]

a dock ID can be reliable if there was a 'significant issue' during the ticket process - maybe the driver nutted off or had a distinct tattoo/scar/birthmark. the cop should note a brief description on the back of the ticket anyway to refresh his memory, but in my experience it is not ID, but unfairness and technicality that is the issue. it is a brave lawyer, or more likely a bush lawyer, that will defend on ID. it does happen though - i lost a drugs case when 2 defendants were charged together, after i found some cannabis during a routine stop, turned up to court with shaved heads, wearing the same clothes. they looked so similar i couldn't confidently say who was who (this was 18 months after it happened), and the judge threw it out.

[Two Smoker]

Err, how does this make you any different than the dickhead up North who killed the young girl and himself because he would rather risk the lives of others than face up to the consequences of his actions...

If you don't like the law either get out of the country or do something to change it. Otherwise your nothing more than your typical run of the mill criminal who needs to spend some time in jail.
If you knew Death Inc. and had see him ride, you would know that he is a extremely capable rider...... AS for the rider that killed Erin Burgess (a friend of mine as i went to school with her) you would know that the person that was running from the cops was high on dugs and not capable of riding a motorbike safely at normal speeds let alone high speeds.........

[Indo]

If you knew Death Inc. and had see him ride, you would know that he is a extremely capable rider......

Err the my point was running from the Police can and often does result in the loss of innocent peoples lives. Nothing justifies doing a runner, especially not trying to avoid a traffic infringement, thats just pathetic.

IMO it makes him both a tosser and no different than any other criminal.

[vifferman]

I've been done (and lost my licence) by a :Police: who made up a bullshit story.The judge simply said 'he's an officer with X years experience' and that was good enough for him.Unless you have witnesses to help you they will win.
JUSTICE system?NOT!!! :finger: :angry2:

Sorry, Mr Death - don't expect justice, because it's not a JUSTICE system - it's a LEGAL system. It's all about laws, enforcement and prosecution of said laws, and penalties for breaking said laws. The police and courts don't deal with justice, just upholding the letter of the law.

[aff-man]

I thought you didn't have to accept a ticket or at least you have to be shown the laser read out before a ticket could be issued. My bro got pulled over and when asked for the laser readout the cop let him go(probably pulled him over for driving in the middle of the day with a school uniform on). So that means either the ticket writer has to wait untill the laser officer comes and shows you the laser or you don't have to accept the ticket. I have had enough bullshit from a cop who tried to lie his way through giving me a ticket (hence my bro asking for the readout)

[pete376403]

Nope. they don't have to show you the readout, and they don't have to write out the ticket for what ever the readout displays, either. The highest number they saw, even before the radar/laser locked on, is what they *can* do you for. How well you talk/grovel determines what they *will* do you for. Also be aware that radar/laser is infallible, because the govt passed a law saying it was.
And the courts will believe them every time over you. Basically you are guilty as soon as the cop decides.
"repugnant to natural justice" is a phrase that springs to mind

[SPman]

.."repugnant to natural justice" is a phrase that springs to mind
Yes, people should stop confusing justice, with the law. Two different animals with only a passing similarity. Sometimes they coincide, but rarely intentionaly! :confused2

[wkid_one]

Isn't it a case tho of that 'we know the rules, let's play to them'? It is not like they are changing the speed limit randomly - we elect to break the limit - why whinge when we are caught?

ChudSpucker and the like may cop an attitude etc - but at the end of the day, if we were obeying the law, we wouldn't be standing on the side of the road? There is a chain of events - and the one thing you can do to stop being a 'victim' of a road side taxing - is not break the law. Simple really. Either that - or you can break the law and take your medicine.

All this discussion comes to one point: You do control whether or not you get a ticket, and it isn't your attitude, your argument or your ticket analysing skills - it is plain and simply the control over your right hand!

[marty]

it is plain and simply the control over your right hand![/B]

what you do in the privacy of your own car is up to you wkid, but good point anyway.

with the argument that you must be shown the radar speed before being written a ticket, should we be stopping at a camera car to view the captured speed? i don't think so.

[wkid_one]

what you do in the privacy of your own car is up to you wkid, but good point anyway.


Hahahaha - I already thought of that response - I am left handed however!

[Lou Girardin]

That's assuming a less than realistic view of an average drivers speed control skills. Remember, 11km/h over will get you pinged. How many of us have inadvertently done that?

[Lou Girardin]

Perhaps you were prepared to lie and risk your career for a traffic ticket or check out porn sites at work but don't assume others are. What have you got to back that statement up?
.

Let me clarify for you; I witnessed the first, several times. You know how it goes, I saw it, so it happened.
As for the latter, read the papers. Even Judges do it.
Lou

[scumdog]

Isn't it a case tho of that 'we know the rules, let's play to them'? It is not like they are changing the speed limit randomly - we elect to break the limit - why whinge when we are caught?

ChudSpucker and the like may cop an attitude etc - but at the end of the day, if we were obeying the law, we wouldn't be standing on the side of the road? There is a chain of events - and the one thing you can do to stop being a 'victim' of a road side taxing - is not break the law. Simple really. Either that - or you can break the law and take your medicine.

All this discussion comes to one point: You do control whether or not you get a ticket, and it isn't your attitude, your argument or your ticket analysing skills - it is plain and simply the control over your right hand!

Wkid one, that is THE most straight to the point realistic and practical comment I have heard on the subject. The LAW says 100kph and that's it.
YOU go faster - YOU pay, simple. - don't worry if it reduces road deaths etc, it's the law.
The people that moan about the speed limit probably also moan "I was only away ten minutes over the time on the meter" or "the tyre is only 10% under the minimum" or "my rego is only out by amonth and a half" etc etc :angry2:

[RiderInBlack]

Err the my point was running from the Police can and often does result in the loss of innocent peoples lives. Nothing justifies doing a runner, especially not trying to avoid a traffic infringement, thats just pathetic.

IMO it makes him both a tosser and no different than any other criminal.
Agree, runners are inherintly stupid:stupid: The best thing the cops can do for you if you are in to runners is take your vehicle away from you and put it in a compactor (it'll save you having to do it yourself!).
I don't care what your skill level is, the road is not the track and you are sharing it with a lot of low skill drivers/riders (not to mention various wildlife, and unpredictable road surfaces), pull you head in before you become a stat. (and/or take someone else's life).