Dangerous driving charge - Victory!

[Funkyfly]

Heres some history.......

I was charged with dangerous driving, and failing to stop, speeds in excess of 180kph.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=19120

After a lot of mucking around the case finally got to court, 9 months after the fact!

Anyway the case went really well, The officer got up and gave his detailed account and showed a video of the road in question, he also had a big layout of maps showing the road, i have no doubt in my mind he thought he had everything covered, his testimony took about 45mins i suppose.

Then it was time for my lawyer to cross examine him, David (my lawyer) started off getting the officer to confirm key facts in his statement, then he proceeded to go over each one with a fine tooth comb, asking for numerous details about each, like speed, distance, traffic etc.

We knew there were a number of conflicting statements in the officers notes vs. his summary of facts, My Lawyer picked away at the officer highlighting how he got it wrong in judging speed and distance on numerous occasions, then he put to the officer what my three witnesses saw (which is totally different to what the officer just stated) and that i wasnt travelling anywhere near 150 let alone 180 which he alleged, the officer by this time was starting to get rattled and annoyed, there was no end in sight to my lawyers questions, they just kept coming, at time i even thought it was a bit drawn out, but it had the desired affect in working the officer up.

When questioned about his attitude towards me after he pulled me up, he had to admit it wasn't professional and that he was running on adrenaline.

Then came the cool bit, questions on why he didn't follow the police procedure for chases, Which i had obtained a copy of under the official information act. When comparing the transcript of the officers call to the communications centre i noted he didn't even try to follow the policy. I gave my lawyer instructions to question the officer hard on this as it would put him in a bad light.

When my lawyer started down this road the police prosecutor tried to stop it, asking what relevance it had, but the judge said he wanted to hear it, my lawyer proceed to hand a copy of the pursuit procedure to the judge, the prosecutor and the officer, he then went over a number of points in the policy, he asked the officer if he was familiar with the document, to which he had to sate "yes". My lawyer then went to question the officer further on a point asking if he had followed it, the officer butted in and said "I know where your going with this, but may i remind you council its only a guideline to be followed if possible" this of course was incorrect, and the judge with policy in his hand knew this, he stopped the officer and said in a surprisingly stern voice "You may not remind council of anything, answer the question, did you or did you not follow the policy" The officer of course had to say "no", from there my lawyer went to town on him, noting other areas he messed up.

It was a good cross eximine and i was ready to take the stand and help dig a bigger hole for the officer, but the judge hadn't finished with the officer, he kept him up there and questioned him repeatedly about his speeds and testimony, picking big holes in the officers statements

Once it appeared he had finished My lawyer stood up to call me to the stand, the judge told him to sit down and that he was going to make a decision right there. Now there's only one reason a judge makes a decision without hearing from the defence! Not guilty!

The judge then proceeded to sum up the case, making numerous comments about the officers dangerous driving and failure to follow police policy, it was pretty damning, and it went on for about 10mins! The officer was squirming in his chair. the last statement from the judge basically said he had grave concerns that the officer had a strong personal interest in the charge, in other words he was trying to cover himself. Not a good look.

To top it all off there was an officer sitting down the back taking notes for the complaint i made against the officer.

It was a beautiful thing!

Its was expensive, certainly a lot more than pleeding guilty and getting a work license, but i was prepared to pay as i saw it as a matter of principle.

The officer tried to embellish the facts, yes i was speeding, i was clocked at 121 on his radar before he turned to give chase, but i wasnt doing in excess of 180kph, the story he made up wasnt air tight, hes was a dirty cop and a cowboy, and the judge saw this.

[Dooly]

Bloody good stuff mate.:yes:

[Ixion]

Well done!

.

[kiwifruit]

good work :)

[Sniper]

Congratulations and well done

[SimJen]

Nice work bro. At least you got a good judge ;)

[k14]

Man that is great news, good to see that justice does come for some, even if it is at a price. I hope the officer in question is now under as much stress and anguish as you were after the incident.

[Squeak the Rat]

The value of witnesses. And a good lawyer! Well done mate. I assume you got off the 121kph also?

[clint640]

Congrats & well done for putting up a fight. Many would have just bent over & taken it.

Cheers
Clint

[GR81]

congrats on getting off the charge... but at the end of the day, you still sped tho? haha
did you end up with any fines or anything in the end?

[Bend-it]

So, just for our benefit... how fast were you going?

[ghost]

may have been expensive, but what price is damn fine entertainment like that worth these days?

"priceless"

[kickingzebra]

Now if only the proportion of police that are like that could be looked at in such light.
The unfortunate side of police work is the big for boots factor.

Good stuff to your lawyer, and the Judge. Shame on the cop, and anyone else with the prosecute or be damned approach.

[Cajun]

awsome Funkyfly - glad you finally got this matter sorted, i know it lefted a bad taste in ya mouth. Hopeful catch up with ya again some stage (c: <

[McJim]

Remind me to get your lawyers details if ever I get caught doing 100 with my L plate on!:rockon:

[ManDownUnder]

So, just for our benefit... how fast were you going?

I have to admit - that was my question. Don't answer it though... I suspect this is a case of justice being delivered at the level of the budget?

[Finn]

Well done. One for the lads.

Edit: Why do people want to know how fast he was going. Who cares.

[ZeroIndex]

well done.. it's good when the law is lawful..

[sndrmn]

Bloody awesome.....wish I could have been there to see it all.

[Lou Girardin]

Well done. Are you going for costs?
It sounds like you have a good chance.

[Funkyfly]

congrats on getting off the charge... but at the end of the day, you still sped tho? haha
did you end up with any fines or anything in the end?

Yep, i was speeding, if i hadent been doing 120kph this would never have happened, i fully expect a ticket, what i dont expect is a Nazi cop fabricating a story to justify his lack of common sense. Theres a lot more to the story but lets just say he doesnt like motorbikes.

No fines etc, but of course i lost my license for 28 days when the officer pulled me over for "exceeding 180kph" and the lawyers bills which is more than any fine could have been.

This is why cops should never have the ability to be the judge, jury and executioner on the side of the road.

It will be interesting to see how my complaint plays out and what if anything happens to the officer.

As for all those wanting to know the spped i was doing, i cant say for sure, my speedo is approx 15% out and i geared my bike down, to be doing a true 180kph the speedo would be reading around 210-220. i was never near these speeds. i might have hit a true 140-150 a couple of times, its possible, but on a road like this where i know cops are i dont go over 150 for this very reason - loss of license.

[skelstar]

Thats awesome dude. I certainly remember reading about this incident ages ago, and have used it as an example in conversations since. Great to see it resolved itself. Good on ya for sticking to your guns mate.

[Lias]

It will be interesting to see how my complaint plays out and what if anything happens to the officer.

Given how much the thin blue line protects its own, I'm gonna have to go with a pay rise and a letter of commendation..

[inlinefour]

Heres some history.......

and the judge saw this.


Appropriate green bling awarded. :rockon:

[shafty]

Bloody good stuff mate - wished it were video taped - would be a cracker to watch. Go for costs, go for costs, go for costs!

[ManDownUnder]

Edit: Why do people want to know how fast he was going. Who cares.

It's an academic thing for me I think.

Part of me is saying yay!
Part of me is saying - who'd he put at risk (knowing none of the facts - but I'll assuming only himself... so that's fine in my book)
Part of me is saying the law is the law and getting off because a process wasn't followed is stupid. What if a rapist got off scott free because the dude ... used a pink label instead of ablue one on the specimen jar or something.

Y'know - like I said... academic.

[SPman]

He gave you shit big time.........isn't revenge sweet!


This is why cops should never have the ability to be the judge, jury and executioner on the side of the road.
My thoughts exactly

[Freakshow]

:yes: I like it, I like it a Lot!!:yes:

Cant wait to hear what happened with your complaint!:nono:

[jimbo600]

Bootiful mate. Good going. Judge probably got a speeding ticket in the week

[DemonWolf]

Hey FunkyFly.. just wondering.. was it in the Taranaki region?? if so.. where? If you dont mind me asking.

[Funkyfly]

It's an academic thing for me I think.

Part of me is saying yay!
Part of me is saying - who'd he put at risk (knowing none of the facts - but I'll assuming only himself... so that's fine in my book)
Part of me is saying the law is the law and getting off because a process wasn't followed is stupid. What if a rapist got off scott free because the dude ... used a pink label instead of ablue one on the specimen jar or something.

Y'know - like I said... academic.

I didnt get off any any technicality, i got off because 1)there was no evidence, 2)the story the office gave was full of holes which the judge was able to see thru because he made it up, 3)the fact he didnt follow proper procedure and put the public at risk reflected badly on his cred.

I also had three independant witnesses wating to give evidence contray to what the office had stated. So until you know all the facts might be best to keep that "part of you" quite aye, you dont look too academic jumping to wrong conclusions.

[Ghost Lemur]

I wonder if there is anyway of going after the officer in question for court costs.

What he did sounds to have been malicious and intentional. It's only right that he should be the brunt of the financial burden.

[Skyryder]

The KB locals need to organise a celebratory ride. Lest they could do is to chip in for some gas.

Good to hear one of the good guys winning. Any chance of getting a copy of the transcript if there is one.

Skyryder

[scumdog]

Well done, good to see justice prevailed, I have no time for those that 'embelish' what actually happened, it's the truth all the way as far as I'm concerned.
( a cynical man might think a stop at the time might have saved you a fortune though!).


BTW While you're all cheering and gloating etc the cop involved has probably already forgotten the incident, very likely it would be nothing to him.

Did it cost him money of his own? No
Did it cost him time? No, (not his personal time.)
Is he going to be sacked? No.
Is he going to be 'told off'? Maybe.

[Patch]

Now to add to the fine officer's whipping :killingme instruct a litigation lawyer to file a personal grievance case against the :tugger: for causing you all sorts of issues all because he personally failed to follow due course as instructed by his employer. Its worth investigating to see what you could be entitled too.

Good luck bro, stick :2guns: to the prat

[Funkyfly]

Well done, good to see justice prevailed, I have no time for those that 'embelish' what actually happened, it's the truth all the way as far as I'm concerned.
( a cynical man might think a stop at the time might have saved you a fortune though!).


BTW While you're all cheering and gloating etc the cop involved has probably already forgotten the incident, very likely it would be nothing to him.

Did it cost him money of his own? No
Did it cost him time? No, (not his personal time.)
Is he going to be sacked? No.
Is he going to be 'told off'? Maybe.

He hasent forgotten, hes been working on this for months, 6 months after the event he did the video tape. He took it personally.

The Judge took to him personally, and its written in the complaint report, i was there and saw the look on his face, he was squirming, even the judge said he was looking uncomfortable.

It certainly wasnt "nothing" to him.

[yungatart]

Its nice to see that the "little guy" can still win occasionally -restores one's faith in the justice system... second thoughts, not quite!

[Motig]

Good one ! Surely with all the expense you've been put to and the obvious bias of the cop that even the judge noted must give you a chance of some compensation ? and lastly whens the movie coming out ?

[kro]

The guys at Boston legal would have just blackmailed him, but nice work, it's good when you get a competent judge too.

[Fatjim]

You could write an open letter containing the transcript of the Judges remarks and forward to all the defence lawyers in town.

I get pissed at cops that fabricate bullshit to get a conviction. I've seen it first hand. It gives them all a bad name as the shit sticks to them all, even the good ones.

Lying in court this way by the plod is no better than fraud by a lawyer, and the result should be the same.

[k14]

You could write an open letter containing the transcript of the Judges remarks and forward to all the defence lawyers in town.
And maybe a few letters to the editor of some of the countries papers.

[Pussy]

Good on you, Lee. Road safety?, my arse. Revenue gathering? Thats exactly what it was. You should have asked Mr. Plod if it hurts to piss out of something that small. I've heard of Hammond a few years ago, a right jumped-up twat!

[onearmedbandit]

Well done Funkyfly, good to see you stuck to guns and were fortunate to have a judge that can see past all the bullshit.

[scumdog]

You could write an open letter containing the transcript of the Judges remarks and forward to all the defence lawyers in town.

I get pissed at cops that fabricate bullshit to get a conviction. I've seen it first hand. It gives them all a bad name as the shit sticks to them all, even the good ones.

Lying in court this way by the plod is no better than fraud by a lawyer, and the result should be the same.

You deserve all the bling you get Fatjim, too many would rant and blame ALL cops for the actions of this one.

Does anybody think I would condone such actions as this officer undertook? I seriously hope not and neither would every cop I've worked with.:yes:

[madboy]

Nice to see one of the liars got caught out for a change. Too often they get away with it. Can't say I've had that sort of success against the various perjurors I've witnessed, but guess it comes down to how good a lawyer you pay for. I'll remember that when I get caught. Well done that man.

[scumdog]

Nice to see one of the liars got caught out for a change. Too often they get away with it.

Sometimes it's the driver/rider, sometimes it's the cop eh?

Not good if it's the cop but everybody expects it when it's the driver/rider.

[spudchucka]

It certainly wasnt "nothing" to him.
I agree. Judges and lawyers talk amongst themselves and this guy will be labeled amongst them as a bad cop. Life will become very uncomfortable for him in future if he isn't 110% squeaky clean in everything he does.

[Patrick]

You deserve all the bling you get Fatjim, too many would rant and blame ALL cops for the actions of this one.

Does anybody think I would condone such actions as this officer undertook? I seriously hope not and neither would every cop I've worked with.:yes:

LIKE WOT 'E SED... GOOD JOB, WHAT AN ARSE. This was the Awakino incident, was it not? I think I even PM'ed ya?

[Lou Girardin]

Part of me is saying the law is the law and getting off because a process wasn't followed is stupid. What if a rapist got off scott free because the dude ... used a pink label instead of ablue one on the specimen jar or something.

Y'know - like I said... academic.

Shall we do away with trials then?
Due process is there for a reason. To prevent abuse of power, just like this case in fact.

[Lou Girardin]

The guys at Boston legal would have just blackmailed him,.

And the guys in 'The Wire' would just have popped a cap in his ass.
Anyhoo, back to reality.

[Swoop]

Heres some history.......

It was a beautiful thing!
Well done Funkyfly! Nice to see justice done where it is due.

:scooter: :scooter:

[dnos]

thats awesome to hear.
glad it worked out for ya, and like you say it's the principle.

[Deano]

what i dont expect is a Nazi cop fabricating a story to justify his lack of common sense. Theres a lot more to the story but lets just say he doesnt like motorbikes.

No fines etc, but of course i lost my license for 28 days when the officer pulled me over for "exceeding 180kph" and the lawyers bills which is more than any fine could have been.

This is why cops should never have the ability to be the judge, jury and executioner on the side of the road.

It will be interesting to see how my complaint plays out and what if anything happens to the officer.

It's just a shame you don't get awarded costs. Still, could you take a civil case against the cop for negligence or nuisance which resulted in costing you $$ ? Seems fair.

[k14]

Shall we do away with trials then?
Due process is there for a reason. To prevent abuse of power, just like this case in fact.
Yeah exactly, I can't see where ManDownUnder is coming from. Very bad comparison.

A more apt one would be someone getting charged for murder when all they did was assault someone.

[Paul in NZ]

Eventually a good outcome and good for you for not rolling over on it.

Shame it cost $$ and while it does prove that some of the system does work, I wonder what would have happened if you had not been rich enough or smart enough to hire a decent lawyer.

Personally, I'd sell that bike or change the rego.

Cheers

[ManDownUnder]

Shall we do away with trials then?
Due process is there for a reason. To prevent abuse of power, just like this case in fact.

No - trials are absolutely needed. And ythere's the problem I have. On one hand I see the need for guidelines and process in the processing of suspects, gathering and presenting evidence etc

And at the same time I want the bad guys off the streets, not let off because poor bloody cop forgot to apply rule 49, b (xvii) .6 of the picking your nose manual which is too big to practically fit into your average garage, let alone to be committed to memory

Re the coments about Nazi cops - no I don;t want them to get away with bullshit they make up on the spot. But likewise I don't expect the crim to get away with their bullshit either. It's all a bit PC really, more common sense needed somewhere - I'm buggered if I can work out how or where it fits in though.

I guess I'm just a fan of "do the crime, do the time" If ff (sorry to pick on you bud - just a topical example) was doing only 130 instead of the 180, the cop should in no way be able to "prove" that 180 figure. But the actual figure should be proven, as corroborated by the witnesses etc... revise the charge while it's being processed, rather than just throw it out.

[ManDownUnder]

I didnt get off any any technicality, i got off because 1)there was no evidence, 2)the story the office gave was full of holes which the judge was able to see thru because he made it up, 3)the fact he didnt follow proper procedure and put the public at risk reflected badly on his cred.

I also had three independant witnesses wating to give evidence contray to what the office had stated. So until you know all the facts might be best to keep that "part of you" quite aye, you dont look too academic jumping to wrong conclusions.


Yep, i was speeding, if i hadent been doing 120kph this would never have happened, i fully expect a ticket,

Yes... academic. I.e. looking at it from an academic point of view...

In the first quote you confirm you got off, and in the second quote you confirm you were speeding.

I'm not bothered by it, you save your money... all is good.

My point of interest is that you did do something wrong but had to pay nothing because the cop inflated their estimate of what you were doing.

The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished.

[The Pastor]

Take the cop to the disputes tribunal and get all the costs back.

I had a very simerlar case except it was a mate who lied to a cop who then arrested me, when I finnally got my day in court (you have to turn up so much just to get a date resulting in lost wages) the cop + witness both lied on the stand and the judge shut them down.. I was so amazed I wasnt sure if I had won!

["D" FZ1]

Good to hear :blip:

[spudchucka]

Yeah exactly, I can't see where ManDownUnder is coming from. Very bad comparison.

A more apt one would be someone getting charged for murder when all they did was assault someone.
The first thing you have to prove in a murder trial is that somebody died, that'd be a bit hard to do if they were only assaulted.

[Macktheknife]

Glad to hear of such a good result mate, great work. I would definitely go for costs though. Take care out there, he will remember you.

[acewheelie]

Glad to hear of such a good result mate, great work. I would definitely go for costs though. Take care out there, he will remember you.

You should definitely go for costs, this guy is obviously a swine. Can't understand why the judge couldn't have awarded you them in the first place.

[Funkyfly]

Yes... academic. I.e. looking at it from an academic point of view...

In the first quote you confirm you got off, and in the second quote you confirm you were speeding.

I'm not bothered by it, you save your money... all is good.

My point of interest is that you did do something wrong but had to pay nothing because the cop inflated their estimate of what you were doing.

The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished.

For someone who likes to look at things from an academic point of view you dont read much do you, the very first post i said it cost a lot of money, far more than pleeding guilty to the false charge of dangerous driving, in fact about 10x as much, on top of that i lost my license for 28 days.

Now what would the "punishment" be for the 121 kph he clocked me at, something like $120 and 30 demerit points?

I think you just like using the word "academic", maybe you should try applying it.

[slimyxylofone]

Well done. One for the lads.

Edit: Why do people want to know how fast he was going. Who cares.

Because if he was actually riding dangrously then just because the cop didn't follow the right procedures he's still guilty.

Happens all the time, guilty criminals get off because their lawyer picks apart some small procedural inadequacy in the police officers' arrest or interview etc.

Obviously these rules are there for a reason but if this guy was actually riding like an idiot I don't feel like it's some sort of victory for justice that he got off.

I do have to admit that I've only read up to this post and am not well versed on this particular case. So if Funkyfly was actually in the right here then this doesn't apply to him, so no offense meant for being uninformed in this instance. I'm going to read the rest of the thread now...

[slimyxylofone]

Okay, just read it. Seems like what I just said doesn't apply so much in this case.

[Funkyfly]

Because if he was actually riding dangrously then just because the cop didn't follow the right procedures he's still guilty.

Obviously these rules are there for a reason but if this guy was actually riding like an idiot I don't feel like it's some sort of victory for justice that he got off.

...

Let me say it again for those that missed it, the case WASNT dismissed due to a technicality, the fact the officier didnt follow police pursuit procedure (which was put in place to curb the amount of injuries and deaths resulting from police chases) just highlighted what a nitwit he was.

The case was dismissed due to no evidence, the holes in the officers story were so big the judge didnt even want to hear from myself or my three independent witnesses! thats how bad his story was. Thats why i won.

I didnt contest the fact i was speeding, and would have happily paid the ticket, but the officer took a dislike to me or whatever and embellished the facts to a point where they didnt even make sense, 180kph!

Heres a fact for all you who are quick to jump in with "do the crime, do the time" cliches..........

Not one call was made to 111 to complain about my "dangerous driving" at speeds in excess of "180", however a concerned member of the public called 111 to complain about the officers driving!

[limbimtimwim]

Nice.

You were wronged and you followed it through in a methodical manner.

[Keystone19]

Well done Funkyfly. I just read back through the original thread and it must have taken a lot of time and effort to put together your case. Glad it worked out for you.

[Finn]

Okay, just read it. Seems like what I just said doesn't apply so much in this case.

You saved saved yourself from a grilling young man.

[onearmedbandit]

Because if he was actually riding dangrously then just because the cop didn't follow the right procedures he's still guilty.

Happens all the time, guilty criminals get off because their lawyer picks apart some small procedural inadequacy in the police officers' arrest or interview etc.

Obviously these rules are there for a reason but if this guy was actually riding like an idiot I don't feel like it's some sort of victory for justice that he got off.

I do have to admit that I've only read up to this post and am not well versed on this particular case. So if Funkyfly was actually in the right here then this doesn't apply to him, so no offense meant for being uninformed in this instance. I'm going to read the rest of the thread now...

Sorry, but why didn't you bother to read the thread first before posting the above. Especially seeing as you admit you will read the thread after making your point.

[ManDownUnder]

For someone who likes to look at things from an academic point of view you dont read much do you, the very first post i said it cost a lot of money, far more than pleeding guilty to the false charge of dangerous driving, in fact about 10x as much, on top of that i lost my license for 28 days.

Now what would the "punishment" be for the 121 kph he clocked me at, something like $120 and 30 demerit points?

I think you just like using the word "academic", maybe you should try applying it.

Yup I love the word academic you might want to confirm which definitions I'm applying. See points 4, 6, 7 and 8 here (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/academic)

[The_Dover]

we had a flu academic at work. everyone got sick

[ManDownUnder]

we had a flu academic at work. everyone got sick

Did they argue the pros and cons first, take a wholistic perspective, or simply adopt an accepted paradigm and agree which symptoms would manifest themselves?

[The_Dover]

i dunno but we all had the shits

[Funkyfly]

Yup I love the word academic you might want to confirm which definitions I'm applying. See points 4, 6, 7 and 8 here (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/academic)

LOL, you sound like the officer, you could be brothers.

Now heres a lesson in being academic, namely point 4 - pedantic.

You said "The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished"

Well there is nothing even remotely academic about that statement. I had clearly stated it cost me big dollars, and the original post noted i had lost my license. I was punished - Fact.

So you certainly werent applying points 4, 6 or 7, point 8 - "Having no practical purpose or use" , indicates that while not praticial or useful some thought has gone into it, which is clearly not the case in your comment.

Your comment is thus less academic more delusional.

[ManDownUnder]

LOL, you sound like the officer, you could be brothers.

Now heres a lesson in being academic, namely point 4 - pedantic.

You said "The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished"

Well there is nothing even remotely academic about that statement. I had clearly stated it cost me big dollars, and the original post noted i had lost my license. I was punished - Fact.

So you certainly werent applying points 4, 6 or 7, point 8 - "Having no practical purpose or use" , indicates that while not praticial or useful some thought has gone into it, which is clearly not the case in your comment.

Your comment is thus less academic more delusional.

errr... small point - you paid the money in defence of something you didn't do. You didn't pay money for the thing you did do... edit - likewise the loss of licence. You'll also note I mentioned both of those things should not have happened and the cop should be punished accordingly.

or did I miss something?

[pritch]

Well done Funkyfly, too often these stories don't have happy endings.
(Sometimes due partly to there being a considerable divergence between what we read and what actually ocurred?)

I seem to remember your original post on the subject and am really pleased for you. Looking forward to seeing you out on one of the rides :-)

Have bling for the write-up.

[Funkyfly]

errr... small point - you paid the money in defence of something you didn't do. You didn't pay money for the thing you did do... edit - likewise the loss of licence. You'll also note I mentioned both of those things should not have happened and the cop should be punished accordingly.

or did I miss something?

You obvoiusly missed a lot, namely school im guessing.

Punishment - look it up. Punishment doenst always relate directly to the crime - it should, but doesnt.

Now think again, was i punished? Could loss of license be considered punishment, hmm, what about the rough handling and mistreatment i recieved from the officer, punishment?

You can do your little dance all you want, even give it names like "academic" but the FACTs speak for themselves.

Fact one i was speeding
Fact two the officer construded it as dangerous driving, took my license as punishment, and made up some fanciful story to make it stick which i was dragged through the court system for.
Fact three the dangerous charge was dismissed and i have an $8000 lawyer bill
Fact four you stated i wasnt "Punished"

[sAsLEX]

How come the public cannot be awarded reimbursment of costs from a not guilty outcome? Surely part of justice is that those that have not done wrong are not punished only those that deserve it?


Would be interested to see if you can get you money back from this Funk.

I know many on this site who have been victims of police lying on the stand in order to get their conviction, and a fair percentage of these jsut dont bother stopping these days.

[Funkyfly]

Well done Funkyfly, too often these stories don't have happy endings.
(Sometimes due partly to there being a considerable divergence between what we read and what actually ocurred?)

I seem to remember your original post on the subject and am really pleased for you. Looking forward to seeing you out on one of the rides :-)

Have bling for the write-up.

By the way a big thanks to all those who have taken the time to say "good stuff", its been a long time and a lot of stress and money.

I will post some of the transscript from the hearing once i get it as it will make for some interesting reading if anyones interested.

[Lou Girardin]

The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished.

Another wondrous benefit of this amazing legal system we have. The cops charged him with one matter and failed to prove it. Do you think they should be able to throw subsequent charges at him? Or should they just hit the poor sod with everything they can think of from the word go?
It's only a traffic offence, not mass murder.

[slimyxylofone]

Sorry, but why didn't you bother to read the thread first before posting the above. Especially seeing as you admit you will read the thread after making your point.

Because I was explaining why some people wanted to know how much he was actually breaking the law (in response to Finn's "Edit: Why do people want to know how fast he was going. Who cares.")

What's wrong with that? My response to that question would still be the same now that I have read the whole thread.

The original post was not clear on the matter of whether he was actually speeding excessively, so those who asked before Finn's post would have likely been thinking what I was.

[sAsLEX]

Originally Posted by ManDownUnder
The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished.


ummm loosing you license for 28 days is a fair bit of punishment for 121 kmh

dont you think?

[Funkyfly]

How come the public cannot be awarded reimbursment of costs from a not guilty outcome? Surely part of justice is that those that have not done wrong are not punished only those that deserve it?


Would be interested to see if you can get you money back from this Funk.

I know many on this site who have been victims of police lying on the stand in order to get their conviction, and a fair percentage of these jsut dont bother stopping these days.

My lawyer thinks i have a good case for claiming costs due to the awesome summing up by the judge, i would love to cliam costs but this will cost me even more $$$ to file, and im already way over what i expected to pay. Im reserving my decision to claim until i get the transscript, then i'll talk to a few lawyers to get their views. I have heard you dont get it all back, so i would need to weight up cost of filing against what i might get back.

It sucks to get this far only to have to make a decision based on finance.

[slimyxylofone]

Let me say it again for those that missed it, the case WASNT dismissed due to a technicality, the fact the officier didnt follow police pursuit procedure (which was put in place to curb the amount of injuries and deaths resulting from police chases) just highlighted what a nitwit he was.

The case was dismissed due to no evidence, the holes in the officers story were so big the judge didnt even want to hear from myself or my three independent witnesses! thats how bad his story was. Thats why i won.

I didnt contest the fact i was speeding, and would have happily paid the ticket, but the officer took a dislike to me or whatever and embellished the facts to a point where they didnt even make sense, 180kph!

Heres a fact for all you who are quick to jump in with "do the crime, do the time" cliches..........

Not one call was made to 111 to complain about my "dangerous driving" at speeds in excess of "180", however a concerned member of the public called 111 to complain about the officers driving!


Yeah I never said I though my statement definitely applied to you and realised that it didn't after I read the whole thread. Good result then, and good on you for (likely) preventing him from being dishonest like this again.

I should qualify why I said what I did to begin with. It's well known that many blatantly guilty offenders get off drunk driving charges and all other manner of crimes by hiring a lawyer to attack the technicalities of the procedures the police use. Like I said, these laws are generally there to protect ones rights, but when someone who is 2-3 times over the limit gets off because the cop didn't fill a form out properly then this is a definite miscarriage of justice.

Now, this case had the possibility of being one of these cases. But it turned out that it didn't and I'm not claiming that it is one of these examples, just that people may have thought this to begin with.

[sAsLEX]

It sucks to get this far only to have to make a decision based on finance.

It does stink a fair bit, why should the innocent pay for other peoples fuck ups


Heres hoping your lawdogs think you have a case and you get through the next one as well as this one went, I reckon if you had the same judge.......

[ManDownUnder]

Fact four you stated i wasnt "Punished"

Nearly - I said you weren't punished for the thing you did do. Ie the speeding.
I also said you were punished for the thing you didn't do.

Re school - I enjoyed it - the days I bothered showing up anyway... what makes you ask?

[ManDownUnder]

Originally Posted by ManDownUnder
The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished.


ummm loosing you license for 28 days is a fair bit of punishment for 121 kmh

dont you think?

You're right - I didn't complete the sentence (sorry). I meant didn't get punished for it. (while being severely punished for something he didn't do)

[ManDownUnder]

Another wondrous benefit of this amazing legal system we have. The cops charged him with one matter and failed to prove it. Do you think they should be able to throw subsequent charges at him? Or should they just hit the poor sod with everything they can think of from the word go?
It's only a traffic offence, not mass murder.

He was doing 121 kph per the Police Radar, he should have been ticketed accordingly, that's all I'm saying.

edit - to answer your question specifically, I think the ticket would have been fine ('scuse the pun) and what they did was go over the top for some reason. I think we're both asking for common sense on this one.

Use the evidence at hand, ticket the guy, and have a chat about any possible higher speeds if there is reasonable suspicion they were involved.

[Lou Girardin]

He was doing 121 kph per the Police Radar, he should have been ticketed accordingly, that's all I'm saying.

Perhaps. But now he has an $8000 'fine' and has committed no offence.

[ManDownUnder]

Perhaps. But now he has an $8000 'fine' and has committed no offence.

Exactly (except doing 121kph - but lets not go there), which is stupid and the cop should be paying up

[sAsLEX]

You're right - I didn't complete the sentence (sorry). I meant didn't get punished for it. (while being severely punished for something he didn't do)

He was punished for speeding, thats what gets you license revoked on the road side, therefor he has seen punishment from the fact he was doing 121.

[Lou Girardin]

He was punished for speeding, thats what gets you license revoked on the road side, therefor he has seen punishment from the fact he was doing 121.

I thought it was 41 over for a roadside licence pluck. Is it now 21?

[sAsLEX]

I thought it was 41 over for a roadside licence pluck. Is it now 21?

no but it is ecessive speed that is the basis for that pluck, hence he has already been punished for his excessive speed excessivaly

[Lou Girardin]

no but it is ecessive speed that is the basis for that pluck, hence he has already been punished for his excessive speed excessivaly

It seems to be far too excessive to pluck his licence for excessive speed when his excessive speed is not in excess of the amount it's stipulated that he must exceed the speed limit by.
Excessive enthusiasm by the Orifficer, I think.

[limmy]

nice dude. sticking the finger to the Big Brother. Good on ya to sticking to your principles. They should show this on TV. Dirty cops! I dispise them for their scare tactics.

[Speedracer]

Perhaps. But now he has an $8000 'fine' and has committed no offence.

:buggerd:
The only people who win in court cases are lawyers.

[_intense_]

grats dude.

[Swoop]

Do you think they should be able to throw subsequent charges at him? Or should they just hit the poor sod with everything they can think of from the word go?
Throwing multiple charges at someone seems to be the modus operandi for some in the blue shirts. The "shotgun effect" and see what charges will stick...
They can also play ball with negotiations as well "you plead guilty to this charge, and we will dismiss all the others"...

[scumdog]

Throwing multiple charges at someone seems to be the modus operandi for some in the blue shirts. The "shotgun effect" and see what charges will stick...
They can also play ball with negotiations as well "you plead guilty to this charge, and we will dismiss all the others"...

Works all the time:
"You plead guilty to breaking that bottle and I'l drop the murder charges"

"Shee-it, you're on, sounds like a fair deal to me":doobey:

[Lou Girardin]

Works all the time:
"You plead guilty to breaking that bottle and I'l drop the murder charges"

"Shee-it, you're on, sounds like a fair deal to me":doobey:
Well it does keep the serious crime stats looking good.

[Zed]

It was a beautiful thing!

Its was expensive, certainly a lot more than pleeding guilty and getting a work license, but i was prepared to pay as i saw it as a matter of principle.Well written Funkfly. Beautiful thing indeed to see such an outcome for you, good on you for sticking to your principles and putting up a good fight till the end! I empathise with the huge debt you've incurred though, here's hoping you can get reimbursment somehow. :yes: