Is that part of the bridge classed as a road? If not then how could he be charged with dangerous driving?
Is that part of the bridge classed as a road? If not then how could he be charged with dangerous driving?
If you read it carefully you will see his defence counsel, Mr Galt, has asked for a defended hearing.
The report above details a disputed facts hearing, whereupon the defence dispute the facts of case as put by the prosecution. No agreement could be reached at this hearing so it has to go to a full defended hearing.
Judge Spear will make an example of carver, to deter joe public from further stunts in this vein.
The legal details will get thrashed out, but there will be consequence related to action.
Bottom line, carver will be walking/skateboarding for a wee while. MHO
As Judge Spear took the disputed facts hearing he will probably not be taking the defended hearing.
Oh Dear - Not Good.
The Judge's attitude doesn't sound good at all.
Surely the deterent is that most would be too scared to try such a stunt.
Blocking access to that part of the bridge would be more sensible.
Has the local council not in fact breached Carver's Health and Safety rights by making it easy for him to undertake this missadventure?
Finding path of least resistance has to be the only sensible way forward.
Best advice: Plead guilty wearing a smart suit with pants around ankles bending over the doc.
Good luck.
Judges should be using their time more constructively dealing with real crime, nobody has been inconvenienced by Carvers action of riding over the bridge!
If there is no notice posted saying "no motorcycles" on the bridge span, he has got to be home free!
Local council tried to prosecute trail bike riders for using a new gravel footpath down here, police would do nothing unless a notice was posted.
The council posted a notice and the police are still doing nothing! Go figure!
Judges in NZ are a bit of a joke really! (INMHO)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks