Bullshit speeding ticket from arrogant cop. Complaint

[caseye]

Nevertheless go with head held high look that old Legal beagle right in the eye and tell the truth.
That is all you can do.
Any witnesses, sttements from business owners, workers in the stretch of road concerned who could say the whole road was moving at a snails pace, etc is all good stuff.
Good luck.

[red mermaid]

You will need to have any of your witnesses at court so that they can give evidence in person and be available for cross examination by the prosecution.

[Kiwi Graham:Me]

Ooops forgot to post a bit of an update;

Went along to a preliminary hearing and have a date set for the 26th July for a 1 hour hearing.
Almost the next day the cops 'brief of evidence' came in the post contradicting his own note book (I have copy's of his notes made at the time).
He also claims to have been able to see me at nearly ¾ kilometer away in heavy traffic "travelling at high speed". I saw him at about 400 meter's away while I was stationary at a set of red traffic lights (it was as I pulled away from these lights that his lights went on and this whole farce started)

So the end of July should see this matter done and dusted one way or another.
I believe I have several areas of defense, from the time he claims to have stopped me I was still at work through to several factual errors in his notes and that where he claims to have first seen me to where I was would take the eyes of a bionic man.

The problem I will have will be the word of a police man verses my word. so I'll have to wait and see what happens.

The result of the Independent Police Conduct Authority's investigation was that this police officer did breach several areas of policy and has been disciplined on these matters, I'm sure he is now reflecting on them ...........not!
However all of that is a separate issue to the speeding claim which has to follow its course through court.

Continue to watch this space.

[Indoo]

The result of the Independent Police Conduct Authority's investigation was that this police officer did breach several areas of policy and has been disciplined on these matters, I'm sure he is now reflecting on them ...........not!.

Good for you on following it through, very much unlike a few of the whingers on here who wouldn't have done jack. Certainly a result and I wouldn't underestimate the impact it would have on the cop involved especially having his behavior brought to the attention of his superiors.

[caseye]

Ooops forgot to post a bit of an update;

Went along to a preliminary hearing and have a date set for the 26th July for a 1 hour hearing.
Almost the next day the cops 'brief of evidence' came in the post contradicting his own note book (I have copy's of his notes made at the time).
He also claims to have been able to see me at nearly ¾ kilometer away in heavy traffic "travelling at high speed". I saw him at about 400 meter's away while I was stationary at a set of red traffic lights (it was as I pulled away from these lights that his lights went on and this whole farce started)

So the end of July should see this matter done and dusted one way or another.
I believe I have several areas of defense, from the time he claims to have stopped me I was still at work through to several factual errors in his notes and that where he claims to have first seen me to where I was would take the eyes of a bionic man.

The problem I will have will be the word of a police man verses my word. so I'll have to wait and see what happens.

The result of the Independent Police Conduct Authority's investigation was that this police officer did breach several areas of policy and has been disciplined on these matters, I'm sure he is now reflecting on them ...........not!
However all of that is a separate issue to the speeding claim which has to follow its course through court.

Continue to watch this space.

Whether you are supposed to or not, use his being disciplined as evidence of his ability to Fudge/lie about what he saw you doing. For crying out loud take just one,or as many as you can get to go with you, witness/es if you can then it's two or more ordinary people against one mildly bent/incompetent copper.Good Luck mate.
PS in view of his being disciplined for not doing what he should, have you written back to the Police re your court case and asked for it to simply be kicked out on the grounds that "He did wrong things" ? just another avenue worth following up.

[scumdog]

Take any witness you can and any documantation that may be useful

Dress repectably

Be respectful

Don't make up anything - if you don't know? - say so.

[Kiwi Graham:Me]

Oh well today was the day;

$170 fine & $130 court costs.

The Police prosecutor spent Half an hour detailing all the training the police officer has had all the equipment the vehicle has and how it worked, produced certificates of same and records of maintenance.

Surprisingly he didn't mention the number of times this police officer has had disciplinary process against him (I'm told he has a few) and he even moved to seek inadmissible any evidence or comment relating to the latest disciplinary process relating to this incident that I may use.

He put the officer on the stand (who didn't take an oath but made a statement of honesty?!) who recalled the event somewhat differently to me. A different part of the road a different time, different traffic conditions. He omitted to mention the severity of the attempted and aborted 'U' turn, claimed I was threatening and intimidating once stopped (I wasn't allowed to talk about what happened after I was stopped because it is subject to the complaint.......nice and fair eh!) this inter-mated I was unwilling to stop. Stated I was the only vehicle on this bit of road....at 4pm on Lincoln road!!!!.

Anyway when it was my turn I was reminded what I could not talk about and that the police prosecutor would object if it was encroached on. So simply put I stated my recollection of events, speeds, traffic conditions, where it was and the police officers initial actions, basicly a totally different story to that told by the policeman that stopped me.

The two judges/magistrates adjourned for five mins and returned. Their statement was basicly its your word against that of a highly trained police officer, the differing recollection of events mean we have to go with the police officers because we have evidence of his training and certificated equipment he used.

I cant believe a police officer can 'sit' (I stood) and give such false evidence. He couldn't look me in the face, he fidgeted and twitched in his chair constantly sniffing and fiddling with his watch. This man lied today. His body language screamed 'I'm lying' yet their was nothing I could do to prove it.

I was fully convinced it would be a his word against my word scenario and the outcome of that would be a forgone conclusion. I was totally surprised at how different sides were allowed to speak on some areas but not others, They were allowed to build a (inaccurate) picture covering the whole scenario, I wasn't allowed to talk about anything after him signalling to pull me over.

The prosecuting sergeant led his boy well, shutting him up when he was going wrong and leading him to say the right things when he messed up. He presented as a very unsure nervous little Asian man, not the sunglass wearing, little man syndrome'd, arrogant, rude, chip on his shoulder type that pulled me over in January.

Anyway I had my day in court......................lost................... . lost a little more respect for the police and will live in wonder as to when this officer will stray from his code of ethics again and how long much longer the police force will support him for.

Its been an eye opener for me and I don't regret pursuing it, its just a little shocking how the police can get away with saying what they like and the judges having to believe them.
Its cost me the prob entry fee for the HD nationals next season so will have to start saving again.

Thanks for everyone's support and encouragement over this.

Cheers

KG

[red mermaid]

I thought you were going to take witnesses along who saw what happened and could give evidence in support of yourself?

[maxlev]

Buy a digital recorder and carry it with you when out and about.
(also handy when dealing with govt depts)
Why?
Well you were initially told you were doing 80 kph.
Then you were told the speed on the radar was 74 kph.
You can then ask in court, why the lie?
Plod discreditted, case dropped.

[red mermaid]

Excellent idea.

A few police officers are doing this as it helps to kill the B/S complaints dead in the water.

[bogan]

He put the officer on the stand (who didn't take an oath but made a statement of honesty?!) who recalled the event somewhat differently to me. A different part of the road a different time, different traffic conditions. He omitted to mention the severity of the attempted and aborted 'U' turn, claimed I was threatening and intimidating once stopped (I wasn't allowed to talk about what happened after I was stopped because it is subject to the complaint.......nice and fair eh!) this inter-mated I was unwilling to stop. Stated I was the only vehicle on this bit of road....at 4pm on Lincoln road!!!!.

shit result dude.

I'm probably stating the obvious here, but doesn't the ticket have the place/time written on it? so if he says a different one...

also whats the story with the disciplinary process, you gotta go back to account your side of the story for that I'm guessing?

Buy a digital recorder and carry it with you when out and about.
(also handy when dealing with govt depts)
Why?
Well you were initially told you were doing 80 kph.
Then you were told the speed on the radar was 74 kph.
You can then ask in court, why the lie?
Plod discreditted, case dropped.

most cellphones will do this now too, may have to download an app though, or just bluff it at the time and he may be more reasonable.

[scumdog]

Surprisingly he didn't mention the number of times this police officer has had disciplinary process against him
KG

Sortalike any Court - even a person who has been to jail 10 times never gets that mentioned anywhere until after he is found guilty for the offence he is currently appearing in Court for.

[yachtie10]

Sortalike any Court - even a person who has been to jail 10 times never gets that mentioned anywhere until after he is found guilty for the offence he is currently appearing in Court for.

Yes but he is not the defendant. He is a trained expert witness whos credibility should have been able to be tested.

bad luck
just shows how far the system will go to protect their own (and there revenue)

[scumdog]

Yes but he is not the defendant. He is a trained expert witness whos credibility should have been able to be tested.

bad luck
just shows how far the system will go to protect their own (and there revenue)

You REALLY have NO idea how Courts work, do you?



Or are you a troll??

[yachtie10]

You REALLY have NO idea how Courts work, do you?



Or are you a troll??

obviously I dont as I stand by what I said, you want to explain your reply? or just wind up drongos