Equality in the eyes of the law

**Lou Girardin** · 8th February 2004, 04:36

Property developer (spit), Andrew Krukziener recenty got a $800 fine and 3 months off the road for doing 103km/h on Tamaki Drive, at night and in the wet. He'd been charged with dangerous, but the cops reduced it to careless.
A family friend said he did speed a lot, but he was a lovable person. Not like a nasty boy racer.
So, what do you reckon your chances are, if it were you? Maybe a snowballs chance in hell?
Unless you're rich, well known and lovable that is.
Obviously the judge didnt invest in Metropolis either.
Lou

**MikeL** · 8th February 2004, 08:07

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Property developer (spit), Andrew Krukziener recenty got a $800 fine and 3 months off the road for doing 103km/h on Tamaki Drive, at night and in the wet. He'd been charged with dangerous, but the cops reduced it to careless.
A family friend said he did speed a lot, but he was a lovable person. Not like a nasty boy racer.
So, what do you reckon your chances are, if it were you? Maybe a snowballs chance in hell?
Unless you're rich, well known and lovable that is.
Obviously the judge didnt invest in Metropolis either.
Lou

It's difficult not to become cynical when this sort of thing happens. One law for the rich, one for the poor. Trouble is, the actual facts of the offense tend to get obscured. Mr Krukziener's driving may have been no more dangerous than yours or mine - who knows? Since it is the police that determine what is "dangerous" or merely "careless" by considering a whole range of variable factors including weather, traffic, vehicle condition etc. it is essentially a subjective decision. As such it is also one that can be influenced by other considerations including the driver's appearance, apparent socio-economic status etc. The fact that people like Mr Krukziener are treated more leniently is not surprising for this reason and the fact that a good (i.e. expensive) lawyer will be able to challenge the police's interpretation of events, put forward eloquent and persuasive arguments in mitigation, introduce character witnesses etc., an effective defence that is denied to the 20-year old student or low-paid worker who will have the book thrown at him as a boy racer despite the fact that the actual offence was no worse than Mr Krukzieners.
It has always been thus.

**SPman** · 8th February 2004, 22:10

The article also said he had several tickets, including a 65kph on Tamaki drive! I think you or i would have got a similar fine....but i could be wrong (and usually am)

ZX7 Rider · 1st June 2005, 13:25

Common you guys - haven't you got anything better to do? You're bikers - we all speed. If someone can be bothered turning up to court to fight, then all credit to them. If all you guys do when you get a ticket is pay it and then complain then what do you expect.

Good on him I say.

**Waylander** · 1st June 2005, 13:29

Originally Posted by ZX7 Rider

Common you guys - haven't you got anything better to do? You're bikers - we all speed. If someone can be bothered turning up to court to fight, then all credit to them. If all you guys do when you get a ticket is pay it and then complain then what do you expect.

Good on him I say.

The problem is when we fight them we are either ignored or made to pay more. Rich/Famous/Government officials always manage to slip through the cracks of equality when it comes to the laws. Welcome to the site by the way.

**MSTRS:Me** · 1st June 2005, 13:29

Originally Posted by ZX7 Rider

Common you guys - haven't you got anything better to do? You're bikers - we all speed. If someone can be bothered turning up to court to fight, then all credit to them. If all you guys do when you get a ticket is pay it and then complain then what do you expect.

Good on him I say.

Hello & welcome - stick around and you'll get 're-educated'.

**Sniper** · 1st June 2005, 13:43

Originally Posted by MSTRS

Hello & welcome - stick around and you'll get 're-educated'.

Ditto I like re-education

**Ixion** · 1st June 2005, 13:46

Originally Posted by ZX7 Rider

Common you guys - haven't you got anything better to do? You're bikers - we all speed. If someone can be bothered turning up to court to fight, then all credit to them. If all you guys do when you get a ticket is pay it and then complain then what do you expect.

Good on him I say.

I was chuffed when Sir Bob Jones took them on. And won I think.

**Motu** · 1st June 2005, 13:49

Mike is right - at my first appearance in court as a teenager I saw a fat young lawyer with long greasy hair defending a guy on a speeding charge,he was persuavive and his client got of with costs...his lawyer was good enough to later make this country nuclear free....

**MSTRS:Me** · 1st June 2005, 13:51

Originally Posted by Sniper

Ditto I like re-education

In your case I don't believe it was necessary.

**Sniper** · 1st June 2005, 14:30

Originally Posted by MSTRS

In your case I don't believe it was necessary.

Hehe, and that is meant to mean??

**MSTRS:Me** · 1st June 2005, 14:56

Originally Posted by Sniper

Hehe, and that is meant to mean??

Anything you like , old son, anything you like.

**Hitcher** · 1st June 2005, 15:02

Originally Posted by Motu

his lawyer was good enough to later make this country nuclear free...

Depends, I guess, what you mean by "nuclear free". Given that New Zealand is riddled with radioactive material (yes, gentle readers, it is part of us all), and radioactive isotopes are manufactured and used by many organisations on a daily basis, then nuclear "freedom" is not something we can boast. Unless we're talking about the two safest forms of nuclear energy -- ships and power stations -- in which case we don't want any of that shit here, thank you very much!

**ManDownUnder** · 1st June 2005, 15:07

Let's face it we're all equal in the eyes of the law... the inequality comes when we're expected to defend ourselves..make submissions, represent ourselves in a manner, and with substance that lawyers and barristors get a considerable amount of special training in.

If you can afford a QC to defend you, chances are high you'll get off a lot more stuff than if you try it yourself, or get someone fresh from passing bar exams.

That's just the way it is.

I don't like it, but then I don't have a lot of say.

It's an interesting point that I have to live by the laws of the land, and yet there are so many of them, a number of ways of interpreting each (generally.. literal, golden rule etc... from my Law 101) and even the fact the final decision comes down to a person so the SAME set of arguements for and against will possibly have a different outcome, and/or a different penalty awarded.

It seems to me that Justice is a wierd combination of the the fact we all live by the same rules, and can expect inconsistant outcomes.

It is in our own interests to do what we can to tip the balance of that outcome in our favour. It seems it was done most effectively in this case.

MDU

**ManDownUnder** · 1st June 2005, 15:09

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Depends, I guess, what you mean by "nuclear free". Given that New Zealand is riddled with radioactive material (yes, gentle readers, it is part of us all), and radioactive isotopes are manufactured and used by many organisations on a daily basis, then nuclear "freedom" is not something we can boast. Unless we're talking about the two safest forms of nuclear energy -- ships and power stations -- in which case we don't want any of that shit here, thank you very much!

Oooo I can see this could be a long thread.

MDU