Suspended licence 28 days - Question regarding a possible defence?

**blackbobcat** · 8th January 2011, 22:12

Ok so the other night (Wednesday - 9:30pm) i was pulled over doing 114kph in a 50 zone.

Yeah i was speeding... i know it... was just in a hurry to get home... dont really have an excuse.

Anyway the cop was coming the other way and picked up my speed but i was over the hill and long gone before he even had a chance to put his lights on... but i knew i had been caught... so i pulled over and waited for him to show up... bout 10 seconds later he flys over the rise... expecting to have a chase on his hands but guess it was his lucky day...

anyway he gets out of the car and the first thing he says is "i appreciate the fact that you pulled over" cause we both knew i cold have floored it and been gone before he even got turned around (i ride a Kawasaki ZX-10R - Ex Track Bike)

he then goes on to tell me that ive lost my licence for doing 114 in a 50 zone etc etc etc... tells me that at that speed i have had my licence suspended for 28 days and that i can expect to recieve a court summons in relation to the charges...

he let me ride my bike home though....

Now this is where it gets interesting... during the conversation he said that his radar picked me up doing 114Kph... but he didnt have time to lock the speed into the radar machine so he couldnt produce that slip of paper they can print out or show me the speed on the radar... he said that he didnt have to... he said that he only had to observe it...

Does anyone know if this is correct and is this a possible way to avoid conviction at my court summons... i thought the police officer had to be able to prove the speed...

also the police officer didnt specify what charges i would be up for... careless or dangerous driving or is there a seperate conviction just related to speed??

final question: i have never been convicted/ been to court before... havent had a speeding ticket in over a year i think... any idea in the likely hood of getting diversion or discharged without conviction or just a fine with no disqualification from driving??

ive got a lawyer but im just waiting for him to return my call regarding an appt

any assistance would be appreciated

Thanks

**FJRider** · 8th January 2011, 22:17

so ...when you get to court ... it's his word against yours ...

now ... any ideas as to whom the judge will believe ... ???

**blackbobcat** · 8th January 2011, 22:39

SORRY IM NEW AND I HAD THIS THREAD IN THE WRONG PLACE:

Ok so the other night (Wednesday - 9:30pm) i was pulled over doing 114kph in a 50 zone.

Yeah i was speeding... i know it... was just in a hurry to get home... dont really have an excuse.

Anyway the cop was coming the other way and picked up my speed but i was over the hill and long gone before he even had a chance to put his lights on... but i knew i had been caught... so i pulled over and waited for him to show up... bout 10 seconds later he flys over the rise... expecting to have a chase on his hands but guess it was his lucky day...

anyway he gets out of the car and the first thing he says is "i appreciate the fact that you pulled over" cause we both knew i cold have floored it and been gone before he even got turned around (i ride a Kawasaki ZX-10R - Ex Track Bike)

he then goes on to tell me that ive lost my licence for doing 114 in a 50 zone etc etc etc... tells me that at that speed i have had my licence suspended for 28 days and that i can expect to recieve a court summons in relation to the charges...

he let me ride my bike home though....

Now this is where it gets interesting... during the conversation he said that his radar picked me up doing 114Kph... but he didnt have time to lock the speed into the radar machine so he couldnt produce that slip of paper they can print out or show me the speed on the radar... he said that he didnt have to... he said that he only had to observe it...

Does anyone know if this is correct and is this a possible way to avoid conviction at my court summons... i thought the police officer had to be able to prove the speed...

also the police officer didnt specify what charges i would be up for... careless or dangerous driving or is there a seperate conviction just related to speed??

final question: i have never been convicted/ been to court before... havent had a speeding ticket in over a year i think... any idea in the likely hood of getting diversion or discharged without conviction or just a fine with no disqualification from driving??

ive got a lawyer but im just waiting for him to return my call regarding an appt

any assistance would be appreciated

Thanks

**blackbobcat** · 8th January 2011, 22:40

sorry ive just resalised ive posted this in the wrong section... ive moved it to General: Bike Law and politics.

Sorry

**Voltaire** · 8th January 2011, 22:40

Firstly I'd not be admitting on an open forum that I was caught fair and square, giving the type of bike I ride and that I work as medic at the naval base....

**SMOKEU** · 8th January 2011, 22:52

Dude, it's your stupid fault for stopping in the first place. If he was driving towards you, then he wouldn't have seen your plate. You should have just kept on riding if you thought you could get away with it.

**blackbobcat** · 8th January 2011, 22:55

Yeah.. regretting pulling over now... should have kept going...

but sadly whats done is done... cant change that.

**dino3310** · 8th January 2011, 23:31

Originally Posted by blackbobcat

Now this is where it gets interesting... during the conversation he said that his radar picked me up doing 114Kph... but he didnt have time to lock the speed into the radar machine so he couldnt produce that slip of paper they can print out or show me the speed on the radar... he said that he didnt have to... he said that he only had to observe it...
Does anyone know if this is correct and is this a possible way to avoid conviction at my court summons... i thought the police officer had to be able to prove the speed...
also the police officer didnt specify what charges i would be up for... careless or dangerous driving or is there a seperate conviction just related to speed??

ive got a lawyer but im just waiting for him to return my call regarding an appt

Thanks

My thoughts are that a lawyer should get you of it, i would contest it and protest it hard back at them,
if he didnt lock it in thats his fuck up, my old man got done for 137 in a 100km zone but the cop saw him at 167 but didnt lock it in fast enough so the old man only got done for 137..
i would fight it....
your a dick for going that fast in a 50 anyway

**blackbobcat** · 8th January 2011, 23:36

sweet thanks for the advice....

yeah i know... ive been called worse though... still was surprised to find a cop with his radar on in the suburbs at 9 30 on a Wed nite...

but thanks for the advice... ill get my lawyer onto it...

**SMOKEU** · 8th January 2011, 23:57

Originally Posted by dino3310

your a dick for going that fast in a 50 anyway

He probably didn't even get a chance to get out of 1st gear at that nanna pace!

**Spearfish** · 9th January 2011, 00:01

Be careful defending your case unless your are really really sure of your stance, judges are lifting the punishment for trying the "get off if I'm lucky defence". Its probably a spin off from the boi racers so community service is in flavour at the moment if your not honest.
With your lawyer, remember their aren't many houses selling so bread and butter jobs are in short supply, you could get one that's keen for you to go not guilty.

**Max Preload** · 9th January 2011, 00:25

He doesn't have to lock it in order to isssue you an infringement offence notice or as in your case a traffic offence notice - in fact, he would find it difficult to lock a bike travelling at speed among vehicles that are a larger microwave signature such as trucks and cars etc (due to both physical size and distance to the patrol) as only the strongest signal can be display locked.

If you deny the offence at a defended hearing he will likely win unless you cough up for a very expensive lawyer. Not only did you foolishly stop and wait for him, I have no doubt you'll have at some point in the conversation admitted the offence, which will have been recorded in his notes. When he asks "Do you know how fast you were going?" he's not asking if you realise it was silly and therefore will give you a warning instead because you're a nice honest chap - he's offering you the opportunity to bang another nail in the coffin of your license.

Next time, fuck off at warp 10 (not that girly 114 in a 50! You'll have to watch that your handbag doesn't become entangled in the throttle). You can always claim you didn't see him if he does catch you up...

**awayatc** · 9th January 2011, 04:52

only pursuit if cop follows you.........with disco lights on

Stopping and waiting for ticket is what you did....
So why complain now?

**The Baron** · 9th January 2011, 07:01

Sorry to hear your news. Bummer.

I just wanted to say, good on you for stopping. You did the crime and you did man up! There is honor in that.

So I'm pleased that we didn't hear about this on the news as another police chase that someone was killed.

It's still a bummer.
Best of luck with the judge.

**davereid** · 9th January 2011, 07:09

114 in a 50 km/hr zone...

I accept there are some zones that are badly placed and should be 100 km/hr zones.

But it sounds here like this zone deserved to be a 50 km/hr zone.

At 9.30 the light is fading, but kids will still be playing, there will be joggers, pedestrians and dog walkers out.

They expect to be able to cross the road safely by applying judgment based on vehicles approaching at 50 km/hr.

There is no excuse for doing those kinds of speeds in those kinds of places.