Querying a speed ticket - should I expect to receive proof of the radar reading?

[Scuba_Steve]

Fooo, good england bro!

I know man, I learnt that England from teh interwebs

[Akzle]

In order:
They may be cops but they are also human. That weakness is also the strength, let us never surrender the humanity for absolute correctness.

Lets see some actual numbers and cases before we get too carried away, but even then 64 "out of how many again?" is hardly even a statistical variation. Compared to the rates of crime in other professions I'll take my chances and if I feel wronged after taking a proper look at the situation I will gather the evidence and do the needful. Until then... HTFU pills and pay the fine.

Pretty sure you can't seek tort damages for lost income on defending a driving charge without also showing that any wrong on the part of the police was intentional... a much steeper hill to mow than getting off the ticket.


Pretty much.


Dear god no! It is bad enough working in Auckland. Don't even suggest we morph into the states!

PS, can't be fucked doing the fancy formatting you do to put in the multiquotes from the same post shit. I cost to much an hour for that.

is it so wrong of me, to expect that when people are disignated as beacons of society, to uphold and maintain "the law" - that they're not going to be cunts, illegally and irregardless of any common decency let alone lawful end?
"just because they're human" doesn't wash with me.

most humans i know dont get to walk around with a gang patch and a belt full of weapons without some serious to-do.

pretty sure i can seek whatever i fucken want. whether i find it or not is another matter.... i put a bong down somewhere around here... i'm sure.

your own dumb fault for going to/being in/ not burning to the ground, auckland.

it's [ /quote] it's not that hard yo. or that fancy.

[Erelyes]

Without regards to the rest of the thread, I am talking a situation where the courts takes an officers word as evidence with no other proof submitted which is not inline with the principle of Haebes Corpus and IMO is a very dangeous and slippery slope

Usually that turn of phrase (slippery slope) means changing something is a bad idea (i.e. what you're suggesting), rather than keeping the status quo.....

[varminter]

For some reason I've read this all the way through. Now I'm losing the will to live.

[nodrog:Me]

Honestly, where are the Lesbians?


Sorry Katman, I can not except those 2 don't have at least 1 penis between them.

its probably called Jin.

[Jin]

Why did the officer not issue you a ticket when He / She stopped you ... ???

Dunno, i didnt mind tho just wanted to get on my way

Highlighted IS the proof ... and it is policy for the offending motorist to be invited to View the locked readout speed on the radar unit.

That is not proof of the speed i was allegedly doing, just a statement that the equipment used to measure my speed works.

Were you invited to view it ... ???? ... and DID you view it .. ?????

Nope. Ive never been stopped before for a ticket. I thought they would keep a record of how fast I was going and would be able to produce it if they need it. How stupid of me

The certificate of accuracy IS enough perceived/required proof ... to substantiate tickets issued in a court of law.

Accuracy of the machine is irrelevant to what my alleged speed was. How do i even know he used it? Evidence please?

What would you expect ... a Christmas card ... ??

An apology will do

[Jin]

Or was it...

Lol you were quick. That was directed at that nogdog dude. Wonder who left his cage unlocked.

[FJRider]

Dunno, i didnt mind tho just wanted to get on my way

And you thought you had got away with it ... right .. ??

That is not proof of the speed i was allegedly doing, just a statement that the equipment used to measure my speed works.

Not ONLY that it works ... it is also accurate.

Nope. Ive never been stopped before for a ticket. I thought they would keep a record of how fast I was going and would be able to produce it if they need it. How stupid of me

Yes you were ... I'm betting it wont be your last ticket.

I note NO claim of innocence on your part ... just asking for proof from the officer ... you did commit the Traffic offense ...

Accuracy of the machine is irrelevant to what my alleged speed was. How do i even know he used it? Evidence please?

YOU DIDN'T ASK TO SEE THE READOUT (next time ask) ... STUPID.

An apology will do

unlikely ... pay the fine and move on ...

[Katman]

Sorry Katman, I can not except those 2 don't have at least 1 penis between them.

You can imagine all you like but something tells me they're not much interested in you being the meat in their sammich.

And besides, both of their hair is down to their shoulders. They must be women.

[Jin]

I note NO claim of innocence on your part ... just asking for proof from the officer ... you did commit the Traffic offense ...

I dont need to claim i am innocent because no evidence has been produced that i am guilty of an offence. This is not a religious state we are not born sinners

[Madness]

nogdog

This cunt's actually quite good

They must be women or from Hamilton.

It's a tough call for sure.

[Virago]

Consider this.

If I see someone driving while not wearing a seatbelt, I write them a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt.

My word is the only evidence.

How else can it work? And please don't tell me to video everything, as the legal system couldn't cope with all the stuff I see.

Interesting point. While I'm firmly in the "just pay it" camp, my wife had an odd experience some months back.

Lit up by red 'n' blue, she pulled over. The female cop approached, but did not say what the pull-over was for, she simply took my wife's licence and went back to her car. My wife thought "I must have been speeding, but I didn't think I was". The cop returned with the licence and ticket, again not saying what for. She returned to her car and left. Five minutes later my wife got home, and looked at the ticket - failure to wear seatbelt.

The problem was, she had been wearing her seatbelt. The cop had seen her wrestling with a stabbing bra underwire, and had erronously assumed she was putting her seatbelt on while travelling.

The only reason my wife got off the ticket was because the cop's work partner was also "well endowed", and could visualise exactly what happened.

Sometimes the cop's word is wrong.

[Katman]

Sometimes the cop's word is wrong.

That's signature material.

[carburator]

Despite the officer's claim here, fact is, you have a fine to pay. Count yourself lucky the fine is not that bad, in all likelihood you've probably been over the speed limit on more than one/this occasion....right?

Where was this 90 kph zone? I have never seen one before, they seem to jump from 85-100.
I was caught doing 19 over the limit and got off, wrote in a gave a reason for the speed (which was 130 just prior) and they let me off the fine.
The issuing officer is just the stating point.

state highway 2 turnoff from Bombay - through to somewhere.. its a 90km zone that's patrolled a lot..

[marmel]

I dont need to claim i am innocent because no evidence has been produced that i am guilty of an offence. This is not a religious state we are not born sinners

I have changed my mind, I now think you should go and defend it.

You have no concept about the NZ legal system, no concept about witness evidence, police or otherwise and despite the fact it has been pointed out several times already that the cop using the radar, locking your speed and then writing it on a ticket IS evidence according to the justice system you seem to prefer to listen to the fucktards with a "stick it to the man" chip on their shoulder.

So go ahead, go to court, the cop will present his evidence, you can produce yours and see what the JP thinks.