Desperately need help ...

[jasonu]

Once many moons ago I was charged with careless use. I checked the paper to see what happened to people who appeared in court charged with same. It seemed they all lost their licence. Losing my licence would have been a major inconvenience at the time, it would have made work seriously difficult, so I consulted a lawyer.

I didn't attend court, but the lawyer did, according to the paper two other people appeared on the same charge that day, they lost their licence, I didn't.

OK, so there was a lawyer's bill, but it was worth every cent.

Since then having spent some time sitting in a court room as part of my job, I have formed the impression that the court system is a big game of money-go-round. It seems quite possible that the judges give credit for your hiring a lawyer as you are seen to be playing the game. Their game.

YMMV

You had better luck than me. I faced a dangerous speed charge (that I was totally guilty of), hired a lawyer, told him the story which he repeated to the judge and charged me $450 for his 'service'. I lost my license and got a fine which is most likely the same outcome had I represented myself.

[Maha]

You had better luck than me. I faced a dangerous speed charge (that I was totally guilty of), hired a lawyer, told him the story which he repeated to the judge and charged me $450 for his 'service'. I lost my license and got a fine which is most likely the same outcome had I represented myself.

I had a very similar experience in 1984, though Judge Moynihan was notorious for being a tad cunty.

My Sister worked for a Defence Lawyer in Taupo at the time and she ''enticed'' me have him represent me in Court. I begrudgingly agreed, went to a meeting with him and coughed up the money (quite a bit for a wage earner at that time) He spoke on my behalf in Court, my eyes didn't leave Moynihan noting that his eyes did not once make contact with Mr Roberts (the Lawyer) in fact he stared at his desk the whole time. When Mr Roberts had finished, Moynihan made his (in my view) his pre arranged judgement and I looked at Mr Roberts and said ''is that it''?

[YellowDog]

This can't be that tough to work out. A starting point would be to ask for the evidence the Police are basing their judgement upon.

If the car driver states that the bike was going too fast to be seen, before they pulled out, then they are potentially using such a statement to defend their own negligence. That's not enough for a charge to stick. There must be something else, like a superduper long skid or a radar-gunless eye witness?

[haydes55]

This thread proves (maybe) the value of always having a Gopro on. Those that rubbished having them on in the other thread would maybe reconsider after reading this thread. You could save thousands of dollars avoiding a court battle having a Gopro on maybe.

I saw on kiwibiker that Cassina had posted in "Desperately need help"... it's been a long time coming but I'm happy she's finally asked for the help she needs.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[FJRider]

If you read poster 1 post again he said the SCU are involved so the accident must fit the criteria you state.

If you read the first post ... you will see the original poster (with one only post credited to her) is saying her darling son is being charged with dangerous driving. At NO point does she say her son was being blamed for causing the accident. Just being charged (it would seem) for HIS part/factor in the chain of events that led to the accident.

He needs a sympathetic judge ... not a sympathetic lawyer ... good luck finding either.

[Akzle]

This can't be that tough to work out. A starting point would be to ask for the evidence the Police are basing their judgement upon.
?

that be called full disclosure.

[Akzle]

This thread proves (maybe) the value of always having a Gopro on. Those that rubbished having them on in the other thread would maybe reconsider after reading this thread. You could save thousands of dollars avoiding a court battle having a Gopro on maybe.

you should hedge your bullshit assertions by saying "maybe" a lot.

//o, wait on...

[Ginge09]

I've worked in the criminal justice system, as others on this thread appear to have done.

SCU get involved because of the extent of the injury. Police need to respond to the SCU report. Money has been spent, people have been hurt, damage to bikes and cars has been done. As tax payers and rego payers we'd be pissed off if the boot was on our foot.

End of the day there's a wash up in court. It's wrong to label Judges and lawyers as money grubbing or disinterested. They work in a dirty world. There's not a lot of happiness comes out of court rooms.

Original Poster hasn't fronted up to respond but it's been a good exchange of views.

[Oakie]

He needs a sympathetic judge ... not a sympathetic lawyer ... good luck finding either.

Hmmm. My cousin Stephen is a District Court Judge in Christchurch ... (true!)

[HenryDorsetCase]

that be called full disclosure.

The Crown are required to produce it on request. OP's lawyer can request it. There's time limits n'stuff too.

[Akzle]

. I threatened the Police Complaints Authority over an accident I was in fault.

tough guy huh

[Akzle]

it's been a good exchange of views.

you'll never make it on KB.




also, judges and lawyers are, pretty much by definition, money grubbing jew cunts.

[Akzle]

The Crown are required to produce it on request. OP's lawyer can request it. There's time limits n'stuff too.

any cunt can request it. nee, demand.

you lawyer faggots aren't endowed with any special power except the perception that you're worth paying in 6 minute intervals.


when i'm voted in as king you'll be lined up and shot.

[HenryDorsetCase]

tough guy huh

I could be wrong but I dont think an IPCA complaint can be made until after the original matter is dealt with (i.e. if we could complain about the Po po BEFORE the matter was dealt with in Court, then we'd all do it as a way of avoiding having the matter dealt with in Court) - I know I would.

[HenryDorsetCase]

any cunt can request it. nee, demand.

you lawyer faggots aren't endowed with any special power except the perception that you're worth paying in 6 minute intervals.


when i'm voted in as king you'll be lined up and shot.

Fuck you, when I rule you all (and I will) I will cut your benefit off and make you work for a living. I will also legalise weed and give Rothmans an exclusive licence so that will remove your income, you'll be digging ditches on a work scheme in Waiouru in winter, son, mark my words.

Oh, and the firm I currently work for does not "do" time recording or time based charging. I agree with you entirely: the six minute interval is a means of rewarding lazy stupid people who are inefficient. When you ask me to do work for you I will either quote you a fixed fee for a job, or give you an estimate and tell you I will bill you monthly. Most of what my team and I do is fixed fee... even stuff like the complex subdivisional work, commercial sales and purchase (not land - businesses) and all that. The exceptions are if your job turns completely to shit (I have one where a fucking building company* are being cunts) and deceased estates (they can be difficult and time consuming). But I am required by the Act and by our ROPC to tell you what its costing, and not to overcharge.

It is a very refreshing change from the previous place (which I co-owned) where we had that fucking shitty 6 minute interval system.

*friends don't let friends build with GJ Gardner