Pulled over

[Patrick]

Don't use lights and sirens if possible to catch burglars doing their deeds... kinda gives us away somewhat. Max speeds? Gotta get there safely.

If you get a ticket, request a copy of the officers notes on the back of the ticket and see what he says...there is a speed portion on the rear which will need completing, including the speedo calibration certificate number (if his car has one...usually only front line cars have them). If he doesn't have one, well...

[HenryDorsetCase]

thats why you were asked what speed you were doing, so you can get enough rope to hang yourself with... the answer is always always (even if doing 230kmh in a 50k zone past a bunch of schoolkids on a pedestrian crossing while wearing a bucket on your head and after drinking 9 tequilas)

"I wasnt looking at the speedometer officer, I was concentrating on the surrounding traffic, but my best estimate of speed would be [insert appropriate speed limit speed here]"

you MUST be able to maintain a straight face while doing it though.

[Zapf]

Question: Is the officer doing more danger to the public travelling at excess of 100km+ in a 60kmh zone with no lights on?

How long was he before he decided to catch you? Get a few physics equations... taking into account acceleration of bike vs car...

e.g if you are travelling 69km/h and him at 59km/h. and you passed him, he waited 3 to 4 seconds before deciding to catch up with you. What speed will he need to travel at over the next 10 or 20 seconds to pull level with you.

And request a disclosure package... its your right. it contains all info they have regarding this case.

[masterofpuppets]

dont worry...... usually when they say they'll send it in the mail they just dont.

[Psalm42]

I find it amazing, that for some reason NZers try to argue there way out of tickets. You were clearly a danger to the world in general, and need to be taxed to remind you. And if the 65% of money you already part with in taxes was not enough, when you calculate it out the price of the ticket tax you may or may not get will probably be no more than another 1%. While I'm ranting, can anyone explain why when you have been accused of the crime of speeding you never get your rights read to you? Im sure one of them is the right not to self incriminate... and not to make a statement... Thoughts.

[Ixion]

Because when you get a speeding ticket you are not (normally) arrested.

[Psalm42]

Well thats where you could be wrong. According to the interpretations, detention means arrest. What you are never told is you are being detained. Just make your first question, before they say anything "why am I being detained" You will be told your not being detained, in which case you say, in that case Im off have a good day, at which time you will very possibly be told if you go you will be done for resisting arrest. How can you be done for resisting arrest if you have not been told your are under arrest? Ignorrance of the law is no excuse. If you do not know being detained is arrest thats your tough nuts.

[Ixion]

Not quite. Normally you'd be required to stop under S114 of the Land Transport Act 1998. Which is not an arrest. But you still have to stop and wait. S114(3)

(3)An enforcement officer may require the driver of a vehicle that is stopped under this Act to—
(a)Remain stopped for as long as is reasonably necessary for an enforcement officer to obtain the particulars referred to in paragraph (b), or to complete the exercise of any other power conferred on an enforcement officer by this Act; and

Then you get served with an Infringement Notice under S139 (the "ticket").

However, if you decide to tootle off , then you may indeed be arrested , under S114 (6)

(6)An enforcement officer may arrest a person without warrant if the officer has good cause to suspect the person of having—
(a)Failed to comply with this section or a signal or request or requirement under this section; or
(b)Given false or misleading information under this section.

At which time I am sure the arresting officer will advise you of your rights.

All in all , usually best to be nice polite biker and not try to be clever.

[Drunken Monkey]

... he then tells me I was doing way more than that and he had to do 100+ to catch me......

I HATE that so f'n much. Did every 'traffic norman' out there fail maths for every year of their lives at school?! Why, oh why, do they think that is some sort of indication that you're speeding, ffs? Even if you were doing 10km/h UNDER the posted speed limit, as long as you were in front of him, he'd still have to go faster than you to catch up, otherwise he'd never catch you!

[Lou Girardin]

thats why you were asked what speed you were doing, so you can get enough rope to hang yourself with... the answer is always always (even if doing 230kmh in a 50k zone past a bunch of schoolkids on a pedestrian crossing while wearing a bucket on your head and after drinking 9 tequilas)

"I wasnt looking at the speedometer officer, I was concentrating on the surrounding traffic, but my best estimate of speed would be [insert appropriate speed limit speed here]"

you MUST be able to maintain a straight face while doing it though.

Then you are admitting to not knowing your speed. You cannot dispute the Officers statement. The response should be, "I was doing X km/h"

[Psalm42]

"Remain stopped" ? Is this not a form of detention? Also people make the assumption that jurisdiction has been proven. Ask the question, under what jurisdiciton are you being stopped. There is a difference between being a soft target and being aware of your rights. Same again though, for conveniance sake be polite and pay the money. If you do not rebut the assumption that you have no rights then you have no rights.

[spudchucka]

While I'm ranting, can anyone explain why when you have been accused of the crime of speeding you never get your rights read to you? Im sure one of them is the right not to self incriminate... and not to make a statement... Thoughts.

Speeding isn't a crime, its an offence against the Land Transport Act 1998 not against the Crimes Act 1961.

Unless you were being arrested for dangerous driving, (dangerous speed), there is no obligation to give a caution or bill of rights.

[spudchucka]

Well thats where you could be wrong. According to the interpretations, detention means arrest. What you are never told is you are being detained. Just make your first question, before they say anything "why am I being detained" You will be told your not being detained, in which case you say, in that case Im off have a good day, at which time you will very possibly be told if you go you will be done for resisting arrest. How can you be done for resisting arrest if you have not been told your are under arrest? Ignorrance of the law is no excuse. If you do not know being detained is arrest thats your tough nuts.

Another bush lawyer. Just what we need around here.

If stopped under the provisions of the LTA 1998 you are required to remain stopped while the cop carries out any of the powers prescribed within that act.

As soon as you are detained, as in required to accompany the cop for a breath test or arrested for an offence then you will be cautioned and have your rights explained.

[spudchucka]

There is a difference between being a soft target and being aware of your rights.

There is a difference between knowing your rights and being a dumb-arse who thinks he does.

[M1CRO:Me]

And just to add to this thread, here is another thought..
Why is Drink/Driving one of the only "crimes" where you ARE expected to incriminate yourself (as not providing a sample sufficient for analysis (breath or blood) is actually an offence)... hmmmm