I'm Dangerous

[Indoo]

I'm sure Lou is equally as anti against the rape trial against Rickard etc even though its 20+ years after the fact.

[Lou Girardin]

Why not, the law says up to three months later is o.k.
At what point SHOULD an offender get away with whatever????

I bet if the cop said to you "Nah, it's two months down the track, we're not going to bother anymore with your driving complaint, bad luck" you may have a different point of view???.

Perhaps at the point where the 'offenders' defence is harmed by the delay.
If I hadn't been stopped by a cop as a result of a complaint by a driver who didn't know the overtaking rules, I may have got a ticket weeks later when I wouldn't have remembered that I passed the tosser on the left of two lanes.
I would have missed the pleasure of seeing the light dawn in Plod's eyes as he realised he'd just wasted 20 minutes loooking for my car.
As for your second point, I've heard words to that effect 2 weeks after a complaint from me and an independant witness. Apparently the other drivers word was worth more than both of ours!


The bottom line is that nobody should identify the driver of a vehicle until they know the nature of the enquiry.

[Lou Girardin]

I'm sure Lou is equally as anti against the rape trial against Rickard etc even though its 20+ years after the fact.

Perhaps, if it weren't for Rickards bosses deterring her from making a complaint originally. But then rape is a little different to a driving offence, isn't it.

[scumdog]

Perhaps, if it weren't for Rickards bosses deterring her from making a complaint originally. But then rape is a little different to a driving offence, isn't it.

Yep, more likely to get killed by somebody committing a driving offence.

[scumdog]

The bottom line is that nobody should identify the driver of a vehicle until they know the nature of the enquiry.

In context of course - you wouldn't want to be summonsed to Court for a penalty of up to $10,000 for failing to supply details/identity of the driver of your car when the only reason they wanted to know who was driving to give them a warning or even $150 ticket of some sort.

[Lou Girardin]

In context of course - you wouldn't want to be summonsed to Court for a penalty of up to $10,000 for failing to supply details/identity of the driver of your car when the only reason they wanted to know who was driving to give them a warning or even $150 ticket of some sort.

I'd take that chance, especially when the fines seldom, if ever, exceed three figures.
What I wouldn't do is admit anything until I know the details.

[The Stranger:Me]

In my view the Rickards case should never have made it to court. I am not saying that they are innocent, not saying they are guilty, simply saying we will never know the truth.

No matter how the decision falls one party will claim vindication when the reality it is nothing of the sort. We and the jury will never know the truth and justice will never be served by this trial.

[Pixie]

In my view the Rickards case should never have made it to court. I am not saying that they are innocent, not saying they are guilty, simply saying we will never know the truth.

No matter how the decision falls one party will claim vindication when the reality it is nothing of the sort. We and the jury will never know the truth and justice will never be served by this trial.

Three poor feeble minded cops,one of whom has risen to a very high position in management,were seduced by a sly, evil teenage girl,with ulterior motives.

[scumdog]

I'd take that chance, especially when the fines seldom, if ever, exceed three figures.
What I wouldn't do is admit anything until I know the details.

As I mentioned before:
Boy does skid,
Boy gets notice to supply details of driver of his car at that time of skid, boy says get stuffed, not telling you neyah!
Boy gets summonsed to court, boy gets $1,500 fine.

Boy would have got a lot less of a fine if he had owned up.

As I said, you have to put it in context.

(and yeah, boy knew details on this one, heard it from friends.
Don't have to tell them details when serving notice on them)

[scumdog]

Three poor feeble minded cops,one of whom has risen to a very high position in management,were seduced by a sly, evil teenage girl,with ulterior motives.

Amazing how many sly evil teenage girls inflict their ulterior motives on people who have money.
(Or they think have money)
I won't quote examples but I know of quite a few where if the guy was a broken-arse bum she wouldn't even try.

[Lou Girardin]

I'm not talking about a mouth-breathing boy-racer who wouldn't know if his arse is on fire until he smells burning.
I'm talking about replying to the letter and asking why the information is required.
You really need to get away from hillbilly central Scummy.
Come up to the big smoke for the HOG rally in '07 and you can have a soundproof room at Casa Luigi.

[Psalm42]

I'd take that chance, especially when the fines seldom, if ever, exceed three figures.
What I wouldn't do is admit anything until I know the details.

Couldn't agree more.

I have been through this routine with the cops, to cut a long story short, if I had not been belligerent about my right to be informed of the nature and the cause, I would have ended up with a dangerous driving charge. The cop got very indignant when I said no one was driving the vehicle, why do you want information relating to this car, what's the nature and the cause of your investigation. So he tried doing me for failing to give details. Ended up, his informant had made a few mistakes, and so had he.

His superior offered to drop the failing to give name charges on the condition I dropped the civil claim against the police officer for damages.

Not being enough of a stirer at the time, I took the offer.

[spudchucka]

Three poor feeble minded cops,one of whom has risen to a very high position in management,were seduced by a sly, evil teenage girl,with ulterior motives.

Just one of many possible truths. Wait for the movie to come out, then well know the truth.

[Lou Girardin]

His superior offered to drop the failing to give name charges on the condition I dropped the civil claim against the police officer for damages.

Not being enough of a stirer at the time, I took the offer.

Another win for the little guy?

[scumdog]

I'm not talking about a mouth-breathing boy-racer who wouldn't know if his arse is on fire until he smells burning.
I'm talking about replying to the letter and asking why the information is required.
You really need to get away from hillbilly central Scummy.
Come up to the big smoke for the HOG rally in '07 and you can have a soundproof room at Casa Luigi.

Yeah, I know what you're saying BUT the law does not differentiate between the two types....
And it was a fire-breathing V8 HQ Holden - we don't have/allow the 'other type' down here.

HOG Rally? I'm not decided yet, want to buy my 'dream bike' (Superglide T Sport) AND now have two boys at Uni so money is a little tighter than it was but we'll see.