I'm Dangerous

[The Stranger:Me]

Well, at least according to the police I was on the 18th of Jan (06)

Now I have a traffic offence notice, but how do I know what it relates to?

all it says is that I drove a motor vehicle in a dangerous manner and details the vehicle, but not what I did.

And hey that was a couple of months ago and I do so much dangerous shit how do I know which incident to prepare for?

And whilst we are on the subject, any one know a decent lawyer for dealing with this type of thing?

Decent lawyer? Well you know what I mean.

Ok this is back on the agenda.
Revieved a summons yesterday.

I was told previously that the summons would set out what I had done, well guess what it too says that I drove dangerously. So it looks like they expect me to turn up at court, listen to the charge and defend my actions without any preparation or nothing.

Wow justice NZ style aye. You got to love it.

So coming back to my original post. Is there any lawyer etc around Auckland which people have had experience with and could recommend for this type of thing.

How does one go about requesting full disclosure so as I can find out what I am defending... or is that not allowed in this country?

[Patrick]

So... when you were told, again and again earlier in the thread to seek disclosure, what did you receive and what did that tell ya??????

Oops... my bad... missed ya bottom line above...

Write in to the Police Prosecution Section at wherever the charge is being heard, (IE: Auckland Distrct Court - write to Auckland Central Police Station Prosecutions) advising them of your name and the date of your hearing and that you are after full disclosure of the case against you. Give em the address to post it too. You do not even have to write... a verbal request over the phone is still a request under the official information act and either verbal or written, it has to be acted on within 20 days.

[Grahameeboy]

I suspect that dislosure arises once you defend Offence.
Speak to Loosebruce since from memory he was in a similar situation which he posted and I think his charge was reduced.
Looking at LTSA site it looks like there is normally a mandatory 28 day suspension and it seems odd that they too all this time to issue you with a notice.
Plenty of Solictors in Yellow Pages but try Peter Tomlinson - 09 309 9519....I only know him to talk to on Ferry and Village but he seems a good down to earth type and just say that guy with Daughter in wheelchair mentioned you and hopefully you should be cushty.

[Karma]

no no.. I'm dangerous.. and so's my wife...

Well if you're dangerous then I can be brian...

[Grahameeboy]

So... when you were told, again and again earlier in the thread to seek disclosure, what did you receive and what did that tell ya??????

Oops... my bad... missed ya bottom line above...

Write in to the Police Prosecution Section at wherever the charge is being heard, (IE: Auckland Distrct Court - write to Auckland Central Police Station Prosecutions) advising them of your name and the date of your hearing and that you are after full disclosure of the case against you. Give em the address to post it too. You do not even have to write... a verbal request over the phone is still a request under the official information act and either verbal or written, it has to be acted on within 20 days.

Those Guys in Auckland really helpful.........were great when I was applying for a limited licence.

[Ixion]

I've heard good reports of Patrick Winkler , as a specialist traffic lawyer. Dunno his number, but it'll be in the phone book.

[The_Dover]

Do you know of any that will work for sexual favours?

I may need one soon too but i'm skint.

[Grahameeboy]

Do you know of any that will work for sexual favours?

I may need one soon too but i'm skint.

Why have you lost your address book Dover!!

[Grahameeboy]

I've heard good reports of Patrick Winkler , as a specialist traffic lawyer. Dunno his number, but it'll be in the phone book.

09 575 5111

[Lou Girardin]

I suspect that dislosure arises once you defend Offence.

Looking at LTSA site it looks like there is normally a mandatory 28 day suspension

Not necessarily. You need diclosure to ascertain if you have a defence.
There is no 28 day suspension for dangerous. (It's not as bad as speeding, you see) But you can be arrested for it, but not for exceeding the speed limit..
This is lawmakers logic.

[The Pastor]

Lawyers fess are often higher than what the driving offence will be.

Just get the details and pick holes in the "facts" do a little bit of ground work then get the lawyer to see if you've got a case. (save a bit of dosh)

[scumdog]

I suspect that dislosure arises once you defend Offence.

Disclosure package is made up at the same time the o/c (officer in charge) of the file is making up the file, it's available just for the asking.

Disclosure should be just about everything on the file relating to the case, that way you know what the cop has that is against you and you can prepare your defence.

(One-way street here - lawyers/clients never in turn reveal how they plan in defending the charge i.e. what line of defence they are going to pursue.)

[Grahameeboy]

Disclosure package is made up at the same time the o/c (officer in charge) of the file is making up the file, it's available just for the asking.

Disclosure should be just about everything on the file relating to the case, that way you know what the cop has that is against you and you can prepare your defence.

(One-way street here - lawyers/clients never in turn reveal how they plan in defending the charge i.e. what line of defence they are going to pursue.)

Cheers for that.

Re One Way thing I guess the Police Lawyer should, based on experience, have a few inclings of what Defence will throw down.......interesting though and I guess the great onus of proof is with the Defendant.....I am sure it does not always work one way in Court.

[Grahameeboy]

Not necessarily. You need diclosure to ascertain if you have a defence.
There is no 28 day suspension for dangerous. (It's not as bad as speeding, you see) But you can be arrested for it, but not for exceeding the speed limit..
This is lawmakers logic.

Cheers Lou....the site is a mine field.

[Patrick]

Cheers for that.

Re One Way thing I guess the Police Lawyer should, based on experience, have a few inclings of what Defence will throw down.......interesting though and I guess the great onus of proof is with the Defendant.....I am sure it does not always work one way in Court.

Onus of proof is on the prosecution. Defendant doesn't even have to give evidence. If they do, they can lie through their teeth to create a reasonable doubt and still get off...