I'm Dangerous

[scumdog]

yeah man, right in the fuckin nuts

Join th P'lice, show us how it should be done.



Then fuck-off when you realise it can't be done.

[The Stranger:Me]

2) What do I ask for when asking for disclosure? Do I just... Give them sufficient references to the TON and Summons and say " I wish to formally request disclosure of all relavent information to the case in question??

And hey, thank you all for the input so far.

Well I now know what I did.

I (apparently) overtook a car forcing the elderly driver off the road (note the compainant was in front of the person being forced off the road) then I followed the compainiant so close that she could not see my number plate then I overtook her "on a narrow bridge in excess of 100kph, I thought I was going to go off the bridge."

Now my version is a little different.
If we remember the compainant was actually in front of the vehicle I forced off the road, it goes something like this.
I followed a little old lady in a little white car at or about 70kmh for some distance from Wellsford along SH16. She had a hell of a lot of traffic behind her and I was 3rd car back. I took the first oppertunity to overtake, this was on a straight below the look out, so (as anyone knowing the road can attest) I had waited and picked my time carefully. As I drew level with the car behind the little old lady the little old lady braked and pulled to the sholder, I assumed to let the long line of traffic go. The car behind her, instead of braking, immediately pulled right, then looked to find me there and hit the picks real hard. I was not even level with the white car, I was still beside the second car at the time, else he would have seen me and not pulled right.

Now the compainant was a long way ahead, not even what I would have classed as in our line of traffic, but it was a long strait (I picked a safe place)

I then drove on and later overtook the complainant in fact on a bridge. This bridge is in a long straight and level with the road, there is lane marking along the length of the bridge. Visability was good and clear. I started the manouvre prior to the bridge and alas it was narrower than I at first thought. However, I was during the course of my travel across the bridge, entirely within the right lane.

This of course confuses me a bit. If it was dangerous for me to be travelling in the same direction as this woman on the bridge then would not it have been significantly more dangerous for me to have been coming the other way? And what had it been a logging truck or cattle crate?
Therefore if I was dangerous, surely it is the fault of the road engineers that it is so.

As to following too close. Almost anyone whom I have ever been a passenger with will attest I am always lecturing them to back off and reminding them what the road code says - Space is you best insurance, and it is free. It just didn't happen, never period. I surmise that her eye sight is so bad that she simply could not see my plate. Other comments in her statement would appear to back this up too, such as the small child I had in the vehicle (6" and weighs 125kg) and other comments

Now there are various other comments in her statement which are not relavent (I assume as the police appear to have ignored them) but go some way to making me wonder at her powers of observation. But that would appear to be it in a nut shell.

Ok as I see it, I can see where she assumed I forced the other car off the road, hey she was well ahead and couldn't see properly and of course I scared her, so I must have scared the other person off the road too right.

So, is it dangerous to overtake on a "narrow" bridge where the bridge is level with the road, the line of sight is good, and there is a centre line marking?

[The_Dover]

can you find out where this bitch lives?

[kickingzebra]

Bugger, well a few nice inconsistancies to highlight... Take it to the courts, and then file for costs for your very valuable time.

[SwanTiger]

I wouldn't call it dangerous, but if you were in a car, I wouldn't call over taking on a bridge the most safest option on a personal level, but it definitely wouldn't classify as dangerous.

Bloody old people aye

[The Stranger:Me]

can you find out where this bitch lives?

Well I do have her name.
Wish I had her surname.

Believe it or not her surname is Cumming.

I am not pissed at her. She is obviously old and she probably was scared, but as I see it the Police should have given her a cuppa calmed her down and sent her on her way. I don't think being someone being scared constitutes grounds for a dangerous charge and waste of my and tax payers money.

[SPman]

Shit - half the drivers on the road are scared and wouldn't even be able to visualise how to drive comfortably themselves, let alone, anybody else!
The fact that you aren't scared of your vehicle or the road, doesnt exactly constitute grounds for a complaint!

[Ixion]

Bugger me, half the time I'm on the road I'm scared! When riding Petal I'm perpetually scared. Should I lodge dangerous driving complaints aginst everyone else on the road.

And I overtake on bridges. Where appropriate. No different to any other bit of road. Would make crossing the Harbour Bridge a bit difficult if you couldn't.

Bloody old people, if they can't hack the pace why don't they give it away. What's someone that old doing out on a State Highway, anyway?

[Indiana_Jones]

Ice.....man......I am Dangerous

-Indy

[Lou Girardin]

I wouldn't call it dangerous, but if you were in a car, I wouldn't call over taking on a bridge the most safest option on a personal level, but it definitely wouldn't classify as dangerous.

Bloody old people aye

A bridge is just another piece of road, same rules apply.

[The Pastor]

Its always the old people who have time to get to the police station and report this shit.

[Lou Girardin]

It's just occurred to me, (OK I know I'm slow) they've laid a charge based on a public complaint without interviewing the offender. Do they not think there may be two sides to the story? I'll be very surprised if this isn't thrown out.
I'd be writing to the Minister and to the PCA about it.

[Swoop]

So much for being innocent until proven guilty, eh?

[spudchucka]

So much for being innocent until proven guilty, eh?

Being charged with an offence doesn't mean you are proven "not innocent" either, eh?

[spudchucka]

It's just occurred to me, (OK I know I'm slow) they've laid a charge based on a public complaint without interviewing the offender. Do they not think there may be two sides to the story? I'll be very surprised if this isn't thrown out.
I'd be writing to the Minister and to the PCA about it.

I'd still like to know the date of the alleged offence and the date that the charge was laid, I'm pretty damn sure there is a 6 month limitation for a charge to be laid.