Dangerous driving charge - Victory!

[scumdog]

Nice to see one of the liars got caught out for a change. Too often they get away with it.

Sometimes it's the driver/rider, sometimes it's the cop eh?

Not good if it's the cop but everybody expects it when it's the driver/rider.

[spudchucka]

It certainly wasnt "nothing" to him.

I agree. Judges and lawyers talk amongst themselves and this guy will be labeled amongst them as a bad cop. Life will become very uncomfortable for him in future if he isn't 110% squeaky clean in everything he does.

[Patrick]

You deserve all the bling you get Fatjim, too many would rant and blame ALL cops for the actions of this one.

Does anybody think I would condone such actions as this officer undertook? I seriously hope not and neither would every cop I've worked with.

LIKE WOT 'E SED... GOOD JOB, WHAT AN ARSE. This was the Awakino incident, was it not? I think I even PM'ed ya?

[Lou Girardin]

Part of me is saying the law is the law and getting off because a process wasn't followed is stupid. What if a rapist got off scott free because the dude ... used a pink label instead of ablue one on the specimen jar or something.

Y'know - like I said... academic.

Shall we do away with trials then?
Due process is there for a reason. To prevent abuse of power, just like this case in fact.

[Lou Girardin]

The guys at Boston legal would have just blackmailed him,.

And the guys in 'The Wire' would just have popped a cap in his ass.
Anyhoo, back to reality.

[Swoop]

Heres some history.......

It was a beautiful thing!

Well done Funkyfly! Nice to see justice done where it is due.

[dnos]

thats awesome to hear.
glad it worked out for ya, and like you say it's the principle.

[Deano]

what i dont expect is a Nazi cop fabricating a story to justify his lack of common sense. Theres a lot more to the story but lets just say he doesnt like motorbikes.

No fines etc, but of course i lost my license for 28 days when the officer pulled me over for "exceeding 180kph" and the lawyers bills which is more than any fine could have been.

This is why cops should never have the ability to be the judge, jury and executioner on the side of the road.

It will be interesting to see how my complaint plays out and what if anything happens to the officer.

It's just a shame you don't get awarded costs. Still, could you take a civil case against the cop for negligence or nuisance which resulted in costing you $$ ? Seems fair.

[k14]

Shall we do away with trials then?
Due process is there for a reason. To prevent abuse of power, just like this case in fact.

Yeah exactly, I can't see where ManDownUnder is coming from. Very bad comparison.

A more apt one would be someone getting charged for murder when all they did was assault someone.

[Paul in NZ]

Eventually a good outcome and good for you for not rolling over on it.

Shame it cost $$ and while it does prove that some of the system does work, I wonder what would have happened if you had not been rich enough or smart enough to hire a decent lawyer.

Personally, I'd sell that bike or change the rego.

Cheers

[ManDownUnder]

Shall we do away with trials then?
Due process is there for a reason. To prevent abuse of power, just like this case in fact.

No - trials are absolutely needed. And ythere's the problem I have. On one hand I see the need for guidelines and process in the processing of suspects, gathering and presenting evidence etc

And at the same time I want the bad guys off the streets, not let off because poor bloody cop forgot to apply rule 49, b (xvii) .6 of the picking your nose manual which is too big to practically fit into your average garage, let alone to be committed to memory

Re the coments about Nazi cops - no I don;t want them to get away with bullshit they make up on the spot. But likewise I don't expect the crim to get away with their bullshit either. It's all a bit PC really, more common sense needed somewhere - I'm buggered if I can work out how or where it fits in though.

I guess I'm just a fan of "do the crime, do the time" If ff (sorry to pick on you bud - just a topical example) was doing only 130 instead of the 180, the cop should in no way be able to "prove" that 180 figure. But the actual figure should be proven, as corroborated by the witnesses etc... revise the charge while it's being processed, rather than just throw it out.

[ManDownUnder]

I didnt get off any any technicality, i got off because 1)there was no evidence, 2)the story the office gave was full of holes which the judge was able to see thru because he made it up, 3)the fact he didnt follow proper procedure and put the public at risk reflected badly on his cred.

I also had three independant witnesses wating to give evidence contray to what the office had stated. So until you know all the facts might be best to keep that "part of you" quite aye, you dont look too academic jumping to wrong conclusions.

Yep, i was speeding, if i hadent been doing 120kph this would never have happened, i fully expect a ticket,

Yes... academic. I.e. looking at it from an academic point of view...

In the first quote you confirm you got off, and in the second quote you confirm you were speeding.

I'm not bothered by it, you save your money... all is good.

My point of interest is that you did do something wrong but had to pay nothing because the cop inflated their estimate of what you were doing.

The fact is - you still did something wrong, you got caught, and you were not punished.

[The Pastor]

Take the cop to the disputes tribunal and get all the costs back.

I had a very simerlar case except it was a mate who lied to a cop who then arrested me, when I finnally got my day in court (you have to turn up so much just to get a date resulting in lost wages) the cop + witness both lied on the stand and the judge shut them down.. I was so amazed I wasnt sure if I had won!

["D" FZ1]

Good to hear

[spudchucka]

Yeah exactly, I can't see where ManDownUnder is coming from. Very bad comparison.

A more apt one would be someone getting charged for murder when all they did was assault someone.

The first thing you have to prove in a murder trial is that somebody died, that'd be a bit hard to do if they were only assaulted.