Firestarter Racing on facebook http://www.facebook.com/FirestarterRacing
Racing thanks to:
www.fluidcoatings.co.nz
www.motostyle.co.nz
MAXIMA racing Oils
www.projectdigital.co.nz
METZELER Tires
New Plymouth Motorcycle Center
www.topstitch.co.nz/
Make it 7... or is that 8 or 9???
It is readable, show the photo provided and explain nothing been done since to rectify and other cops say it is fine. The licence thing is easy to prove too, show a copy of your passport with the arrival date in it. As for the speed.... ummmmm ......
Raj.
Wear yourself one of those fluro yellow safety vest and you'll be fine.
Taking 1 indian off the road at a time.
Sounds like my mate Tabesh - he would make the ultimate anti-indian cop.
Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.
So remind me again, why YOU are having to prove that you WERE NOT BREAKING THE LAW??? rather than THEM having to prove that you WERE BREAKING THE LAW???
Seems like a strange concept....
I have deep pockets. It's just that it's a deep empty pocket...........
Dude The first time I saw your plate I thought it looked nice and tidy on the bike AND VERY VISIBLE! Easily seen from behind you in a car, on the side of the road or by a speed camera. It's a standard plate a? No bends or anything a? Not like mine! Hahahaha, a cop had to walk real close the other day to see it and didn't say anything! I haven't got a picture but it's got a few laughs from other riders thats for sure.
I'm selling my new riding gear!! Only worn a few times get a deal Kiwibikers!!
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...53#post1414653
So..officer dibble is wrong about the licence, wrong about the plate....but always spot on about the speed, with no chance he's just having a bad day....seems like a bit of a police get out...
"oh yeah..I was wrong about that bit....and that bit....but the rest...No question I'm 100% right"
Can no one else see a pattern forming....if you do bother with court it might be worth asking when he was last trained with the speed detection system...he's obviously forgotten the lesson about licences and plates....
Mind you, according to the latest advert you just didn't have your bee keeping hat on...then you'd be 100% safe....
I must eat....I'm getting grumpier.....
Because the age-old principle of innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt does not apply to motor offences. The Land Transport Act and its various amendments actually state what is required as proof of an offence, for instance:
Land Transport Act 1998 - Part 10 - Proceedings enforcing responsibilities
145 Evidence of approved vehicle surveillance equipment
1) In proceedings for a moving vehicle offence, an image produced by means of an exposure taken by approved vehicle surveillance equipment and showing or recording a motor vehicle on a road, the speed of the vehicle, the location of the vehicle, the colour or form of a traffic control device, and the date and time when the image was taken, or showing or recording any of those things, is, in the absence of proof to the contrary, sufficient evidence of that fact or event.
2) The production in proceedings for a moving vehicle offence of an image purporting to be an image referred to in subsection (1) is, in the absence of proof to the contrary, sufficient evidence that the image was produced by means of an exposure taken by approved vehicle surveillance equipment.
Which, roughly translated means that a cop can take a picture on his cellphone of you sitting in your car whilst parked, claim it's a photo taken with approved vehicle surveillance equipment and that you were doing 250kph, and it's up to you to prove that these things didn't happen. The legislation, contrary to the Bill of Rights, shifts the burden of proof onto the defendant. Again, it's something a good lawyer would probably be able to exploit, but I wouldn't want to have to pay his fees whilst he argued it.
Using the above section of the Land Transport Act, a photo simply showing your vehicle driving down the road can be treated as proof that you were doing almost anything. The truly odious part of the sentence is: or showing or recording any of those things. It means that, for instance, a photo of your vehicle on a road can be construed as proof of speeding, regardless of whether the image actually shows the speed of your vehicle as well. A cop merely has to state, under oath, that he observed you speeding and here's the proof and the magistrate won't even listen to any arguments to the contrary.
Worse still, magistrates will intrinsically believe a Police Officer in relation to motor offences where in any other case they'd demand actual evidence. The equipment in use by NZ Police contains absolutely no way of verifying anything after the fact:
Despite the fact that such technology is available off the shelf and in use by other Police forces around the world, it has not become a mandatory requirement in NZ. This does allow the cops to basically get away with virtually any ticket they issue and, more serious in my view, instantly fosters a complete lack of trust in the Police by the general public. considering that motoring offences are the means by which most members of the public come into contact with the cops, is it any wonder that the Police's standing in the community has nosedived spectacularly since the counter-productive zealous speed-limit enforcement started?
- Radar and laser guns have no auditing capability, to show when they were triggered and what speed was recorded at what point.
- In-car radar systems are not connected to a camera of any sort, or have an audit log of their own, to show the same.
- Police vehicles do not have cameras in them recording constantly.
Of course, such equipment is not going to help in every case, but the majority of incidences should require an element of proof by the Police instead of the defendant having to prove he did not commit the offence.
Section 146 of the Land Transport act also contains an interesting little snippet too:
In proceedings for [a speeding offence against any bylaws or enactment, any other offence against this Act, or an offence against the Road User Charges Act 1977], the production of a certificate (or a document purporting to be a copy of the certificate) purporting to be signed by a sworn or non-sworn member of the Police authorised for the purpose by the Commissioner or by a person authorised for the purpose by the Director, as to the testing and accuracy of any equipment or device to which this section applies that is referred to in the certificate, is, in the absence of [proof] to the contrary, sufficient proof that the equipment or device referred to was tested on the date specified in the certificate and was accurate on the date of the alleged offence.
It's a remarkable assumption to say that things like radar guns (especially in-car ones which are affected by the police vehicle speedometer calibration, tyre wear, tyre pressures and so on) are deemed to be accurate provided they have been tested within the previous twelve months. In the UK, items do have to be formally calibrated every twelve months, but the calibration must be confirmed by a series of manual calibration checks at the start of each shift, and proof of that must be provided. No competent engineer would trust a measuring device that was not calibrated on a regular basis, but it seems OK for the courts and government to expect the general public to.
Sanx that was a bloody informative post. Cheers. I am still awaiting a reply from the cop shop and when they do write back to me I shall post up the ruling here for everyones future reference.
Firestarter Racing on facebook http://www.facebook.com/FirestarterRacing
Racing thanks to:
www.fluidcoatings.co.nz
www.motostyle.co.nz
MAXIMA racing Oils
www.projectdigital.co.nz
METZELER Tires
New Plymouth Motorcycle Center
www.topstitch.co.nz/
Whats a PCA Patrick? Also should I be sitting tight waiting for their reply in the post, or should I get on to calling his C/O like u suggest. Also I've heard he is the C/O !! so who do I call regarding him then? Or will my calling just aggravate him further... coz I really don't want a well trained, professional anti-bike cop on ma arse... seriously !
Firestarter Racing on facebook http://www.facebook.com/FirestarterRacing
Racing thanks to:
www.fluidcoatings.co.nz
www.motostyle.co.nz
MAXIMA racing Oils
www.projectdigital.co.nz
METZELER Tires
New Plymouth Motorcycle Center
www.topstitch.co.nz/
If it wasn't for a concise set of rules, we might have to resort to common sense!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks