Busted? Help!

[Ixion]

...so you then seek remedial damages.... compensation. I agree it's not ideal but I understand "ideal" is a component of "perfect society" and we don't seem to have one of those...

There's also the wee issue of someone actually doing the crime, therefore time served is not entirely out of order, or am I foolishly seeeking out the spirit of the law rather than the letter?

Do the crime do the time is fine, BUT there should be a conviction first . After all , for the much more serious speed dangerous (ie another 10kph) you keep your licence UNTIL FOUND GUILTY. No reason at all why the 140 couldn't work the same way. Guilty of 140, lose your licence for 28 days. But, YOU SHOULD BE FOUND GUILTY FIRST.

(There's no right to compesationor damages, BTW .)

[Ixion]

You have a point, but I doubt there would be much of an outcry to seizing the boy racer's cars at the roadside for dangerous driving/unsafe vehicles, etc. I mean if you're clocked at 140+ you don't have much of a leg to stand on...

Unsafe vehicle is a different matter. If I am stopped in an unsafe vehicle, it will not normally be safe for me to proceed. The fact that the vehicle is unsafe when stopped would normally mean that it would be unsafe to proceed. But there is no logic at all that shows that someone who was stopped at 140 would continue at that speed (they might, but there's no evidence to adduce it ) . Stop them, ticket them, let them go on their way. Eventually the legal wheels turn and they are found guilty )or plead guilty otr pay the fine) And then they cop the 28 days. Unless of course they are found not guilty. .

[mudthug]

probably cost you more to fight the charge and you'll probably still lose anyway

[jafar]

2 of us just lost our licences. passed an undercover car at 142 ( radar reading )
instant 28 day loss of licence + fines ( $510 )

dont tell us, we know. we are bad boys.

wondering if it is ok to book both of us on 1 radar reading???

I'd get a Lawyer that specializes in traffic law & pay them good money for sound advise rather than listen to the bush lawyers in here
Strange as it may seem , but the judges appear to go a bit lighter on 'offenders' who have consulted with their friends
Judges were lawyers once too ya know

[spudchucka]

As usual there's plenty of good advice here, you should be sweet.

[Mikkel]

Bzzzzt, wrong, but thanks for playing.

the point of a criminal prosecution is that the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the crime that is asserted.

So its important to just deny, let them try and prove, and if their major plank of evidence is incorrect (i.e. the radar reading) then its not beyond a reasonable doubt.

However i reckon it would cost you easy a couple of grand to defend, so its up toyou. Oh and get lawyered up.

Mate, you read what you quoted wrong. My point was that you're responsible for whatever speed you are doing no matter whether you are aware of what it is. It is not the responsibility of the prosecution to ensure that the defendants speedometer was displaying the right speed (or working at all). If you base your defense on the fact that you thought you were only doing 130 km/h instead of 142 km/h it is not that different from arguing that "I only thought I was stealing $2,000 not $20,000 your honour. Therefore I should go free...". As for reasonable doubt - whether the defendant believes he's committed an offense or not has no impact upon reasonable doubt.

You proceed to state that their best option is to address the accuracy of the radar reading - just like I stated in my posts above. Indeed, if you can prove that the statistical deviation on a speed measurement at ~140 km/h is in the order of 2 km/h you have got a good case.
It actually seems you agree with that... Although for a good defense it would be a better idea not even to address the issue of speed altogether and just focus on what limitations are inherent in the gear used to make the measurement.

I'd get a Lawyer that specializes in traffic law & pay them good money for sound advise rather than listen to the bush lawyers in here
Strange as it may seem , but the judges appear to go a bit lighter on 'offenders' who have consulted with their friends
Judges were lawyers once too ya know

There's a movie right there:

A real-life Central Auckland drama: Once were Lawyers.


And I agree with Ixion, the roadside confiscation of a persons license is absolutely ridiculous. In many cases such a confiscation would constitute a much larger hazard to both the offender and other motorists than that of a motorvehicle travelling at 140-160 km/h!

[Banesto John]

[QUOTE=Ixion;1467340]Do the crime do the time is fine, BUT there should be a conviction first . After all , for the much more serious speed dangerous (ie another 10kph) you keep your licence UNTIL FOUND GUILTY. No reason at all why the 140 couldn't work the same way. Guilty of 140, lose your licence for 28 days. But, YOU SHOULD BE FOUND GUILTY FIRST.

Getting charged with Speed Dangerous isn't always automatic at 151 or higher. It's a case by case thing. Time, place, circumstances.

What is automatic is the 28 day walk, any time you get caught doing 41 or more over any posted speed limit, regardless of what the cop charges you with. Fer example, a bloke gets caught doing 151. The cop charges him with Dangerous Speed(coz he's passing a mini-van full of nuns), he gets a 28 day walk. A different bloke gets caught at 151, this cop is a softie, he charges him with Exceeding 100km/h, but he still has to give a 28 day walk.

Most people charged with murder DON"T get bail. The pollies must have been having a bad day when they let the Coppers hand out 28 day walks. Still, don't do 41 over a speed limit and it probably won't happen.

[hospitalfood]

hi folks

first a thanks to all that have replied and a massive thanks to those who have gone above and beyond the call. you know who you are.

we have recieved heaps of help and good advice.

Morcs mate.........sorry to hear.

we passed ( overtake on straight ) a mufti car, he turned his radar on as we pulled back in and his reading of our speed was 142 km/h.

we have decided it is worth fighting this. there is the matter of weather his radar is correct ? has been calibrated correctly and in the specified timeframe ?
if his car has / had a current warrant / rego ?
I have learnt that the police officer must have done his job correctly, and his equipment must be up to scratch. this all comes into play before we even look at weather it is ok to book both of us with an alleged reading that has only come from one bike.

I dont have massive hopes to be dashed, but I have heard some good news and interesting facts. enough for me to think it is worth a bit of a fight as the officers actions seem unreasonable to me.

once again thanks all

[Morcs]

hi folks

first a thanks to all that have replied and a massive thanks to those who have gone above and beyond the call. you know who you are.

we have recieved heaps of help and good advice.

Morcs mate.........sorry to hear.

we passed ( overtake on straight ) a mufti car, he turned his radar on as we pulled back in and his reading of our speed was 142 km/h.

we have decided it is worth fighting this. there is the matter of weather his radar is correct ? has been calibrated correctly and in the specified timeframe ?
if his car has / had a current warrant / rego ?
I have learnt that the police officer must have done his job correctly, and his equipment must be up to scratch. this all comes into play before we even look at weather it is ok to book both of us with an alleged reading that has only come from one bike.

I dont have massive hopes to be dashed, but I have heard some good news and interesting facts. enough for me to think it is worth a bit of a fight as the officers actions seem unreasonable to me.

once again thanks all

The one to try is wether the radar was calibrated for use against bikes.

[cowboyz]

there will be 2 different court cases to answer if you both defend the charge. One for you, one for him.
Simplicity is the answer. At your case you plead that you DEFINITELY were not exceeding 140k/hr. Admit to 135k. take the ticket and move on. There is plenty of reasonable cause for the judge to believe the OTHER bike was doing 142.
At your mates cause he pleads that he was DEFINITELY not exceeding 140k/hr. Admit to 135k. take the ticket and move on. Plenty of reasonable cause for the judge to believe the OTHER bike was doing 142.
I can see the judge getting pissed and slapping a few fines around the place but no reason why either of you should lose your licences.

[scumdog]

The one to try is wether the radar was calibrated for use against bikes.

Eh

Oh right, yeah, they're only calibrated for white Japanese cars with four-doors>>

[Nade]

hmmmmm we got pulled over just south of Kaikoura as a group.....about 6 of us....for speeding. The cop was a good bastard...spent more time yakking about the bikes than the fact we were doing 119kms. In the end He only gave us a warning and let us go and his parting statment was..who do I give the ticket to......I only got one of ya and I don't know who it was...shrugged his shoulders and laughed. We thought he was a good chap....for a copper....lol

[swbarnett]

Most people charged with murder DON"T get bail.

But most is not all. They still treat murderers better than speeders.

[Grahameeboy]

hi folks

first a thanks to all that have replied and a massive thanks to those who have gone above and beyond the call. you know who you are.

we have recieved heaps of help and good advice.

Morcs mate.........sorry to hear.

we passed ( overtake on straight ) a mufti car, he turned his radar on as we pulled back in and his reading of our speed was 142 km/h.

we have decided it is worth fighting this. there is the matter of weather his radar is correct ? has been calibrated correctly and in the specified timeframe ?
if his car has / had a current warrant / rego ?
I have learnt that the police officer must have done his job correctly, and his equipment must be up to scratch. this all comes into play before we even look at weather it is ok to book both of us with an alleged reading that has only come from one bike.

I dont have massive hopes to be dashed, but I have heard some good news and interesting facts. enough for me to think it is worth a bit of a fight as the officers actions seem unreasonable to me.

once again thanks all

Sorry but you were doing 140ish...overtook a mufti cop...how can you say he was being unreasonable?

I would find out whether you you are likely to get done for any other offences. Maybe talk to the Police Prosecution Service and see what they can tell you. They can be helpful...

Don't get me wrong as you have my sympathy having lost my licence in 2006 but less stress is better and then if you loose you may loose your licence for longer, all extra hassle...

[Grahameeboy]

But most is not all. They still treat murderers better than speeders.

How so...murderers get put in jail, speeders generally don't...silly boy