Busted? Help!

[FJRider]

Why is it, people complain the loudest about the "stupid" laws which are actually only the ones they get caught breaking, or the ones they find inconvenient at the time. What gives ANY of us the "RIGHT" to pick and choose WHICH law they WILL, or WON'T obey. Personal (in)convenience was never a serious factor considered, in the process (REASON FOR) a LAW being enacted. WE ALL KNOW THE RULES.
Even after knowing (all) the rules, we may find a reason (ANY REASON) to break the rules, this usually means a brief "disscussion" with the Highway Patrol officer when caught, why this rule shouldn't apply to you. This thread was started after an ADMISSION of breaking the rules. AND wants OFF on a "technicality" ANY TECHNICALITY !!!
As was said on a previous post...TWO riders made two mistakes. ONE - BOTH 40 km's over the posted speed limit TWO - BOTH stopped.(after the flashing lights came on)

[hospitalfood]

This is a totally valid question, I no people who have gotten away with just cruising away at the same speed, if not increasing it a bit more and just ride off and watch the flashing lights fade away in you mirror. If for some reason they do manage to catch up then just claim inocence & say you hadn't checked your mirror. If he was tailing you then that is different and basically your screwed!

I have to agree with alot of the posts, you could try take it to court but by the time you get your day the 28 days will be up, I just hope for your sake the demerits aren't going to kill you.

Safer riding next time. Slow & easy wins the race (hmm)

the demerits probably will, not quite sure yet but looks like min 3 months.

[FJRider]

the demerits probably will, not quite sure yet but looks like min 3 months.

How many demerits did you have prior to this "catch" ??? Any prior to this may be wiped !!!

[Jantar]

Hmmm, mine has a label saying 'FASTEST" - and will lock two speeds.....one being the fastest surprisingly enough...but to be grammatical it should read 'faster' eh..

No, Your grammer is correct. As I understand it even if there are 4 vehicles in the beam it will lock the fastest, and the strongest signals, and sometimes they will be the same signal. It will ignore all other signals. So fastest is correct, not neccessarily faster.

[Mikkel]

This is a totally valid question, I no people who have gotten away with just cruising away at the same speed, if not increasing it a bit more and just ride off and watch the flashing lights fade away in you mirror. If for some reason they do manage to catch up then just claim inocence & say you hadn't checked your mirror. If he was tailing you then that is different and basically your screwed!

I know someone who has done that as well. Not on a bike, but in a car...

[MaxB]

Which works in two ways because it also exposes the lying twats that make vexatious complaints about honest hard working cops.

Agree 100%. In some European countries 'camera cars' have the ability to play back to drivers exactly what they did wrong at the road side. Shuts them up real quick.

In my mates cruiser the screen and speed display is on all the time but the recording can be stopped or started as required. The hard drive is not big enough to be used continuously. So they retain their discretion when issuing tickets. AFAIK he now issues a lot more dangerous/careless use tickets using video evidence.

[spudchucka]

Agree 100%. In some European countries 'camera cars' have the ability to play back to drivers exactly what they did wrong at the road side. Shuts them up real quick.

In my mates cruiser the screen and speed display is on all the time but the recording can be stopped or started as required. The hard drive is not big enough to be used continuously. So they retain their discretion when issuing tickets. AFAIK he now issues a lot more dangerous/careless use tickets using video evidence.

It would also make great evidence in drink drive cases. At the moment all the court gets is a printout of a breath or blood reading and the cops oral evidence to go on.

If they also had video evidence of the driver staggering out of their car, walking around on their wobbly boots, doing the inebriated stroll and talking the shit that they almost always do then the court would get a really good indication of just how pissed they were at the time.

I think that this would result in some more realistic sentences as at the moment it is just an arbitrary number having been exceeded and therefore is outside the law. If the courts could see for themselves just how pissed a person was when they were apprehended driving they might start to realise that they and all of us share the roads with these wankers.

[Coldrider]

Video footage works both ways, also records policemans activity as well, not always that flash.

[scumdog]

Video footage works both ways, also records policemans activity as well, not always that flash.

True.

But bad behaviour on video?

The public win by about 500 to 1.

[Coldrider]

True.

But bad behaviour on video?

The public win by about 500 to 1.

Yeah, producers get enough of it to string a doco, sorry programme on it and actually get to sell it, then chewing gum viewers actually watch it.

[more_fasterer]

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

Overtaking a mufti - D'oh! Been there before myself in the cage, passed at an even 115km/h feeling the energy of two glares burning into the left side of my face... but I digress.


My understanding of doppler radar is that there needs to be a significant difference in speed between the returns from the two pulses the radar puts out (one to the target, the other to the ground) otherwise an accurate speed over ground measurement of the target cannot be made.

This means that the radar cannot measure the speed of targets travelling in the same direction, they either have to be oncoming or the patrol vehicle has to be stationary.


Nothing mentioned previously in this thread by our resident has mentioned anything about this, perhaps they can either prove or disprove this point?

Similarly, perhaps davereid has some more knowledge on this subject that can be shared?

[scumdog]

This means that the radar cannot measure the speed of targets travelling in the same direction, they either have to be oncoming or the patrol vehicle has to be stationary.

Similarly, perhaps davereid has some more knowledge on this subject that can be shared?

Mwahahaha!!

Does that explain it???

[Mikkel]

Similarly, perhaps davereid has some more knowledge on this subject that can be shared?

If you're interested I suppose Wikipedia would have a decent article on the Doppler effect (make sure to look at the one for electro-magnetic radiation).

[more_fasterer]

Nothing mentioned previously in this thread by our resident has mentioned anything about this, perhaps they can either prove or disprove this point?

Mwahahaha!!

Does that explain it???

No, but it does give a few indicators as to your character perhaps I should have asked if any of our resident had anything constructive to add?

[hospitalfood]

there is more than one resident officer and sometimes thier opinions differ, however the target / ground thing sounds unlikely judging by the specs of the radar unit.
but I could be wrong ?