3 point turn cop on trial

[The Pastor]

Doesn't look like a high speed crash to me.

(tnx Nasty)

yeah, that looks more like a 10kph accident.

[mujambee]

yeah, that looks more like a 10kph accident.

I've seen far more damage in urban crashes ...

[Winston001]

My point in starting this thread was that here we have a (past) representitive of the law, in a court of law, offering evidence through a barrister, (who should know what is evidence and what is not,) which is subjective at best as part of his defence...

In my past experience of this, abielt in a different country, this kind of evidence could not be offered, one's barrister would advise against. Standing on a street corner saying a vehicle is exceeding the speed limit is not admissable evidence surely.

Still, I'm not a lawyer. Cross fingers for the Bikes because aside from their misfortune, if they loose some very unfortunate precedents are set for us all

Just to clarify something, a police officer can allege excessive speed on the basis of his own judgement as a law enforcement officer. The actual speed can only be estimated so the charge is either exceeding the speed limit or possibly driving at a dangerous speed.

It is then up to the judge and the evidence. If credible witnesses say otherwise then there is a fair chance of being discharged.

As to this case, there is no precedent being set to worry us. These cases are a dime a dozen, so common they will send a judge to sleep, each case is decided on its own circumstances. Just had the distressing experience of seeing a woman discharged on a similar charge (u turn) - only in that case she killed my mates son who was on his motorcycle. The family are devasted.

[MD]

......

Geez, 125kph? Big fuckin' deal, let it go. It's not like this 'mystery biker' going the other way was reported to shot anyone's granny up the bum is it? If this biker does in fact exist he/she probably feels stink but is unlikely to break ground coz all the fingers would undoubtedly point their way. Especially the cops coz don't forget; it's human nature to want to blame everyone else for shit that goes down and if you have plenty of money to spend, why not give it a shot?

I think some of you have missed this old thread on the crash.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...=62178&page=10


I'm appearing at the trial so can't comment but it should be wrapped up by Friday.

One things for sure the past few days have greatly increased my respect for the Police. Some really nice people work there. Seeing the low-life good-for -absolutely-nothing scumbags they have to deal with all hanging around the courthouse. It just amazes me how Cops stay human in the face of such trash, I'd go postal.

[rastuscat]

Because that is the New Way (tm) and this is the 21st Century where NOBODY accepts responsibility and are always quick to point the finger at 'somebody else' when they're in the cack.

It's not JUST the Police that do this - hell, I'm sure they learned off the public they deal with so often...

It's a process called neutralization. It's how we all react when accused of doing something we either think we didn't do, or which our mind can't believe we did.

It's the source of so many of these threads, have a look at it and wonder at your own reactions.

Here is the guts of it.

Neutralization is defined as a technique, which allows the person to rationalize or justify a criminal act. There are five techniques of neutralization; denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of victim, condemnation of the condemners, and the appeal to higher loyalties.

Denial of responsibility is a technique used when the deviant act was caused by an outside force. This technique goes beyond looking at the criminal act as an accident. The individual feels that they are drawn into the situation, ultimately becoming helpless. These juveniles feel that their abusive families, bad neighborhoods and delinquent peers predispose them to criminal acts. A common statement used “It was not my fault.”

Denial of injury occurs when the criminal act causes no harm to the victim. Criminal acts are deemed deviant in terms of whether or not someone got hurt. Using this technique the delinquent views stealing as merely borrowing and views gang fighting as a private argument between consenting and willing participants. The use of this technique is reaffirmed in the minds of these juveniles when society does not look at certain acts, such as skipping school or performing practical jokes, as criminal, but merely accepts them as harmless acts. “I assumed that a criminal action meant hurting someone, we did not hurt anyone” (Coleman, 1987:411).





Denial of victim is used when the crime is viewed as a punishment or revenge towards a deserving person. This technique may be used by those who attack homosexuals or minority groups. “They deserve it.” This is also glorified in the stories about the character Robin Hood and his actions involving stealing from the rich.

The technique called the condemnation of the condemners, also known as rejection of the rejectors by McCorkle and Korn (1954), places a negative image on those who are opposed to the criminal behavior. The juvenile ends up displacing his/her deviant behavior on those they are victimizing and also viewing the condemners as hypocrites, such as corrupt police and judges.

The appeal to higher loyalties technique is used when the person feels they must break the laws of the overall community to benefit their small group/family. This technique comes into play when a juvenile gets into trouble because of trying to help or protecting a friend or family member.

[BMWST?]

Doesn't look like a high speed crash to me.

(tnx Nasty)

what are you on?The bike has bent the rear suspension!Look at the back wheel!

[BMWST?]

Will be an interesting one.We are supposed to travel on a laned road at a speed to be able to stop in the distance that is visible to us.....

[rastuscat]

And for the record, the serious crash unit know how fast the bikes were going. Physical evidence rarely lies.

[mdnzz]

And for the record, the serious crash unit know how fast the bikes were going. Physical evidence rarely lies.

Any an all evidence against the motorcyclists will certainly be presented in court, however a spanner here.

What if they were speeding?

Does that exonerate the driver from failing to ensure the safety of other road users during the course of his
maneuver? For not thinking that at any second another road user could round that blind corner?

Surely at the days end people are responsible for their own actions.

If the bikers were speeding the prosecute them for that, but still prosecute the driver for his inattention that contributed to the accident.

[PirateJafa]

What if they were speeding?

Does that exonerate the driver from failing to ensure the safety of other road users during the course of his
maneuver? For not thinking that at any second another road user could round that blind corner?

Surely at the days end people are responsible for their own actions.

If the bikers were speeding the prosecute them for that, but still prosecute the driver for his inattention that contributed to the accident.

You do recall that by law you must be able to stop within the visible distance?

Not that I'm defending the ex-cop in any way, shape or form, but it will be something interesting to bear in mind as the case goes to court.

[Marmoot]

the cop thinks that the bikes in question were exceeding 100kph

To quote the bible:
If he hadn't seen the bikes before/while doing the U-turn, how could he have estimated their speed.
Yet if he had seen the bikes and had guessed the speed correctly to be excessive, why had he turned in front of them?




Who is the prosecutor and why this question hadn't been asked? Incompetence? How can I email this to him/her?

[peasea]

To quote the bible:
If he hadn't seen the bikes before/while doing the U-turn, how could he have estimated their speed.
Yet if he had seen the bikes and had guessed the speed correctly to be excessive, why had he turned in front of them?




Who is the prosecutor and why this question hadn't been asked? Incompetence? How can I email this to him/her?

Don't email it, scribble it on a brick and............

[cheshirecat]

To quote the bible:
If he hadn't seen the bikes before/while doing the U-turn, how could he have estimated their speed.
Yet if he had seen the bikes and had guessed the speed correctly to be excessive, why had he turned in front of them?




Who is the prosecutor and why this question hadn't been asked? Incompetence? How can I email this to him/her?

You could contact 'MD' up above a few lines

[peasea]

This is the latest that I've spotted.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/n...-lights-differ

"Differing accounts" indeed........

[HenryDorsetCase]

how could he tell that the bikes coming towards him were going at 125kph? really hard to judge speed of an object coming straight towards you I reckon, plus he would have had bugger all time to make the call.