Not another speeding thread, well actually

[tigertim20]

ok, had a conversation with a few others the other day, re getting pulled up for speeding.

Here is a theoretical situation. There is a cop sitting up on an overpass, clocking vehicles, then radio-ing through to another cop further up the road, giving details of speeding vehicles so they can be pulled over.

Now, assume you were pulled over by the cop waiting further up the road, who said you were speeding XX amount, but you beleived you were not, Do the police have to show you your speed on the radar gun-thingy they use?
I was sure that they had to, but Have been tod by some that this has changed. I ask because we couldnt come to a solid consensus. My thinking was that if a cop accuses you of speeding then he must provide evidence to prove you were speeding, and that if he couldnt show you, then he couldnt ticket you.

No, I wasnt caught speeding, its just a theoretical question, as we did bet a dozen beers for whoever could prove they were right, so please, if anyone out there, (perhaps a cop on KB?) can confirm whether I have won or lost a dozen beers, that would be great, thanks!

[nsrpaul]

not a cop, but it has changed if that was the law previously

it would be ticket time

[Ixion]

He is under no *legal* obligation to show you anything whatsoever. Or, even, to have anything to show you. You can get done for speeding just because a cop sees you and estimates your speed and thinks it over the limit.

[nsrpaul]

He is under no *legal* obligation to show you anything whatsoever. Or, even, to have anything to show you. You can get done for speeding just because a cop sees you and estimates your speed and thinks it over the limit.

on the button unfortunatley

[Laxi]

He is under no *legal* obligation to show you anything whatsoever. Or, even, to have anything to show you. You can get done for speeding just because a cop sees you and estimates your speed and thinks it over the limit.

not what I was told, my friends brother is a cop & he said that if you request to see your speed then they are "required" to show you

[Motu]

But that's so unfair!!!! Just because my bike looks so fast,and because I look even faster - he can give me a ticket?

[Jantar]

There is no requirement at all to show you the reading on the speed measurement equipment, but if you decide to defend the ticket you can ask for all evidence under discloser. Then when you go to court, the fact that the cop who wrote the ticket isn't the same one who detected you speeding, you may have some doubt as to identification. Ie How did the cop who wrote the ticket know that he had the correct vehicle? It is possible that the one using the laser gun kept you in sight all the time until you were stopped, then confirmed to cop who stopped you that he did have the correct vehicle. Or maybe it was another bike clocked, and you who were stopped.

Then again, if you were speeding, and it was a fair cop, just pay the tax and get on with life.

[tigertim20]

bugger it dagnammit!, I was looking forward to some cold beers, Im fresh out! So if at the time you are pulled over, you say, I was not speeding, prove it, he can just sy NO, now heres your ticket, piss off?

[MaxB]

You have very little chance of getting off if you were wrongly accused of speeding. Your only hope is to have independant or contrary reliable evidence that counteracts the police evidence to the point that a judge will believe you and not them.

So for example you will have to have a witness that will swear that they saw the laser unit being improperly used and have an expert to back that up. And/or a GPS output that proves you were not speeding at the exact time and place of the alleged offence. Then you go to court and take your chances which statistically are not that great.

Or pay the fine, take the demerits and get on with your life. YMMV.

[FJRider]

Its been common practice with the Lasers for quite some time...

[Gremlin]

Ixion is correct.

GPS are also not just for finding your way, they are excellent backup if you're wrongly accused.

[Renegade]

case law has been made on this in wellington back in 06 i think, district court level though so not binding in other district courts. (i could be wrong)

the radar should be shown if its practical, they found that an officer using the radar 350metres up the road was close enough for it to be practical for the alleged offender to view the radar,

however it has been found that an officer situated 1.8km away from the alledged offender was not practical for it to be viewed.

[LBD]

case law has been made on this in wellington back in 06 i think, district court level though so not binding in other district courts. (i could be wrong)

the radar should be shown if its practical, they found that an officer using the radar 350metres up the road was close enough for it to be practical for the alleged offender to view the radar,

however it has been found that an officer situated 1.8km away from the alledged offender was not practical for it to be viewed.

Well over here you get waved over by a pink batton weilding uniformed bloke....officer presumably.....You are told you were speeding irrespective of facts or evidence and that will be 300 som thankyou very much....unsaid is the comment that these two other guys behind him, with kalashnikovs think you were speeding as well... bugger there goes another NZ$12

By the way, heard a good one a few years back that goes like this...

A officer pulls over a lady for speeding...

"Excuse me Mam, do you know why I pulled you over?"

"Why yes of course I do officer, you think I am attractive and want to invite me to the Southland policemans annual ball...."

"Sorry mam, Southland police do not have balls....." ...and then he just turned and walked away

[CookMySock]

You have very little chance of getting off if you were wrongly accused of speeding. Your only hope is to have independant or contrary reliable evidence that counteracts the police evidence to the point that a judge will believe you and not them.

It is not your responsibility to prove your innocence. It is their responsibility to prove your guilt.

There are two parts to this. Firstly the police must follow procedure, and if that means they must show you the speed display, or do any other thing, then they must, and if they don't then they did not follow procedure - then its not legal in court. I'm sure the fuzz must have a chuckle about how many fines they can actually get paid, when they wouldn't have a hope of getting them through a court of law.

Secondly, they must make an allegation that holds water. They cannot just trump up some bullshit and expect it to hold. They are fully aware of this, and they are also fully aware of when then are operating in "trumped up bullshit" territory or not, and usually you can just laugh at them at this time and they will snarl at you and just tell you to get lost and slow down.

So its a game of wits for them and for you. They will try to stay cool and calm so you don't call their bluff. If they are trying one on, then you handle them anyway you see fit, from telling them to stick it, to laugh at them, or to request a hearing, or whatever comes to mind at the time.

The first step is to get out of them issuing you with an infringement notice right then on the side of the road. The next, to pull their notice apart with logic and see if they will write "warning" on it, then to request a hearing etc. I have almost always got out of it at the first step. Most cops will write you a ticket regardless, and just let you sort it out in writing later on. The tickets that are obviously bullshit I do NOT write in about - I just leave until it goes to court - hopefully I get to see the judge reprimand the police and call their allegation "trumped up bullshit", but they always withdraw them.

disclaimer: don't speed everywhere, all the time. It's dangerous, and eventually you come across a live round in the chamber. Think of your mum or your daughter and the tear in their eye, and slow down.

Steve

[MarkH]

Do the police have to show you your speed on the radar gun-thingy they use?
I was sure that they had to, but Have been tod by some that this has changed. I ask because we couldnt come to a solid consensus. My thinking was that if a cop accuses you of speeding then he must provide evidence to prove you were speeding, and that if he couldnt show you, then he couldnt ticket you.

Since when did they ever have to show you your speed on any device? Over 20 years ago I got a ticket for speeding, this was before cops had hawk radars. The cop had followed behind me and while matching my speed - his speedo read whatever it was, then he pulled me over and ticketed me for travelling at that speed.

In court he would be a witness. The fact that he was matching speed with me and that his accurately calibrated speed read x kph while the speed limit was y kph would be what he would testify in court. If the judge believed him then I would be found guilty. I never saw it being worthwhile to dispute a speeding ticket in court.

In your hypothetical case - if you argued in court that you were not speeding then the testimony of the officer operating the speed gun and the testimony of the officer that pulled you over would be against you. The fact that you weren't shown the speed gun reading wouldn't be a factor at all.