FJR Owners Forum banner
  • Hey Everyone! Enter your bike HERE to be a part of this months Bike of the Month Challenge!
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
:shock:
I am defending a speeding ticket I got a few months ago. I have done all the leg work and issued a Sopena to the police for imformation relating to the case etc.
I have a good case and I am confident I will win. However I am going to represent myself as I approached a Solicitor asking the cost to present my case. $1,500 was the reply. Shit the fine is only $250. No wonder people just pay the bloody fine instead of taking it to court.

I will keep you posted on how I go. The case is not until April 19. Provided I keep my head and dont go to water I should be ok.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Good luck Belly, heres hoping it all goes in your favour. Your description of solicitors.... spot on :twisted:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,982 Posts
Belly, hope it all goes well, mate. Keep us in touch with theoutcome (and the process) as I might be doing the same sometime.

See you at the State of Origin in April :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Nice to see that the sharks, AKA solicitors, are the same down under as they are here, at least Dick Turpin used to wear a mask. Never met a poor solicitor yet, says it all. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I had my day in court today: :roll:
Represented my self in a speeding matter.
I had to cross examine two Police officers for over one hour and then give evidence my self.
The first police officer was a trainee Highway patrol newby. Had no problems with him he knew jack shit about the operation of a Lidar Gun. He was MY BEST Witness.

Not so easy with the Senior constable though. He knew his stuff and was not giving an inch.
The case revolved around allegations that my bike was recorded on radar. The problem was there were two bikes involved and there was only one DISTANCE TO TARGER READING 279 meters. This was the same on both infringement notices.
My argument was that how can you take a reading on the first bike and have a reading of 94kph at 276m and then three seconds later take a reading on the second bike and end up with the same readings.
Not possible as the distance to target would have changed by at least 104 meters. In defence the officer claimed he only recorded the distance to target for the last bike and used that on both infringement notices. That took some getting around however I was able to show again with time and distance that this would have meant he finished tracking the first bike before it even entered the restricted speed zone. Also in the officers statement he mentioned he tracked the first bike for 3 seconds then switched to the second bike tracked it for 3 seconds etc etc. I was able to calculate the time
it took the officer to do what he claimed. Total time was 19 seconds. At 94kph (26.1 M/Sec) this placed the first bike 148 meters past his location.

In summery the judge said I had a case to answer, I thought thats it we are stuffed.
However there was enough doute in his mind that He found the case not proven and dismissed the matter.
You bloody beauty. One for the goodies.

I must say both Police officers were great blokes and congratulated me on presenting the case.
Although I think I will stay away fron their area for a while LOL.
Yes Way to GO :ale: :ale: :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,982 Posts
Well done, Belly. Great effort.

Remember our ride to the MotoGP - well, I could have gone to Albury to defend, but it would have involved two trips at least, and I had no 'second reading'. Also, no recorded distance to target recorded on the infringement notice. You know where this is going - all too hard, so now I am waiting for their next move.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
russell arthritic said:
Just out of interest Belly, were you speeding?? I know, I know, that's not the point!
Technically yes. Morally NO
100 into 60kph/ Backed off did not apply brake, (hand off throttle ) slowing down from 90. Rural setting not a person, car, house or street light in sight. Speed limit posted 1.5km out of town.

Radar set up within 100m of start of 60 zone. Not cricket old chap. Not out was the umpire's decision. And that's all that matters.

Now if it had been a built up area and they were set up allowing a reasonable distance For drivers/riders to slow down, then I would not have bothered defending the matter. Fair game I would say. I have no objection to them doing their job, but sometimes they can over do it I think.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top