Just After Some Advice.

[R 2 THE J]

To all fellow Sau'ers,

I have recently been given a Court Attendance Notice (CAN). I was alleged to have committed an offence which I was driving at a dangerous speed allegedly over 45km/h in a 50km/h zone.

The alleged offence was witnessed by an off duty police officer about 4:30pm on Sunday the 15th of November 2009, who immediately contacted Highway Patrol officers. I have no re-collection of this incident. I'm an honest man, and I believe in "do the crime, be prepared to do the time".

I remember a Highway Patrol Officer arriving at my residence late in the afternoon. Facts sheet claims to be at my residence "about" 5:10 pm (about 40mins after the driving incident). Previously returning home from driving my car, trying to find a tyre shop for quotes with no re-collection of what time I arrived at my residency, I proceeded with some electrical work for a family member for whom I reside with. Whilst mid-working, a Highway Patrol Officer arrived at my residence, asking me questions about the incident. I told him truthfully that I had no re-collection of the alleged incident. As time goes past very quickly when working hard I believe I was at my residency for over an hour. Which I confidently told the Officer, who claimed the incident occured under an hour ago.

I have no recollection of this incident what so ever. The Prosecuter whom be the Officer in witness is the only proof they have of me committing the offence. No radar scan, no pictures, etc etc.

I am to be heard by court on Thursday 6th may, 2010.

Having been such a long period of time ago, as anybody would, I have loss of memory of exact details of the incident claimed by the police officer who attended my residence. All I have is the alleged details of offence/s on my CAN.

All i'm asking for is some advice for me to get prepared. I don't want no disrespecting of the law on this thread, ie Cops are blablablabla.

Some serious legal advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks RJ.

p.s. Any questions to help you with advice please ask.

[D_I_F]

I would say it's all he said she said so they have no hard proof whatsoever.

But your only problem is, it's your word against a police officers word.

It might have just been 1 wrong letter or number on the rego plates and they have just picked you out of the hat.

If I were you, I would sourse some proper legal advise. There are some places that give free legal advice if you can't afford solicitors.

Good luck mate.

[GTR-N1]

Are you sure that your car wasn't in your mechanic's workshop on the 15/11/09 waiting for parts, and your mechanic can vouch for that?

Are you sure that you weren't in church on that Sunday and your priest can vouch for that?

Are you sure that your grandmother (who doesn't have a licence anyway), wasn't driving your car on 15/11/09 to test its power?

I'm not suggesting that you use the above excuses or lie.

I'm asking how the off-duty police officer can espy your 6-digit licence plate at the speed he says you were doing (@ over 95Km/hr) > pull out a pen/paper > write it all down > accurately relay it to HP.

Even 2 days ago, I can only guess that for breakfast I had peanut butter... hmmm... or was it vegemite?

For all I know, your rear number plate might have been all dirty after a Texi.

Is there a lawyer in the house (agreeing with Corinne)?

BTW, in your 3rd-last sentence you said RJ that you had a "loss of memory", which should read "no memory". There's a difference.

[tbag]

Get a lawyer, your word against the person who saw you, you got to prove that they could of been mistaken/ might of been another car

[kimbod]

Talk to a specialist traffic lawyer.

[Cassbo]

[R 2 THE J]

Thanks for the replies guys.

Yeh i'm just stuck in this situation. I'm pretty sure I would've remembered doing such speeds down my main rd that was allegedly witnessed by the off duty officer.

I'm not saying that I always drive like a typical Grandma but i'm not a hoon either.

@Terry. "Loss of Memory" or "No memory". What I was stating there was that I remember a Highway Patrol officer arriving at my residence, asking me questions about the alleged offence. I told him as previously explained in my first post. As I was explaining the recent history to him, I remembered him writing this all down.

All information given to the Officer lead to myself being Not-Guilty. Which is what I will plead at Court. What i'm worried about is, as Corinne said above "it's my word against a Police Officer's word". And with all the "hoons laws" about, and the Jury at Court more than likely being biased on the Officers statement.

I'm sure most of you "could" understand what this would end up like. Not Very Good.

Just out of curiousity, does anybody know what the punishment is for 45km/h> speed limit is?

Also pleading Not Guilty, and with the Jury Voting against my decision, i'm sure the punishment would be even harder.

Thanks RJ.

Edited April 1, 2010 by R 2 THE J

[Messiah]

fine for 45km over if convicted in court... 2200 max fine and 6month min loss of license.

Get a lawyer, trust me it will cost you the same as the fine, but you wont do the time if he's any good.

dont risk it on your own.

Do you have the cops statement? does it id your car type or just the rego?

oh and there's no jury for these appearences... just a judge

[R 2 THE J]

@ Simon.

Yes I have the officers statement.

The officer has I.D on my car type, Registraion plates, A young male driver about 20 yrs old, thin build, olive complexion, wearing a dark blue polo shirt and baseball cap.

Apart from the clothing, which from the life of me I cannot remember what i was wearing, it pretty much sums me up.

Although i have no memory of committing this ofence.

Edited April 1, 2010 by R 2 THE J

[**RB2530**]

Slim build eh??...How much weight do you think you can pack on between now and your court date??

To me their case sounds weak but you should seek some legal advice...It may be a case of them hoping you will get to court and make an admission etc...

[SECURITY]

@ Simon.

Yes I have the officers statement.

The officer has I.D on my car type, Registraion plates, A young male driver about 20 yrs old, thin build, olive complexion, wearing a dark blue polo shirt and baseball cap.

Apart from the clothing, which from the life of me I cannot remember what i was wearing, it pretty much sums me up.

Although i have no memory of committing this ofence.

are you sure it wasnt what you were wearing at the time when he came to your house? if so then im guessing thats when he got all of those details. highway patrol officers are scummy at best of times.

i say play the same game they are playing. ask for video of the incident, a radar/lidar reading.. none of either?? sounds like BS to me.

get a stat dec from a mate who is chubby and has a head too big to wear a hat to say he was driving your car in a completely different area. if he had a receipt of the time of incident from a completely different area at the same time that would also help.

[Fraser]

Good luck. I would fight it. It will really all depend on the judge.

A group of my friends drove to Bathurst for the weekend and did a few laps around the track. They then parked up to have a chat and a few mins later the police turned up. Some people who had been walking around the track had called them.

When the police arrived the walkers gave statements to the police saying that the driver of a grey sports car (pointed at my friends xr6) was doing around 90km/h past them and that he passed them 3 times under 2minutes.

It went to court.

The evidence brief had many hole i.e. The witness statement said the driver was gearing a red top. Pictures of the group with the cars at the track on the day in question, show my friend wearing a white jumper while talking to police! The number plate in the witness statement was also wrong. Even the make of the car (witness statement said Holden)

My friend even explained that the witness was clearly wrong as there is no way that his stock xr6 can do 2mins around the track. The judge replied "Fords and Holden's do it in 2minutes all the time. Don't you watch the 1000."

GUILTY!

[75coupe]

@ Simon.

Yes I have the officers statement.

The officer has I.D on my car type, Registraion plates, A young male driver about 20 yrs old, thin build, olive complexion, wearing a dark blue polo shirt and baseball cap.

Apart from the clothing, which from the life of me I cannot remember what i was wearing, it pretty much sums me up.

Although i have no memory of committing this ofence.

How did he see your 'thin build' if your in a car...?

Im just wondering, usually all I see of people in cars is there head and shoulders... not much to go on really as far as their 'build'

[Messiah]

Good luck. I would fight it. It will really all depend on the judge.

A group of my friends drove to Bathurst for the weekend and did a few laps around the track. They then parked up to have a chat and a few mins later the police turned up. Some people who had been walking around the track had called them.

When the police arrived the walkers gave statements to the police saying that the driver of a grey sports car (pointed at my friends xr6) was doing around 90km/h past them and that he passed them 3 times under 2minutes.

It went to court.

The evidence brief had many hole i.e. The witness statement said the driver was gearing a red top. Pictures of the group with the cars at the track on the day in question, show my friend wearing a white jumper while talking to police! The number plate in the witness statement was also wrong. Even the make of the car (witness statement said Holden)

My friend even explained that the witness was clearly wrong as there is no way that his stock xr6 can do 2mins around the track. The judge replied "Fords and Holden's do it in 2minutes all the time. Don't you watch the 1000."

GUILTY!

yeah but Dusko's guilty of everything... mainly of driving a ford.

[Fraser]

yeah but Dusko's guilty of everything... mainly of driving a ford.

True that! I guess the judge took one look at him and went "GONE!!!!"

He would have been speeding. He reckons that he was being "aggressive" in the corners but wasn't speeding but everything used against him in court was total bs.

[R34Liner]

there is no way that can hold up in court. alibi alibi alibi of both you and your car.

[Kujotk]

its unlikely the case should hold water in court, get a good traffic lawyer and just get him to create any reasonable doubt that you or your car weren't speeding or there at all, lawyer shoudl press on what if the copper recorded the information incorrectly, no evidence of yopu or your car being there at the time, no proof of what speed the actual car the copper saw was doing.

Either way it seems like the copper has it in for you, your car, skylines in general ect...?

The chances are that you were probably speeding 5, 10, 20 km/h over the limmit like most of us would do both intentionally and unintentionally, but for an off duty officer to say over 45km is abit harsh, how can she determine a speed of 44km/h where you loose your lisence for 3 months or 45km/h where its lost for 6 months? You should be able to get out of it even if you were actually doing more than 45 over.

That being said whats your driving history like?

[D_I_F]

My friend even explained that the witness was clearly wrong as there is no way that his stock xr6 can do 2mins around the track. The judge replied "Fords and Holden's do it in 2minutes all the time. Don't you watch the 1000."

GUILTY!

BWAHAHAHAHA...

[mxfly]

Having been to court with a solicitor that specialised in traffic infringements when I was 18 years old (and that was a bloody long time ago), I can tell you that your chances will be 1000% better with a legal representative. I didnt get off as I pleaded guilty, but my punishment was a lot more lenient. Also a huge contributing factor on the outcome is how your driving history is like. That's the first thing the magistrate will look at, before even a word is spoken.

[Gerg_R31]

if you werent pulled over whilst doing the alledged crime, they had no legal right to question you at your door as they cant prove who was driving, if the vehicle was being driven, and at most all they can legally do is tell you to "settle down" as the off duty officer is off duty making him no more then a member of the public calling in what they alledgedly saw, they cant fine or penalise you in anyway once you have entered private property (place of residence)

you have not admitted guilt either, magistrates are usually ex cops, and quite often you will find the police prosecuter gets more time to speak then your lawyer, get yourself a couple good character references (make sure they dont state their opinion of what the decision should be otherwise it may be scrapped) and yeah your driving history will also assist/ effect the out come, if it start going bad ask to do a driving intervention program

but yeah seek legal advice and try to avoid legal aid (most of them are fresh out of uni and have little experience) tell the lawyer what happened truthfully and he/she will speak / bullshit/ find loop holes/ errors etc in the cops report