Gt-r 40km/h Over. Need Your Help!

[PM-R33]

Excatly, a 6 month suspension for your situation is completely unfair. You were overtaking and wanted to do so as quickly as possible and had the car that was able to do so. 3 seconds spent on the wrong side of the road at a higher speed is a hell of a lot safer than 15 seconds at the speed limit.

[eastes]

Mt Nebo ?

Definitely fight it, talk to a good solicitor and see what your chances are having it overturned are.

Traffic law and traffic police are a joke, don't feel bad about fighting it.

Best of Luck.

Close. It was Mt Mee.

[fungoolie]

Im pretty sure the law is that if there are two cars in the radar beam then they cannot possibly resolve who was actually speeding. I know that this is written more for the case of a dual carriageway where the car on the left is entitled to go faster than the car on the right so there is no way of ascertaining who was actually speeding. Read the actual law first, it may just be cut and dried at that no matter what the circumstances depicted in the photo otherwise indicate. There's also the issue of the inaccuracies of the doppler radars when two cars are in close proximity to one another. You have issues of double bounce etc causing heterodyning/mixing effects. So theres more than just the unresolvable car issue here at play. However I do like the angle of you went to overtake and the prick sped up and cut back up the inside of you when the pic was taken, highly unlikely but definitely not impossible

Edited September 20, 2010 by fungoolie

[Birds]

Just get the solicitor to reduce the fine, you may not get off it completely, but if you settle for a lesser charge - this is the more likely and desirable outcome. I don't think you'll be able to clear it but atleast you have another car in the photo to show you were overtaking and not just gunning your vehicle. A history of good driving behaviour will certainly help too.

Also, for those saying they can't tell who was speeding in the photo...given he's on the wrong side of the road and therefore overtaking the assumption is going to be that he is the faster of the two vehicles...even if the other guy sped up to block/race him.

They should have sent a fine to the ute too for donning a Chev badge

[fungoolie]

Also, for those saying they can't tell who was speeding in the photo...given he's on the wrong side of the road and therefore overtaking the assumption is going to be that he is the faster of the two vehicles...even if the other guy sped up to block/race him.

Relative performance of the vehicles is irrelevant. You don't always floor a car to overtake especially on a wet road and especially especially if you are a safe driver as you are trying to portray. And it is a Chev after all so it's more than capable.....

Edited September 20, 2010 by fungoolie

[Harey]

At least you got a cool picture out of it, I didn't get anything

On a serious note though, if you are behind some one doing say 60km/h in a 80km/h zone and you go to overtake them in a fast car, isn't it safer to overtake as quickly as you possibly can so you are not on the wrong side of the road? I think the law is bullshit that says you can not go above the speed limit if you are overtaking.

The way I see it, the ute was going under the speed limit so you went to safely and legally overtake when you saw an incoming car in the distance, got scared and accelerated to get back into your correct lane as to not cause an accident...

Agree with this, it just doesnt make sense. Surely it should be acceptable to do say 10-20% over the speed limit while overtaking and then once returning to the left hand lane must promptly return to the speed limit or something.

Otherwise it makes overtaking just plain dangerous. I always say i would prefer to get a fine then end up in the obituaries.

[GTR-N1]

It asks me if I was the driver. If I wasn't, then I'd have to have a JP sign a statement of whom I believe was driving.

Re: "Were you the person in charge of the vehicle at the time...?"

My mechanic friend nominated his (willing) wife.

He got off.

Justice (defrocked) Einfeld did not.

A traffic lawyer might get you off on a technicality, by forcing the Police to prove it was you who was overtaking, or the ute driver who was undertaking.

But then, what are prepared to say if the magistrate/judge asks you the question? Your lawyer of course might need to discuss this with you beforehand.

[fungoolie]

Agree with this, it just doesnt make sense. Surely it should be acceptable to do say 10-20% over the speed limit while overtaking and then once returning to the left hand lane must promptly return to the speed limit or something.

Otherwise it makes overtaking just plain dangerous. I always say i would prefer to get a fine then end up in the obituaries.

Yes spoken to a cop about this and his attitude was.... If you can't successfully overtake by sticking to the speed limit then he's clearly not going slow enough to need to overtake him..... And if you saw a car coming AFTER you started overtaking then you did not provide enough distance to overtake safely. He said you should NEVER find yourself in a situation where you have to accelerate more than you anticipated to get back in front of somebody. Lets face it, if we all drove how he suggested the queues on a country drive would be ridiculous. You can't win against their inane logic.

Edited September 20, 2010 by fungoolie

[funkymonkey]

First thing you need to do is put in a plea of not-guilty.

After that you can decide when your court case comes up whether you want to plea guilty and take a 6 month, or try and convince the judge otherwise. Hire a Traffic Law specialist solicitor to represent you. Worst case scenario take a reduction to 1 month suspension and points plus fine. Best case scenario they dismiss the case on insufficient or inconclusive evidence.

Either way, pleading not guilty puts the onus on the police to prove conclusively that you were speeding and that you were doing that speed. Any other action you take is an admission of guilt.

[Iron Chef]

Just get the solicitor to reduce the fine, you may not get off it completely, but if you settle for a lesser charge - this is the more likely and desirable outcome. I don't think you'll be able to clear it but atleast you have another car in the photo to show you were overtaking and not just gunning your vehicle. A history of good driving behaviour will certainly help too.

Also, for those saying they can't tell who was speeding in the photo...given he's on the wrong side of the road and therefore overtaking the assumption is going to be that he is the faster of the two vehicles...even if the other guy sped up to block/race him.

They should have sent a fine to the ute too for donning a Chev badge

Assumption and proof are two different things - the onus is on the police to prove his guilt.

[kimbod]

Get the best traffic lawyer in Qld. You should get out of that fine. I don't know QLD rules but I would be surprised if after the lawyer sent a letter to your transport authority that is wasn't dropped. 2 cars in shot they must be after revenue like NSW . Remember if you just hand over the money and cop the suspension you might have trouble getting insurance etc.

Edited September 20, 2010 by kimbod

[The Bogan]

Hope it turns out OK for you, BUT, next time go here- http://www.queenslandraceway.com.au/main.php?menu=qre01

[Col-GTSX]

Im pretty sure the law is that if there are two cars in the radar beam then they cannot possibly resolve who was actually speeding.

So just to clarify for everyone, I noticed a few people mentioned this in one way or another...

I work with speed cameras as a part of my job as they use a fair bit of technology from the firm I work for.

In short, the laser scans on a level. Similar to a dumpy level (tradies will know what that is).

However this only indicated a range & an est speed. The computer than goes to set the dumpy (styled) laser on the vechicle suspected of speeding.

It can manage up to 6 lanes at a time with a 150m head. (Meaning 150m clear unobstructed view of the 6 lanes).

The less the clearance distance the less lanes it can cover.

Now, the laser is then fixed on the suspected speeding vechicle and a range in metres is recorded, then (depending on setup) a timed amount a 2nd range is recorded.

Simple maths then records the speed and it is rounded down to the nearest km/h.

What you dont see in your photo is the car being targeted, however this information is recorded.

Think like a DSLR, when you focus to take a photo is indicated a priority focus point. Entry level SLR's have 7 to 9 points.

Speed cameras have closer to 54 focusing points.

If you go down the path of blaming the ute in the photo it will get dismissed straight away, you will be seen to be clutching at straws to get out of the fine.

Therefore any additional attempts to dodge the fine here after will probably fall on deaf ears.

With that explained, id avoid trying this method completely.

Biggest problems with speed camera threads is everyone seems to know something about them, but very few actually work on them or in the industry.

The best bit of advice here is to contact a solicitor whom specializes in this sort of thing and disclose them the full truth and let them give you the right advice.

In all honesty the best you could do is prove the camera was not calibrated that day. But chances of it not being down as per the legislation are slim.

[Iron Chef]

Just to clarify - aren't Gatsometers all the older radar-style detectors rather than lasers? I'm no expert on the subject, but it's a question worth asking I would've thought.

[fungoolie]

Now, the laser is then fixed on the suspected speeding vechicle and a range in metres is recorded, then (depending on setup) a timed amount a 2nd range is recorded.

Simple maths then records the speed and it is rounded down to the nearest km/h.

My bad, being South Australian I assumed you guys were still using doppler microwave radar cameras as we do rather than a lidar based system. If that is the case I'd say you are screwed going down that path....

Edited September 20, 2010 by fungoolie

[Birds]

Relative performance of the vehicles is irrelevant. You don't always floor a car to overtake especially on a wet road and especially especially if you are a safe driver as you are trying to portray. And it is a Chev after all so it's more than capable.....

I didn't say anything about the performance of the cars, only that he is in the wrong lane and the safe assumption is that he is performing an overtaking manouvre. He could only use this to his advantage to reduce the penalty by showing he wasn't just speeding for the sake of it.

So just to clarify for everyone, I noticed a few people mentioned this in one way or another...

I work with speed cameras as a part of my job as they use a fair bit of technology from the firm I work for.

In short, the laser scans on a level. Similar to a dumpy level (tradies will know what that is).

However this only indicated a range & an est speed. The computer than goes to set the dumpy (styled) laser on the vechicle suspected of speeding.

It can manage up to 6 lanes at a time with a 150m head. (Meaning 150m clear unobstructed view of the 6 lanes).

The less the clearance distance the less lanes it can cover.

Now, the laser is then fixed on the suspected speeding vechicle and a range in metres is recorded, then (depending on setup) a timed amount a 2nd range is recorded.

Simple maths then records the speed and it is rounded down to the nearest km/h.

What you dont see in your photo is the car being targeted, however this information is recorded.

Think like a DSLR, when you focus to take a photo is indicated a priority focus point. Entry level SLR's have 7 to 9 points.

Speed cameras have closer to 54 focusing points.

If you go down the path of blaming the ute in the photo it will get dismissed straight away, you will be seen to be clutching at straws to get out of the fine.

Therefore any additional attempts to dodge the fine here after will probably fall on deaf ears.

With that explained, id avoid trying this method completely.

Biggest problems with speed camera threads is everyone seems to know something about them, but very few actually work on them or in the industry.

The best bit of advice here is to contact a solicitor whom specializes in this sort of thing and disclose them the full truth and let them give you the right advice.

In all honesty the best you could do is prove the camera was not calibrated that day. But chances of it not being down as per the legislation are slim.

Good post, thank you, and I agree. I think OP should just be going with a good driving plea (that is, if you deserve one), and try for a lesser charge. Alot of police have advised me to do this whenever the question is raised. Get a solicitor who specialises in traffic offences, take it to court, and hope for the best. Don't try to be a hero and get off it completely, it's easy for people to say that when their licences aren't at stake...

[mico]

you can clearly see that the ute sped up to 122kmh so you could not pass.

what a prick

lmao !!! the guy in the ute knew what he was doing 4 sure !!!!

[jawrgy]

we can make speed camera's redundant if we all speed when we get to a camera. If every car on Australian roads sets off a speed camera they wont be able to police it. If everyone has 0 demerits and lost their license the cops wont be able to do shit.

[eastes]

@Col-GTSX fantastic post. Thank you. This confirms my decision not to try to BS anyone.

I'm going to hire a solicitor and try for the honest approach with a plea for a slightly reduced penalty.

[eastes]

we can make speed camera's redundant if we all speed when we get to a camera. If every car on Australian roads sets off a speed camera they wont be able to police it. If everyone has 0 demerits and lost their license the cops wont be able to do shit.

That'd be lol. Gillard will have a mutiny on her hands. Not very realistic though.