Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

dont need to get character refrences' date=' thats only if you pleed guilty, if you pleed not guilty then youll need a defence which is liable in court,QUOTE']

Still get character references... You need them. I pleaded guilty with mitigation and still brought in character references and they helped heaps. Use them as a back-up to support your facts and your show a good judge of character

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

....but if you tell the judge "i thoguht i was going to  get hit by another car" then he'll say " well did it hit you" and you say "no" and he'll say " well then you crosssed the white line, soory 400 bucks and 3 points + court costs"

goood luck champ hope that helps.

er, but the point of the arguement is if he DIDNT move forward, he WOULD of been hit - isnt the burden on the law to prove that if he DIDNT move forward he WOULD NOT have been hit?

that is what having mitigating circumstances is all about, just like the guy on the motorbike who was excused speeding as he argued it was the only way he could avoid being hit by a car - the case was dismissed.

Would a precedent from Vic be admittable in NSW?

Guest INASNT

Firstly why is the fine so high at $400 anyway and 3 points???

For all the people that said just pay the fine, its people like u that have made the governments around aus make fines and roads laws more ridiculous over the years coz they are under the assumption that people will just pay the fines even tho they are innocent and the reason they got the fine is BS!! Why fork out $400 when u know you are in the right??

Seek some legal advice and if u have a good records (ie no previous fines) u have a good chance of getting off or atleast getting the fine reduced to something more reasonable.

I'm with Denham on this. You all ought to be ashamed. This is clearly self preservation and they now have to prove that he didn't move forward to avoid an accident.

Talk to a lawyer and see what the case is that you have. You can ask for costs, including the legal assistance if the ACT is wrong. Ask for the photos in writing. A phone call to an ACT lawyer should cost nothing first up as a consultation. I can ask for a recommendation from a friend in ACT for a firm. PM if you wish for my number.

Steve, not sure on the precedent there, but case law across Aust is pretty much the same and derives originally from British common law.

You admitted in the very first post that you entered the intersection on a red light.

If you didn't enter the intersection, the camera wouldn't have gone off.

If you moved into the intersection far enough to cause the camera to go off, you were placing yourself (and any oncoming traffic) in danger.  

You may have been concerned about being rear ended, but it was still a red light.

The law is pretty much black and white.

Let us know how you go

Just because he crossed the line setting off the red light camera does not mean he was in a position to place himself and as you say oncoming (I say crossing) traffic in danger because the other cars do not drive along the dead left of the intersection.

Take it to court. Best of Luck.

i'm the forum meber skyline geoff was refering to i think (ajourned twice since my post if anyones interested).

Ok heres what i know. Dont plead guilty, you didnt run the red, and you had no intention to do so.

As for anything else. get a lawyer, its not worth fecking thnigs up.

I'm in sydney too and i'm using mark steinburg and assoc, he's a rev head and bike rider aswell as a lawyer who specialises in traffic.

i had a consultation with mark, he is good, but not cheap, even charges for travel time if the case is not at his local (hornsby) court.

for one session in court dont expect change from around $1400

also his first consultation is not free, its $240..

so have a good think about costs... i would go and try to represent myself, i dont think its worth getting a lawyer when it will cost u three times as much as the fine..

get some legal advice and represent yourself.

A good lawyer should petition the court for costs in the case of the state not being successful in it's prosecution. There is no reasonable justification for you paying for your defence if you are innocent and it adds an object lesson for the prosecutors to not waste resources on bogus legal cases. You will of course be paying expenses up front, but that should be refunded by the state (in this case the Banana Republic Town Council of the ACT) on successful defence. Have an agreement with the lawyer as well for expectations of outcomes and costs overall, as well as defence strategies and reparation requests.

Guest INASNT

well done, and for all the people that said pay the $400 fine?????????????????????????? if everyone that just pays the fines had a bit of back bone and fought the bs fines they recieved then the laws would change for the better, not worse!!!

judges has some common sense unlike cops

Awesome news. I'm happy to hear you stuck to your beliefs, and ignored the spineless cattle who would have you pay into the corruption trust fund.

Governments are getting too addicted to the income from fines (sound like victoria?).

So what was the judgement? No contradictory proof of a self preservation/self defence case?

COngratulations!! My girlfriends parents own a red light camera company (operating in the USA not Aus, so dont hate me :)) and they as you would expect, are quite versed in Aus traffic law. So i asked them about this and they said:

If the photos showed you stopping in the intersection, even if you ran the red light, you are not guilty. You MUST go all the way through to be found guilty, hence the two photos taken by the camera.

Well done on your win, but id say if you had spoken to a lawyer about this they would have told you that you had nothing to worry about. The self defence case may have worked as well, but im pretty sure you need to prove it. In the case given as an example (the guy that had to go through because of the ute or whatever), im pretty sure the photo from the camera showed the other car would have hit him.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...