|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
28-11-2011, 09:59 PM | #61 | ||
Where to next??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,893
|
I think a letter of leniency is your best bet. You weren't all that much over the limit and you have a good record.
You may get lucky, or you may pay the fine. Trying to pursue your case will set you back much more than $153. From what I have seen in that picture, and as you described you would have had several hundred metres to adjust your speed. If it were me, I would write the letter and see what happens. If I ended up paying the fine such is life. |
||
28-11-2011, 10:50 PM | #62 | ||
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,750
|
Yes I agree with what you have said. What annoys me really is I probably would have seen the first sign and have been doing the correct speed if I wasn't fixated on the police car. As can be seen by my detected speed I was adjusting my speed from the posted 110.
However that is not a defence I guess. But then one could argue that my speed wasn't checked in the 80 zone. |
||
29-11-2011, 12:08 AM | #63 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,876
|
Quote:
|
|||
29-11-2011, 05:46 AM | #64 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: On The Footplate.
Posts: 5,086
|
Brazen, you keep mentioning this "they can't ping you within 300 meters of a speed sign" stuff...the lower speed zone starts at the lower speed sign, not 300 meters after it. It's up to you as an observant driver to ensure you are doing the speed for that next area by the time you reach the sign.
Once again, as others have asked, how would you apply this to a school zone? Should you be allowed to have 300 meters after the sign to slow down to the posted speed for he school times? That drawing is interesting...am I to take it that the two 80 signs with the black rectangle in between are both "standard" speed signs with the red circled number? If they are, and the "80 zone ahead" sign is one of the black ringed ones, then that's no real surprise...I know several places where they seem to "double up" on speed signs, possibly after extending the zone and leaving the old sign in place. |
||
29-11-2011, 06:11 AM | #65 | |||
VFII SS UTE
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 6,353
|
Quote:
i found several tas/vic operation (gov.pdf) of all radar/lidar and exclusion zone and all mention 400mtr from 110k...300mtr from 80k
__________________
I don't often hear the sound of a screaming LSX. But when I do, So do the neighbours.. GO SOUTHS
|
|||
29-11-2011, 06:41 AM | #66 | |||
Where to next??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,893
|
Quote:
School zones??? Have you not seen how fine print is applied to anything? A little * in the corner and "Does not apply to school zones" as a sub clause is all that is needed to address that issue. |
|||
29-11-2011, 08:36 AM | #67 | ||||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,876
|
Quote:
Hey you're right, learn something new everyday. http://www.police.qld.gov.au/rti/pub...1.htm#06_05_01 Quote:
|
||||
29-11-2011, 08:48 AM | #68 | |||
Regular Schmuck
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,640
|
Quote:
I see police with lasers sitting at the bottom of hills all the time, one near Bankstown with is a long and reasonably steep downhill stretch. |
|||
29-11-2011, 08:52 AM | #69 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,876
|
Quote:
Doesnt matter, it says 'should not generally' instead of 'should generally' big difference. You read any legislation and legal text, it is full of that kind of language. The courts are clearly aware of the intention of the guideline or legislation. The fact is they had a speed detection device in a restricted site. Hearing Naddis story of a road coming into a town I cannot on the surface see justification for it. Last edited by Brazen; 29-11-2011 at 08:58 AM. |
|||
29-11-2011, 01:01 PM | #70 | |||
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 316
|
Quote:
1. Your quoting QLD Police operating policy. Not legislation or "legal text". The offence is completely different and is not dependant on whether the policy is followed or not. Funnily enough, the policy quotes the relevant offence. While these policy's can be used against the police to cast doubt on the accuracy of their evidence, it's certainly not an automatic win for the OP. 2. You didn't quote the whole policy. It lists numerous other scenario's where officers can use a speed detection device in a restricted site. Including "areas where there are a number of public complaints relating to the speeding of vehicles" 3. This offence occurred in Victoria. |
|||
29-11-2011, 01:45 PM | #71 | |||
Regular Schmuck
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,640
|
Quote:
|
|||
29-11-2011, 06:14 PM | #72 | ||
FPV GTR
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Island High Country
Posts: 2,355
|
I just noticed that the QLD policy has changed.
It always used to read that detection devices could only be operated in the above scenarios with written approval from a very high ranking officer. Now reads "Not Generally", which just gives them a green light to do what they want.
__________________
- FPV GT RSpec - - Chill SZ Territory Titanium -
The Family Bus - Veridian Green PJ Ranger XLT - The Work Truck |
||
29-11-2011, 06:29 PM | #73 | |||
Pro Street Au Ute
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Rocky QLD
Posts: 1,150
|
Quote:
|
|||
29-11-2011, 07:27 PM | #74 | |||
Where to next??
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,893
|
Quote:
|
|||
29-11-2011, 07:51 PM | #75 | ||
Pro Street Au Ute
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Rocky QLD
Posts: 1,150
|
Yeah i was reading the first page when i posted it. i didn't realise the thread had gone three pages and am working at the same time.my bad, won't do it again .
|
||
29-11-2011, 11:00 PM | #76 | ||
Whipper Snappa
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SA
Posts: 1,192
|
Take pictures, both on site and bird's eye, where you were speeding and pulled up.
At the very least you could get it knocked down a tad with a respectful showing in court.
__________________
*insert witty quote* |
||
30-11-2011, 07:33 AM | #77 | ||
Rob
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Woodcroft S.A.
Posts: 21,743
|
hey naddis, looking on google maps, would i be correct in assuming it was as you were coming in to a small town called Cullulleraine??
|
||
30-11-2011, 12:35 PM | #78 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Parkdale, Vic
Posts: 1,016
|
If you write Civic Compliance a letter asking for it to be dropped, and if you have not had a fine in two years, it will be dropped.
This is the case in Victoria. two year gap without a fine, if you write to them & tell them you were a bad boy & won't do it again, it will be dropped. This has already been mentioned in this thread but received no responses. I've done this twice & succeeded.
__________________
"You can't fight stupid people - there's just too many of them" |
||
30-11-2011, 01:17 PM | #79 | |||
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 316
|
Quote:
http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content...ument_id=10369 A whole lot of worry over nothing. |
|||
30-11-2011, 01:38 PM | #80 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NSW
Posts: 4,342
|
Quote:
On topic of the OP, the cop is suggesting you entered the 80 zone doing 90. Which means you managed to pull up your car from 90km/h to 0 in about 2 seconds. Somehow I am thinking he pinged you before you reached the sign. |
|||
01-12-2011, 10:56 AM | #81 | |||
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,750
|
Quote:
|
|||
01-12-2011, 11:56 AM | #82 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,876
|
Quote:
Its the opposite, the 'Not Generally' means they cannot do what they want. According to the law 'Not Generally' is the catch-all. Its very simple. A magistrate would not start over-turning legislation (thats the High Courts job), an officer in Naddis case should not be using a speed detection device on a vehicle within 300m of a speed zone change. |
|||
01-12-2011, 12:08 PM | #83 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,876
|
Quote:
Bunning V Cross 1978, French V Scarman 1979 R V Lobman And for the police to rely on exceptions to the general rule means they need to have demonstrated they have taken all action to adhere to the general rule. Your example above of public complaints would need satisfy a magistrate that this a case of an exemption being granted. The policy states that the police would need to seek a higher speed limit before being allowed to use the exception - I would love to see that happen. People are reading the policy wrong, they are reading the exception first then working back, whereas its the other way round. Anyway there have been countless people who have had their speeding ticket thrown out of court due to the 300m rule. |
|||
01-12-2011, 01:27 PM | #84 | ||
Rob
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Woodcroft S.A.
Posts: 21,743
|
if its a hand held device, it could be operated 300+ meters from a speed zone change and still be capable of pinging you as you enter the new zone. either way, i see speed guns operated within that distance all the time, as do most other members.
|
||
01-12-2011, 03:17 PM | #85 | |||
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 316
|
Quote:
What I'm struggling to understand, is how you could possibly think that a policy from QLD would have any bearing on an offence that occurred in Victoria. Care to address that part of my post. Anyway, regardless of all this. It's a moot point because there is absolutely no need for the OP to go to court at all. One letter and it all goes away. That is actually policy in Victoria, rather than this QLD discussion that is irrelevant to the OP. |
|||