64 in a 60 zone

My philosophy on this is, were you exceeding 60 kph in the 60 zone. If
yes: cop it sweet. If no: go your hardest (it's the principle)

---
Cheers

PeterC [aka MildThing]
'81 Suzuki GS450-s
'87 BMW K100RT

www.dmcsc.org.au

 

No problem...

Keep in mind though that according to smee, Australian Design Rules
don't apply in Victoria ;-)

big

 

It's not a whinge its a message saying this:
to those posters who tell us about their state's regulations it doesn't
apply in joe's case so what's the point of posting?[/QUOTE]

You said:

"As for my original post BVR was speaking about his experience here in
VIC and people were gabbing about adr's speedo's and tolerances in non
victorian states"

All you've done is whinge, we're _still_ waiting for you to explain to
us exactly which laws the Vic govt has passed that overrides the
Australian Design Rules. ADRs are _not_ "state's regulations", they are
_federal_ law, just as applicable in Vic as they are in NSW or anywhere
else in Australia. The states _can_ pass legislation which supercedes
ADRs (as Zebee explained about ADR39/ADR83 issues with in-service regs
in NSW), but unless they have, the ADRs apply.

So (I repeat myself):

Come on Smee, quit "gabbing" about how we're wrong, and post the
in-service regs that show the ADRs aren't applicable here.

big

 

Where in all my posts did I say anyone was wrong?
show me please
find the word WRONG anywhere.
I neither said it or implied it.
ALL I have ever said is that what constitutes regulations in one state
are not being applied here in Victoria because of the 3kmh tolerance.
Hence what others are saying about 10% etc on cameras and speedo
tolerances are not adhered to here in Vic hence irrelevant to the
discussion.
The racv has checked it out and said it cannot be contested. ADR's or not.
If Joe had a bagful of money and took it all the way to the high court
then maybe the regulation could be struck off.
Until it becomes a high court issue the whole point is moot.

Why the aggro btw?
I know it's harsh week and all.

 

If you want to challenge it, you will not be the 1st to win a case but you
do need to do some homework and preparation (and ignore the types that think
an Ostrich's approach to avoiding an issue is actually a good idea).

A few cases have been won due to the cops not following their own procedures
in setting up as well as testing their equipment, and then there are the
more 'inventive' wins such as "Court Rules Speeding Saves Life"
http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/news/blankstory.asp?ID=5511 (this was in
Vic). For more information
http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/news/blankstory.asp?ID=4909

Also this website is a man's crusade against the speed camera - plenty of
information, contacts and links on the topic.
http://www.roadsense.com.au/

 

ster ster ster sti!

 

smack said....

That reminds me of the wedding that I went to in Tassie. The bride's
family was so pissed off at her. Apparently she decided to marry someone
outside of the family...

 

John said....

If a case is heard in the county court or higher, then decisions made in
cases in other county court or higher have to be considered. Precedent
doesn't apply for decisions made in magistrates' courts on higher courts
or on other magistrates' court cases.

So, unless the speeding thing went to the county court or higher, then
the magistrate will most likely ignore any arguments put forward based
on a "judgement" made in another magistrate's court.

 

Iain said....

ADRs are a minima. ie: in the case of a speedo, the max that they can be
inaccurate is 10 percent. Vic regs re speeding don't reflect or conflict
with ADRs. They merely say that you cannot exceed 3 km/h over the limit.
How you determine that is your problem. Spend the money and buy a GPS,
perhaps. Or get your speedo calibrated, or drive at a speed where you
know that you're not speeding. eg: half of what the surrounding traffic
flow is.

Anyway, if the Vic tolerance was conflicting with federal law, some
bright spark would've pointed it out by now, and possibly the regs
wouldn't have gotten past the governor-in-council.

 

Careful Martin gabbing facts in this thread will ensure a flaming from
the non victorians

 

R1100Smee said....

I was counting on it. It wouldn't be a decent Harsh Week if it wasn't,
huh?

 

Local courts (magistrates courts) being the bottom of the food chain
don't get much sway in the precedence ranks, but strictly speaking you
are wrong, a decision of an equal level court within the same
jurisdiction is persuasive but not binding on another court at the same
level. A more senior court's precedent is binding (however you have to
seperate the ratio decendi from the obiter dicta and playing silly
buggers around determining that is what lawyers get paid so much money
for - that and the fact they have a monopoly and most politicians are ex
lawyers

A more senior court in an unrelated jurisdiction is persuasive but not
binding (ie a magistrates court/local court in vic would pay pretty
close attention to a similar case decided by the Supreme Court of NSW -
although it wouldn't be binding, there's about zero chance of them
ignoring it.

JL

 

John said....

Hmm. Can you show me what I said that was incorrect? And what of that is
different to what you posted here?

 

Did you break the law?

IS the law "60kmh or less" or is the law "appropriate speed"?


Speeding is not a criminal offence,its a road rule.

You cant compare deviant behavior from murder to speeding now can we.

Personaly i think its wrong, the speed detection equipment has a 3km error
rating. BVR could have been doing 61kph for all he knows.

Now if he had a gps reeding and had it all on video that would be a great
way to go through thecourts...

be nice for somebody to create a case law and piss the goverment off.

But really what is your defence BVR - I didnt do it?,

because it was a clear road and it was hidden. They will just say, look
photo, his plate, this speed. Its like being pinged on video for robbing the
servo....

 

I saw somebody do that once..

Just brought his first car a hooned commodore, drove down ther road and got
done for 100 in a 80 zone..

hes going wtf, had it dyno'd, new diff ratio, put the speedo 30k's out. he
had the dyno cert to prove it..

You should know how fast you are going by feel, ticket cost + court costs...
case dismissed

 

What about those who lost their licences, as a result lost their jobs which
resulted in marrage break downs, depression and eventually suicide.

Your honor my husband/father/Son died as a result of your actions. and i am
claiming compensation of 16 million....

A licence can mean a lot to a person...

 

A good point, but a fairly extreme example....

I've little doubt the government will have indemnified itself against all
liability arising from erroneous suspension/cancelation.

cam

 

Perhaps not *all* liablity

#snip from www.justice.vic.gov.au/speedcameras#

Q: Can I get compensation?
If you have lost your licence as a result of a speeding fine on the Western
Ring Road you can apply for some money.
You may have automatically lost your licence because you were travelling at
an excessive speed.

Or you may have lost your licence because you received one (or more)
demerit points from a fixed camera.

Drivers who have lost their licence from a speed camera on the Western Ring
Road can apply for a ex-gratia payment from the government to cover costs
of inconvenience (such as transport expenses) while they were without their
licence.

If you are eligible for such a payment, a letter will be sent within a few
weeks to explain your options.

#end snip#

cam

 

But that _is_a criminal offence, isn't it?

 

Not in Victoria...


Postman Pat