No such thing as safe speeding?:-)

Take this link to Carpoint:-

http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/news/blankstory.asp?ID=5511

 

Some sense finally!

 

F*****g oath, that was a good one.

Some sanity evidently remains.

Thanks mate,
j

 

I wonder how he would have gotten on if he hadn't been a "former traffic
cop".
--
Deevo

Geraldton
WA, The Nanny State (® Corks)
http://members.westnet.com.au/mckenzie

 

I wonder how he's going to get on now. Surely there will be some coppers
detailed to watch his every move and book him if he sneezes... They're going
to make his life miserable...

 

The interesting thing is that the article states that
Quote
"The interesting aspect of the necessity defence is that the onus is on the
prosecution to rebut it,"
End Quote
Therefore, theoretically any photo fine contested under the "necessity
defence", unless the prosecution can disprove it, should be waived.
Should be interesting next time if this is used as a precedent.
Cool
JB

 

spook said....

sp> defence", unless the prosecution can disprove it, should be waived.
sp> Should be interesting next time if this is used as a precedent.

Decisions handed down in magistrates courts are not binding (ie: set as
precedent). If it were a county court judgement, then yes.

Expect either the government to change the law, to prevent this from
occuring again, or that the magistrates have a chat from above.