can they book me if they don't have evidence?

Prolaser III, Prolaser IV, Prolite+
chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

can they book me if they don't have evidence?

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:38 pm

hi guys

hopefully someone can give me a bit of advice on this.

on 17th January 2011 i was traveling home from work on Warrigal Rd
towards Canterbury Rd when i was pulled over by an undercover police officer in a orange ford xr6.
the police officer said i was doing 73 km/hr in a 40 km/hr zone which i was not doing (i know people always say these things but im being honest when i say that i was not speeding). when i was eventually pulled over by the police officer i was very respectable and kept my cool with him and when i asked him if i could see the laser radar of me speeding, he refused to show me and said that the infringement notice will provide details about the fine.

i got the speeding fine in the mail about 3 days later and called up civic compliance victoria straight away to request the evidence and they don't have anything at all on their system ( i called again over 2 weeks later to ask for any evidence but again they don't have any)

i would just like to say that i am very familiar with the road and travel on it everyday to and from work.
if you want to know the exact locations of where it happened here it is.

http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&ie ... 04812&z=18

(the corner of the boulevard and warrigal rd)

i was stationary at the set of lights under the bridge heading towards Canterbury rd.
about 40m in front of me at the lights is the last 40 km/hr sign and about 20m after that is the 70 km/hr sign. the police officer was was right behind me at the time and i knew that he was there. on the infringement notice i got it said that he was 96.2 m behind me and there is no way he was that far behind me if he were to be that far behind me it would mean that i would have already been way into the 70 km/hr zone.
he was driving at the same time he was apparently checking my speed.

i have asked for this matter to go to court and im just wondering if they can still find me guilty if they don't have any evidence of me speeding?

is there any other evidence i could ask for such as the calibration readings of the laser?
thanks in advance

oscar
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:00 am

Postby oscar » Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:52 pm

hhmmmm, interesting

96.2m behind you say

means he was stationary and using a laser - no other way to state a distance that accurately

also no way he was targetting another vehicle apart from yours

oh, and by the way, evidence is the thing that is decided on by a court, it could be verbal testimony, a photograph, pretty much anything else

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:55 pm

oscar wrote:hhmmmm, interesting

96.2m behind you say

means he was stationary and using a laser - no other way to state a distance that accurately

also no way he was targetting another vehicle apart from yours

oh, and by the way, evidence is the thing that is decided on by a court, it could be verbal testimony, a photograph, pretty much anything else


there were cars all around me at the time and he was not stationary, he was driving at the same time.

oscar
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:00 am

Postby oscar » Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:59 pm

chad1989 wrote:and he was not stationary, he was driving at the same time.


you are wrong

he cannot have detected you with that accuracy if he was moving

how do you 'know' he was moving? or are you assuming way too much?

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8239
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Wed Feb 16, 2011 7:00 pm

When you get to court, he will say he was stopped in or next to his car, lasered you, then drove off and followed you to pull you over.

There is nothing you can say that can contradict that.

No one expects you to know everything that the police are going to say in court.

That is one of the main reasons my website says:

1. What are my chances of success?

It is usually impossible to give any realistic or practical advice about your chances of success until I have seen all the paperwork for your particular case, including court papers. Coming to a conference before the matter has reached court might be a waste of time if you are expecting an expert opinion about the chances of winning your case. It is not possible for a competent lawyer to conclude that you have no realistic chance of winning unless the lawyer has seen the charge and summons, the court file and the police brief.

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 7:09 pm

oscar wrote:
chad1989 wrote:and he was not stationary, he was driving at the same time.


you are wrong

he cannot have detected you with that accuracy if he was moving

how do you 'know' he was moving? or are you assuming way too much?



im not assuming way to much and i know for a fact that he was moving. he said at the time that he had got me through a laser that was built into the car.

oscar
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:00 am

Postby oscar » Wed Feb 16, 2011 7:25 pm

once again you are wrong

there are no lasers that are fitted to vic pol cars that can detect speed when the vic pol car is moving - there are only lasers that are fitted to vic pol cars that are hand operated by police

there are only radars fitted to vic pol cars that can detect speed when the vic pol car is moving - and they don't give distances

to be honest, you don't have a clue what you are talking about

either pay the ticket or object, then read the information given and then you will know what actually happened

Day
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Wed Feb 16, 2011 7:59 pm

To answer your question - "can they book me if they don't have evidence?"

You don't know that they don't have evidence. You assume it because they wouldn't show it to you. HOwever he is under no obligation to show it to you. You seem confused about what method of of detection was used. What is being explained to you by others is that you may ahve seen his car moving behind you, but may not have noticed him hidden by the side of the road when he got you with the laser. Hence your belief that he got you with a laser while he was moving which is impossible. He may have said that the laser was attached to the vehicle, (in the vehicle) but this would have been how it was powered and then when he got a reading off you took off after you.

He may have however had a radar, but if as you describe that there were other vehicles then that is unlikely. He may have got you by keeping an even distance from you and matching your speed but you claim that he said he used laser and the reference to the distance supports the use of laser. The issue here is that you didn't see him when he actually got a reading of you and then only noticed him when he was catching up to you.

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:24 pm

Day wrote:To answer your question - "can they book me if they don't have evidence?"

You don't know that they don't have evidence. You assume it because they wouldn't show it to you. HOwever he is under no obligation to show it to you. You seem confused about what method of of detection was used. What is being explained to you by others is that you may ahve seen his car moving behind you, but may not have noticed him hidden by the side of the road when he got you with the laser. Hence your belief that he got you with a laser while he was moving which is impossible. He may have said that the laser was attached to the vehicle, (in the vehicle) but this would have been how it was powered and then when he got a reading off you took off after you.

He may have however had a radar, but if as you describe that there were other vehicles then that is unlikely. He may have got you by keeping an even distance from you and matching your speed but you claim that he said he used laser and the reference to the distance supports the use of laser. The issue here is that you didn't see him when he actually got a reading of you and then only noticed him when he was catching up to you



Firstly I would like to say that I knew he was there and had been behind me for quite sometime. He did not jump out of any bushes or anything like that.
I don't know how he detected my speed but on the infringement notice it says laser and in brackets 96.2 meters.

Secondly I have made numerous calls to civic compliance Victoria and asked to see the evidence wether it be a photo video or what ever it is but they have nothing at all. And I was told that it is my word versus the police officers word.

Day
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:33 pm

chad1989 wrote:Firstly I would like to say that I knew he was there and had been behind me for quite sometime. He did not jump out of any bushes or anything like that.


He can pick your speed then take off after you and follow you for some time. He cannot use a lser in a moving vehicle it would not work. Nearly every response on this site has tried to tell you that.


chad1989 wrote:Secondly I have made numerous calls to civic compliance Victoria and asked to see the evidence wether it be a photo video or what ever it is but they have nothing at all. And I was told that it is my word versus the police officers word.


Calling civic compliance won't do anything. They deal with the cameras. He is the only one that will adduce evidence relevant to the offence. You can ask fo it, but until you have objected to the infringement notice, no-one is required to share it with you. As it stands, with a laser offence, it his observations of your vehicle, his credentials for using the speed measuring device and then his observations of the reading from the speed measuring device when he aimed it at your vehicle. He is not required to have photo's or printouts from the device. This is why calling civic compliance won't help you.

If you displayed the same attitude to the officer on the day as you are now with the people who are trying to help you and offer you advice, I can see why he was hesitant to show you anything, but what I can be sure of is that his notes would have been emaculate in response to your manner and he would maintain a copy of his audio recording to support his version of events.

Regards.

oscar
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:00 am

Postby oscar » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:34 pm

chad1989 wrote:I don't know how he detected my speed but on the infringement notice it says laser and in brackets 96.2 meters.

And I was told that it is my word versus the police officers word.


exactly

Day
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:35 pm

oscar wrote:
chad1989 wrote:I don't know how he detected my speed but on the infringement notice it says laser and in brackets 96.2 meters.

And I was told that it is my word versus the police officers word.


exactly


That too.

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:35 pm

oscar wrote:once again you are wrong

there are no lasers that are fitted to vic pol cars that can detect speed when the vic pol car is moving - there are only lasers that are fitted to vic pol cars that are hand operated by police

there are only radars fitted to vic pol cars that can detect speed when the vic pol car is moving - and they don't give distances

to be honest, you don't have a clue what you are talking about

either pay the ticket or object, then read the information given and then you will know what actually happened


I am not wrong. I'm very aware of my surroundings when I drive and I do know what I'm talking about. I would not know that the Victorian police cars don't have lasers fitted to them. I'm just saying what the infringement said.
I am not going to pay the fine and have my license suspended for something I did not do.
I was simply doing the right thing and once I had passed the last 40 km/hr sign that's when I increased my speed unto 70 km/hr.
And if there is one thing I can assure you ( wether you believe me or not ) is that the police officer was driving about 10 m behind me when he put on the light to pull me over. He did not jump out of and bushes.

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:57 pm

Day wrote:
chad1989 wrote:Firstly I would like to say that I knew he was there and had been behind me for quite sometime. He did not jump out of any bushes or anything like that.


He can pick your speed then take off after you and follow you for some time. He cannot use a lser in a moving vehicle it would not work. Nearly every response on this site has tried to tell you that.


chad1989 wrote:Secondly I have made numerous calls to civic compliance Victoria and asked to see the evidence wether it be a photo video or what ever it is but they have nothing at all. And I was told that it is my word versus the police officers word.


Calling civic compliance won't do anything. They deal with the cameras. He is the only one that will adduce evidence relevant to the offence. You can ask fo it, but until you have objected to the infringement notice, no-one is required to share it with you. As it stands, with a laser offence, it his observations of your vehicle, his credentials for using the speed measuring device and then his observations of the reading from the speed measuring device when he aimed it at your vehicle. He is not required to have photo's or printouts from the device. This is why calling civic compliance won't help you.

If you displayed the same attitude to the officer on the day as you are now with the people who are trying to help you and offer you advice, I can see why he was hesitant to show you anything, but what I can be sure of is that his notes would have been emaculate in response to your manner and he would maintain a copy of his audio recording to support his version of events.

Regards.


I respect that you are trying to help me but I feel as if you are not understanding what I am saying. My manners to the officer on the day was very polite and respectful and he was the one who had a bad attitude towards me. So from my understanding now is that I have to elect to go to court and then only can I see the evidence?

I am only 21 years of age and this is the first time anything like this has happened to me. I would just like to let you know that I am still trying to understand all the procedures of how to deal with this.

Day
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:59 pm

chad1989 wrote:I was simply doing the right thing and once I had passed the last 40 km/hr sign that's when I increased my speed unto 70 km/hr.
And if there is one thing I can assure you ( wether you believe me or not ) is that the police officer was driving about 10 m behind me when he put on the light to pull me over. He did not jump out of and bushes.


This is the biggest tell that you are mistaken. That is what I and others have tried to explain to you; he would have got you speeding then caught up to you and then lit up his lights when he was close. He doesn't light you up as soon as he gets the reading. They get the speed reading, join the traffic, catch up then turn their lights on when they are 10 metres away. If he turned on his lights when he first spotted you he would have had the possibility that you were far enough ahead to see them and bugger off as he tried to catch up. Should you choose to contest this: Please, please please keep us informed of the lead up and the results.

Day
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:04 pm

chad1989 wrote:I respect that you are trying to help me but I feel as if you are not understanding what I am saying. My manners to the officer on the day was very polite and respectful and he was the one who had a bad attitude towards me. So from my understanding now is that I have to elect to go to court and then only can I see the evidence?

Calling the officer a liar will not get you on their bad side. They will see that as not being polite or respectful and having a bad attitude, so will respond accordingly. He is only going of his observations.

chad1989 wrote:I am only 21 years of age and this is the first time anything like this has happened to me. I would just like to let you know that I am still trying to understand all the procedures of how to deal with this.


Have a good rad of procedure on Hardy's site here, you should pick up a good idea of procedure. Also, if you have the time, pop into a local Magistrates' and sit in on some cases. It will be an education.

Good luck with it all.

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:16 pm

Day wrote:
chad1989 wrote:I was simply doing the right thing and once I had passed the last 40 km/hr sign that's when I increased my speed unto 70 km/hr.
And if there is one thing I can assure you ( wether you believe me or not ) is that the police officer was driving about 10 m behind me when he put on the light to pull me over. He did not jump out of and bushes.


This is the biggest tell that you are mistaken. That is what I and others have tried to explain to you; he would have got you speeding then caught up to you and then lit up his lights when he was close. He doesn't light you up as soon as he gets the reading. They get the speed reading, join the traffic, catch up then turn their lights on when they are 10 metres away. If he turned on his lights when he first spotted you he would have had the possibility that you were far enough ahead to see them and bugger off as he tried to catch up. Should you choose to contest this: Please, please please keep us informed of the lead up and the results.


Ok I can see where you are coming from. I know that they don't turn their light up as soon as they get a reading. I watch a lot of police shows such as motor way patrol and RBT so I have a fairly good understanding of how it happens.
I probably should have mentioned this earlier but I know the exact point on when he got the reading of my speed.
Once I had passed the last 40 km/hr sign and started increasing my speed I did see him in my rear view mirror slow down but never stop. ( as if he was still doing 40 when I was going 70 ) and that was when he sped up and turned on the lights. I thought at the time he was going after the ute that overtook me.

Day
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:33 pm

chad1989 wrote:Ok I can see where you are coming from. I know that they don't turn their light up as soon as they get a reading. I watch a lot of police shows such as motor way patrol and RBT so I have a fairly good understanding of how it happens.


That won't help your case at court, and unfortunately you have mentioned two shows that are not based in Victoria. However, I'm not knocking you as this may be the same understanding that most users have of police procedures.


chad1989 wrote:I probably should have mentioned this earlier but I know the exact point on when he got the reading of my speed.


How do you know this?

Regards.

chad1989
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:05 pm
Location: melbourne

Postby chad1989 » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:42 pm

chad1989 wrote:I probably should have mentioned this earlier but I know the exact point on when he got the reading of my speed.


How do you know this?

Regards.[/quote]

Because I like to make sure that I am being extra cautious on the roads when I know that there is a police car around me. I was consistently looking in my rear view mirror at him and when I saw him slow down and everyone was speeding up I knew that he was doing something or going to go after the car that was passing me. He slowed down as if he was trying to stop all the traffic behind him and then all of a sudden he turned on the lights and sped up.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8239
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:56 pm

You have no idea where he was when he used his laser.

i was stationary at the set of lights under the bridge heading towards Canterbury rd.
about 40m in front of me at the lights is the last 40 km/hr sign and about 20m after that is the 70 km/hr sign. the police officer was was right behind me at the time and i knew that he was there.


He lasered you prior to you stopping at the lights, not after the lights. He was sitting behind you doing a registration check, not measuring your speed.

If you are correct about your theories, then you will do very well in court because the police won't have any evidence. Best of luck!


Return to “Lasers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest