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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:09 pm

oscar wrote:yep - that's a speeding ticket, which no longer exists as you have objected to it.....


just out of curiosity, i have objected to the notice abd they mailed me a letter stating that they cannot identify the infringement number.
i did send them 2 clear copies via fax and express post but now i want to know is
1) what would happen if just left it and not resend the infringement notice? would it just sit there and be forgotten about?

i will keep you guys posted on the result

Chef2
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:04 pm

Postby Chef2 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:25 pm

chad1989 wrote:
oscar wrote:yep - that's a speeding ticket, which no longer exists as you have objected to it.....


just out of curiosity, i have objected to the notice abd they mailed me a letter stating that they cannot identify the infringement number.
i did send them 2 clear copies via fax and express post but now i want to know is
1) what would happen if just left it and not resend the infringement notice? would it just sit there and be forgotten about?

i will keep you guys posted on the result


Given the offence date was today, CCV won't have recieved it yet to process it. You need to mail the TIN in with the back signed to show your objection.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8233
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:26 pm

The -73 suggests that he might have shot you up the butt. Possibly hiding up a driveway or similar so oncoming cars can't see him and he can't see them, and at 70kmh you would be going about 20m per second so locking it at 96m is consistent with him starting to track you shortly after you went by (i.e. tracked you for 3 second or 60 metres).

At court you will find out where he was and you can then work out how many metres he was from the 70 zone.

If it was a 40kmh school zone, then you might benefit from getting some good legal advice.

If you can't prove that you lodged a proper objection to the notice within time then any suspension imposed after 28 days is lawful and you won't have any defence to driving while suspended.

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:11 pm

Hardy wrote:The -73 suggests that he might have shot you up the butt. Possibly hiding up a driveway or similar so oncoming cars can't see him and he can't see them, and at 70kmh you would be going about 20m per second so locking it at 96m is consistent with him starting to track you shortly after you went by (i.e. tracked you for 3 second or 60 metres).

At court you will find out where he was and you can then work out how many metres he was from the 70 zone.

If it was a 40kmh school zone, then you might benefit from getting some good legal advice.

If you can't prove that you lodged a proper objection to the notice within time then any suspension imposed after 28 days is lawful and you won't have any defence to driving while suspended.


it was a three lane main rd and we were both in the middle lane.
it was not a school zone and is only a 40km/hr zone between 8 am and midnight.
i lodged the notice of objection 22 days after receiving the infringement

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:14 pm

chad1989 wrote:
oscar wrote:yep - that's a speeding ticket, which no longer exists as you have objected to it.....


just out of curiosity, i have objected to the notice abd they mailed me a letter stating that they cannot identify the infringement number.
i did send them 2 clear copies via fax and express post but now i want to know is
1) what would happen if just left it and not resend the infringement notice? would it just sit there and be forgotten about?

i will keep you guys posted on the result


How come you didn't fill the back of the infringement notice in and just send that?

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:19 pm

chad1989 wrote:
it was a three lane main rd and we were both in the middle lane.


You keep referring to him being behind you when he detected you. Because he was in the middle lane when he "intercepted" you does not mean that was the position he was in when he "detected" you speeding. He is sitting still somewhere sees you driving. Aims the laser at you, gets a reading and waits 3 seconds. He then puts the laser down and takes off after you. You may have made it easier for him to catch up if you had by then realised you were in a 40 zone and slowed down, but it would have been too late. He had got you a minute or two before. His notes will have the exact location on it. You can ask for a copy of that after receiving the court papers.

Cheers.

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:40 pm

Day wrote:
chad1989 wrote:
oscar wrote:yep - that's a speeding ticket, which no longer exists as you have objected to it.....


just out of curiosity, i have objected to the notice abd they mailed me a letter stating that they cannot identify the infringement number.
i did send them 2 clear copies via fax and express post but now i want to know is
1) what would happen if just left it and not resend the infringement notice? would it just sit there and be forgotten about?

i will keep you guys posted on the result


How come you didn't fill the back of the infringement notice in and just send that?

I did fill in the back of the infringement notice then sent it in. Why would you think I have not?

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:09 pm

Day wrote:
chad1989 wrote:
it was a three lane main rd and we were both in the middle lane.


You keep referring to him being behind you when he detected you. Because he was in the middle lane when he "intercepted" you does not mean that was the position he was in when he "detected" you speeding. He is sitting still somewhere sees you driving. Aims the laser at you, gets a reading and waits 3 seconds. He then puts the laser down and takes off after you. You may have made it easier for him to catch up if you had by then realised you were in a 40 zone and slowed down, but it would have been too late. He had got you a minute or two before. His notes will have the exact location on it. You can ask for a copy of that after receiving the court papers.

Cheers.



Ok will you obviously don't seem to believe me when I say that he was always behind me. At no stage did he ever get out of his car, he even told me that he was using a laser that was on the car and not a hand held laser. As I have stated before that this was in the middle of peak hr traffic and there were cars everywhere around us so I don't see how I would have made it easier for him to catch up after me.
The 40 km hr zone I went through is not a very long zone and I would guess that it's less than 400 m in it's total lenth. I was entering the zone at walking speed and stayed at that speed for approximatly 70 % of the time.
The moment he had detected my speed will show that I was or would have already been into the 70 zone. It's about 70m from the set of lights to the 70km hr sign and about 50 m from the light to the end of the 40 km hr sign. So if you take that 96.2 m into account it means I'm in the 70 zone and not the 40 zone
I think the police officer had made a mistake and must have thought that, that was the start of the 40 zone and not the end.
Once I get the papers and the evidence I will post it up here just to make you believe me.

I hope you can see why I am getting frustrated

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:13 pm

chad1989 wrote:I did fill in the back of the infringement notice then sent it in. Why would you think I have not?


Because you said that you faxed it, you also said you sent two clear copies of the infringement notice with the notice of objection. I couldn't understand why you would send a seperate copy of the notice if you sent the original in. The notice of objection is the back of the infringement notice. You fill that in and send it in with no need to send copies if you send the original. That's why I asked. That and the fact you managed to post an image of the infringement notice here for us to see.

I apologise if you had done all that and kept an electronic copy of the original rather than the original.

That was my reasoning. Keep us in the loop.

Cheers.

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:17 pm

chad1989 wrote:Ok will you obviously don't seem to believe me when I say that he was always behind me. At no stage did he ever get out of his car, he even told me that he was using a laser that was on the car and not a hand held laser. As I have stated before that this was in the middle of peak hr traffic and there were cars everywhere around us so I don't see how I would have made it easier for him to catch up after me.
The 40 km hr zone I went through is not a very long zone and I would guess that it's less than 400 m in it's total lenth. I was entering the zone at walking speed and stayed at that speed for approximatly 70 % of the time.
The moment he had detected my speed will show that I was or would have already been into the 70 zone. It's about 70m from the set of lights to the 70km hr sign and about 50 m from the light to the end of the 40 km hr sign. So if you take that 96.2 m into account it means I'm in the 70 zone and not the 40 zone
I think the police officer had made a mistake and must have thought that, that was the start of the 40 zone and not the end.
Once I get the papers and the evidence I will post it up here just to make you believe me.

I hope you can see why I am getting frustrated


I believe you now and can understand why you are frustrated. Some times it takes a while to get the whole story. It is difficult when sitting in front of a computer screen to visualise a situation unless the word picture is detailed. Thi/s last breakdown you gave paints a clearer picture. Now all you can do is check to see if the notice wa received and then wait for the paperwork before requesting the notes, etc.

Good luck.

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:19 pm

Day wrote:
chad1989 wrote:I did fill in the back of the infringement notice then sent it in. Why would you think I have not?


Because you said that you faxed it, you also said you sent two clear copies of the infringement notice with the notice of objection. I couldn't understand why you would send a seperate copy of the notice if you sent the original in. The notice of objection is the back of the infringement notice. You fill that in and send it in with no need to send copies if you send the original. That's why I asked. That and the fact you managed to post an image of the infringement notice here for us to see.

That was my reasoning. Keep us in the loop.

Cheers.


No I only sent in the copies of the original. The reason why there was two copies sent in was because my mother had gone and faxed a copy in for me without the knowledge of me already sending one by post.
I have posted up a link of the original but I don't know why you would assume I never filled out the back when you can't see it.
Last edited by chad1989 on Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:19 pm

Chef wrote:
Given the offence date was today, CCV won't have recieved it yet to process it.


Date of offence - 17/01/2011. :lol: Not like you Chef. Musn't have had your weeties this am.

Cheers.

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:30 pm

chad1989 wrote:I have posted up a link of the original but I don't know why you would assume I never filled out the back when you can't see it.


What I was referring to was not that I thought you hadn't filled in the back but had not sent in the original. I had assumed that you filled in the back and then only sent in a copy. That is what I was trying to relate to you via this medium called the internet.

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:45 pm

Day wrote:
chad1989 wrote:I have posted up a link of the original but I don't know why you would assume I never filled out the back when you can't see it.


What I was referring to was not that I thought you hadn't filled in the back but had not sent in the original. I had assumed that you filled in the back and then only sent in a copy. That is what I was trying to relate to you via this medium called the internet.


Ohh ok I can see where the confusion is now.
You said before that his notes will have an exact location of where he detected my speed.
Is that something that will be saved on the laser or what he writes down on paper? For example the infringement says warrigal rd but not exactly where on warrigal rd. Or will it give me a reading like 37.51' S 145 4' ?

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8233
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Thu Feb 17, 2011 9:30 pm

His witness statement will not tell you where he was when he measured your speed. He will tell you the answer to that if you ask him in the witness box. The witness statement is likely to say where you were when he measured your speed, and you might be able to work out roughly where he was.

If you really want to save your licence and demerit points and are willing to put a few $k on the line, then subject to seeing the police brief I reckon there is a good chance of winning and a reasonable chance of recovering your legal costs.

Seeing it is only a one month suspension, you could probably hire a stretch limo to get to work rather than spend it on legal fees, so I'm not expecting you to get serious about it.

Chef2
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:04 pm

Postby Chef2 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 9:55 pm

Day wrote:
Chef wrote:
Given the offence date was today, CCV won't have recieved it yet to process it.


Date of offence - 17/01/2011. :lol: Not like you Chef. Musn't have had your weeties this am.

Cheers.


Quite right, too busy sorting out blokes busting gas mains, must have got a good lungful!

Mind you, this thread is providing some comic relief somewhat. Must investigate these car mounted lasers!

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 9:56 pm

Hardy wrote:His witness statement will not tell you where he was when he measured your speed. He will tell you the answer to that if you ask him in the witness box. The witness statement is likely to say where you were when he measured your speed, and you might be able to work out roughly where he was.

If you really want to save your licence and demerit points and are willing to put a few $k on the line, then subject to seeing the police brief I reckon there is a good chance of winning and a reasonable chance of recovering your legal costs.

Seeing it is only a one month suspension, you could probably hire a stretch limo to get to work rather than spend it on legal fees, so I'm not expecting you to get serious about it.


I don't have a witness nor does the police officer so I'm a bit confused as to what exactly is a witness statement. I have done a search but could not find anything helpful to me.
I'm not going to pay a fine and get my licence suspended for something I am not guilty of. I know this is a big risk but I'm going to represent myself in court. I don't care how much I could save or it will cost me, all I know is that I'm going to stand up for myself

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

Postby Day » Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:00 pm

chad1989 wrote:
Hardy wrote:His witness statement


I don't have a witness nor does the police officer so I'm a bit confused as to what exactly is a witness statement.


It is the police officers statement. You will get a copy of it when you ask for all relevant information after receiving the charge and summons.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8233
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:10 pm

A witness is a person who gives evidence in court.

The police member who aimed the laser speed detector at your vehicle will be called to give evidence as a witness for the prosecution and most likely you will receive a copy of his witness statement together with the charge and summons.

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

Postby chad1989 » Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:22 pm

Hardy wrote:A witness is a person who gives evidence in court.

The police member who aimed the laser speed detector at your vehicle will be called to give evidence as a witness for the prosecution and most likely you will receive a copy of his witness statement together with the charge and summons.


Lol I know what a witness is, I just got a bit confused because neither the officer or i would have had a witness but now I understand the context you were saying it in.


Return to “Lasers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest