Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

[Vic} Rider claims he wasn't doing 247kph

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by TonyE, May 30, 2007.

  1. Today's Herald Sun online.

    I'm posting it here rather than in politics because of this comment

    The court heard he would call expert witnesses to prove he could not ride upright at that speed without falling off his 2005 Aprilia 1000cc machine.

  2. Interesting. If he has a poor riding record he might be in trouble.
    Worth fighting though.
  3. Of course he could. Ignorence is really bliss.
  4. I want to know who the "expert witnesses" are, and their qualifications.
  5. like to see the outcome of this one... very interested to see who the expert witnesses are too and what "evidence" they could provide to get him off :?
  6. I think the keyword is "upright". If the camera pictured him sitting upright, then I tend to agree with him.

    Wouldn't he need to be tucked in behind the screen at that speed. There's no question about the ability of the bike or rider to go that fast, but his body position might provide some clues as to the credibility of the claim of 247km/h
  7. There's a few experts in the art of falling off around here :LOL:
  8. read the article. there's 2 possibilities - either whoever the hell can get their hands on a manual for those cameras, or a pyschologist/psychiatrist saying he was unable on that day to maintain that speed with the "mood" he was in.
  9. :?

    This would be an interesting case to sit in on.

    The 'expert' witnesses could be interesting.

    I assume that he's represented (if not, he's already gone). There may be more to this, and I wouldn't rely on the Herald Sun to either:

    1. know the facts
    2. report them accurately, even if they do.
  10. i actually agree with this guy..... if it was a naked the picture will tell the story..... at $2.30+ it's actually a bit of work to hold on :wink:
  11. It will certainly be interesting to see how this turn out.

    But I'm also curious as to why the police think they don't have to release the operating manual?
    It is my understanding of the court system that everyone is entitled to have all relevant documents provided to them, and the calibration, and operating procedures for a device muct come under that surely????
  12. He's certainly right about the difficulty in getting access to information about the speed cameras.

    ... and it IS going to cost him thousands.

    I object on principle to: the lack of transparency the government has on speed cameras and where the revenue they raise is spent, the legislated infallibility of such devices to avoid hassle/cost to the government operating the cameras [whilst ignoring the Australian constitution on national weights and measures], and to the sheer friggin' lies we are fed about the dangers of speeding - particularly by omission on other key points of road safety.

    A lot of people on here say "Do the crime, do the time."

    I don't care if the guy WAS doing even 300km/hour.
    I hope he wins. I hope he keeps his license, his job, his bike, his money, and whatever unique aspect of his personality has made him stand-up and tell a power-drunk road authority to jam it.
  13. +1 ktulu, but........

    does bring me to another thing i heard on the radio. a bloke was in an intersection turning right, by the time it cleared the red light camera was set off. he got out of the fine by spending $15,000 in legal fees.

    2 ways to go there -
    all he had to say was, the rear of my vehicle set the 1st camera off while stationary, the 2nd went off automatically as i was completing my turn. (and that cost $15k!?)

    all the coppers had to say was, stationary or not, you entered the intersection without it being clear.

    why is it that every aspect of road law is a freakin grey area?
  14. say what now?
    your not allowed to enter an intersection without it being clear?
    How the hell do yah get through an intersection when the traffics packed way back on the other side and your only chance is to sit halfway in and wait til it goes amber and the flow stops....

    Everyone I know does this including the police :eek:
  15. I hope the guy gets off too. His reasons for his innocence seem pretty convincing too.

    Still... if there was a road you were going to pull 240km/h on there'd be worse than Westall. :LOL:
  16. he should be able to access the operating manual and maintenace record of the camera unit under FOI. If they deny those documents, it casts doubt upon their validity, which might assist his case. He could also ask his solicitor to obtain a subpoena for the docs.

    I think whatever way this goes, it's going to cost him a lot of money.
  17. He could just argue that since speed is such a killer, if he'd been doing that speed then he would have been dead. :?
  18. I know that piece of road pretty well.

    I assume he was heading north. If you have a look at that stretch there is a slow right hand sweeping curve that he would have had to negotiate - not one that I think he would have made it around at 247 kph. He would have had to had it laid way over at that speed......

    It would be interesting to know where the camera was located. That would at least give us some idea as to whether he could have accelerated to 247 kph at that point.

    I assume that Aprillia can actually hit 247 kph. What is it rated to speed? (please excuse my ignorance - remember - I ride a Harley :LOL:)
  19. very open to interpretation.
    just because everyone does it doesn't mean it's legal. the police also come over the white line at intersections. it's interesting to watch from a heavy vehicle from dad's work that needs that space to make a corner :grin: horns are honked, bus keeps coming, police reverso-el-quicko.

    in practice, the only succesful way to make a turn is by entering the intersection, but technically, yes technically you aren't supposed to. There are so many traffic violations per day worth so much more revenue than speeding (and more dangerous like mis-aimed driving lights and high beams), but then the police would actually have to know stuff. It would also take time, money etc etc. 2 things the government don't see as cost effective.
  20. The Westall Rd extension is really just one big curve. His argument about being upright would more than likely extend to whether or not the lean angle of the motorbike is consistent with the speed and the curvature of the road.

    At 247kph, the bike would need to be leaned over a fair way just to even travel at that speed, and as others have mentioned, he'd have to be in a full racing tuck, flat on the tank, to achieve that sort of speed as well. Further, that sort of speed would likely take around 1km of distance to achieve that speed from when he started accelerating. Am pretty sure that Westall Rd extension isn't much more than 2km long, so it'd depend on where the camera was located.

    Heck, on the R1 I enter the main straight at PI at ~190kph, and am reaching 260kph (actual, not indicated) at best at the end of the straight 800m later, and the R1 has more power than an RSV1000 (assuming that's what he was on).

    [Edit: jdkarmch beat me to it]