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.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Ktulu, Feb 21, 2007.

  1. Drivers lose Speed Camera test-case

    So a court can uphold a law simply so the police aren't inconvenienced by having to prove it was enforced correctly???

    OK, so I see what it's about - the one guy who calibrates speed camera's can't be getting dragged into court-rooms for the rest of his life to ensure fines stick... BUT surely such a volume of complaints that would necessitate legislation to prevent him being tied up would INDICATE that there was some sort of widespread problem or issue that meant people were quite likely contesting an unfair fine[?]

    Does anyone know more about this tidy little piece of convenient legislation, or can I go on thinking that this prevents people being able to reasonably contest an automated criminal accusation and punishment?
  2. "Never stand between a state Premier and a bucket full of money." - Paul Keating

    What did you expect? There's a great big bucket of money there, and no government is going to let some little upstart motorist get in the way. Any and every magistrate and judge in your state would have been left in absolutely NO DOUBT as to what outcome was going to be required the next time this came around. After the fiasco last time it was tested in court, they would have made sure it was "FIXED" this time.
    It's not even politics - it's just life :roll:
  3. I think common sense has prevailed. I do believe that stricter terms need to be applied to cameras if they are not already in place. Calibration needs to be periodically checked and a means test done to guage when/if the machine can go out of whack and the cameras are recalibrated within this time frame so credibility of there accuracy is true.

    Cheers :cool:
  4. I think there is a piece of legislation somewhere that basically say that speed camera, provided x, y and z is met are proof beyond reasonable doubt.

    So obviously the first judge found contrary to the legislation, but the appeals judge couldn't ignore it.

    It sucks, because basically they can legislate black is white and even if it's clearly not the case ther is nothing a judge can do about it.

    You would have to challenge it under the NSW constitution.