Kawasaki Sportsbike Riders Club - Australia - Online Forum

Well having it finally dealt with would be a huge relief although your sentence was a bit harsh IMO, just the worry and waiting is torture enough and can be a sentence in it self.

I can not understand how your solicitor and the magistrate allowed a flawed speed detection device and the reading as evidence, like it was 30+ kph out ffs if you were in fact doing 150 kph, and possibly as much as 80+ kph out of wack

Anyway, good luck with the home detention thing, do you have to report to the cops or the dept' of corrections?

Good thing is you will have plenty of time to have your daughter over and even do an online course for a non alcohol related career, why the ban on grog, bewildering considering it was not related to this offence?

(*Edit* grammar)

At a guess i imagine it would be one of the terms & conditions of home detention in general, something to do with ensuring he doesnt exacerbate any bad behaviour, and having it blanket applied to everyone who falls under home detention regardless of if you dont drink and only serve the stuff or are a pisshead who could outdrink the lot of us cumulatively.

im a bit surprised and annoyed that the "well you must have been doing at least 50 over" b-s was thrown at him and him getting prosecuted for it. It severely sounds like a flawed use of logic to me as the lidar could have been out and he was only doin 120-130 for gawd sake, which if caught on a correct camera bumps him down to a lot friendlier 3 point $240 offence.

FFS what happens if someone on a 10 was doing 130 ffs and the laser was off and said "you were doing 210", you'd be fucked even further using this screwed logic.

I thought the idea was you were tried, found not guilty of doing the speed the officer at the time SPECIFICALLY charged you with and if reasonable doubt was given, then the charges are dropped with no further prosecution.

What about the idea of the western ring road speed camera snapping that chick with the burnt orange datto which could only get up to 117 with a professional driver let alone the 158 that she was charged with. Then again its in victoria and it had a shitload of publicity to it too.

Then again, this is a nanny state were turning into, remind me not to go WOT in anything other than first gear near your place mate.


[n.b.] I take it you've already discussed how this fell flat on its arse with your lawyer, definately not the wort outcome you could have gotten, but far far short of what you should have.

sorry for ranting a bit there, its just that it shits me to see what i percieve to be flawed logic used in a traffic offence like this.

Thanks for your concern and comments guys, but really the bottom line is whats done is done.... and ike mentioned it could of been 100x worse....

Like i said in a previous post im just gad its al over, really its only 2 months which im going to use to get my life back on track, my boss is giving me my job back after the 2 months so its sorta just like a holiday.

Ive already decided im selling the bike, and going to save up during the time i have no licence to get a nice new shiny bike when i get my licence back.

The home detention wont be all that bad as i have 2 housemates now who said they are going to help me any way possible,and friends from work who are going to visit Mum & Dad said they are going to visit me between now and xmas, and my daughters mother might be coming up by train so i can see my daughter aswell

I guess what im saying is that im looking a the positives of this rather then the negatives. Im not going to let this beat me and get me down...

Ok, way to go mate, cop it on the chin and do it, only 2 months thats a walk in the park really.

It doesnt look so bad all said and done.

All the best with it.

Cheers

J.

congrats mate...glad u got wot u think is fair/reasonable, and ur reasonably happy with it, and ur not gunna be bubba's man-meat...

everything else can work it self out...

To be honest I feel a bit disappointed ! The prosecution had *no* evidence you were going any particular speed above the speed limit, so any offences related to excess speed should have been dropped. You provided evidence that the radar detection statistic was totally inaccurate, it should THEN be up to them to supply evidence that either the radar reading was accurate, or some other substantial evidence that you were above the speed limit.

Use a different lawyer next time mebbe

But as you say what's done is done, might as well try to make the most of the situation - hopefully in two years time the shiny new bike will make ya feel better too !

I highly reccommend Ian Crighton Browne (solicitor/barrister/klawyer/whatever) at Balmain if anyone has a big traffic issue like ninja. I was staring down the barrel of similar charges a few years ago and he got me cleared of all charges and had the matter dismissed from the court. They tried Aggravated dangerous driving occasioning grevious bodily harm, negilgent driving occasionally grevious bodily harm, excessive speed, crossing double white unbroken lines.

(really it sounds much worse than it really was)

stevew_zzr wrote: The prosecution had *no* evidence you were going any particular speed above the speed limit, so any offences related to excess speed should have been dropped.

Well, not really. The argument was probably that he was travelling in excess of 45 km/h above the speed limit. Once you start reaching those kinds of speeds, the actual final speed is kind of irrelavant.

aardvark wrote:

stevew_zzr wrote: The prosecution had *no* evidence you were going any particular speed above the speed limit, so any offences related to excess speed should have been dropped.

Well, not really. The argument was probably that he was travelling in excess of 45 km/h above the speed limit. Once you start reaching those kinds of speeds, the actual final speed is kind of irrelavant.

From memory, the cops tailed Ninja to an intersection, watched him slow down at it, make the turn and accelerate out of sight along the cross-street. They followed, caught up to him, hit the discos and pulled him over for doing 180-odd *along the cross street*.

So, not only was the GPX250 supposed to be able to exceed 180kph, it was supposed to have gone from 30kph (the sort of speed at which you'd take a turn at an intersection) to over 180kph in a few hundred metres.

Which is why I suggested, months ago, that, along with putting his bike on a dyno, Ninja take the bike to an EC drag night, get himself filmed to show he's giving the bike all it's got and enter that into evidence alongside timeslips showing the bike to be capable of no more than 16s quarters with a terminal speed in the region of 120-130kph...

...at which point his lawyer, if he was anything other than a complete liability to his client, would get up, and cross-examine the cop to the effect of,

"How much time, would you say, elapsed between you observing the motorcycle make the turn into the cross street and you doing the same?"

What's the cop going to say? "About 10 seconds."

"So, when you made the turn, how far ahead of you would you say the motorcycle was?"

Two options here. If he says "Oh, about 500m", the lawyer can further examine the cop's claim that he can accurately determine the speed of a receding motorcycle from some 500m away, at night.

Alternately, if he says, "About 80-100m," out come the dragstrip timeslips which show that the 300-foot time of a GPX250 on full throttle is about 7 seconds, at which point its speed is some 90kph.

"Can you explain to us how you came to judge the motorcycle's speed to be not only over 30kph greater than even its theoretical top speed, but more than *twice* the speed this motorcycle can possibly reach in the time and distance available?"

There were so many holes to be shot in the cops' case here it's not funny.

I can't believe:

a) Ninja isn't appealing to the District Court.
b) His lawyer was apparently more incompetent than the guy out of The Castle.

I can't believe:

a) Ninja isn't appealing to the District Court.
b) His lawyer was apparently more incompetent than the guy out of The Castle.

Me too

I-K wrote:I can't believe:

a) Ninja isn't appealing to the District Court.
b) His lawyer was apparently more incompetent than the guy out of The Castle.

Again i'm with you I-K but having said that, it does take money and indeed time to appeal and perhaps Ninja is just happy (as he has said) to have the matter finalised and done with.

I can certianly understand that even if he did get screwed royally I reckon.

maybe its just all about the vibe??

Neka79 wrote:maybe its just all about the vibe??

Colette wrote:

Neka79 wrote:maybe its just all about the vibe??

He got a 636