Walking for 2 years :'(

Neka79 · Post by **Neka79** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:18 pm

mohawk miss wrote:See a good solicitor, the ones in the mags like CycleTorque are usually riders too, and definately get your bike dyno'ed.
Precedent for this sort of thing was set a couple of years ago by a guy who got pinged supposedly doing 160k/h in a stock standard datsun 180B.
It was proved on appeal that the car was incapable of doing that speed and the case was dismissed.

Hard luck, seems a really severe penalty to me. What about the guy who did 200k's + down the freeway to Goulburn, he managed to prove the speed was not excessive for the conditions and the vehicle was not out of control? The SOB got off without even a warning...

yea i believe that was JOhn Singleton in a Bentley...

87Ninja wrote:
gigksrc wrote:Even if you can prove your bike's top speed is say 160 how is that going to make any real difference when you are in an 80k zone?
All of us have done bad stuff & been lucky to get away with it so dont let it totally mess up your self esteem.
Sell the bike cos 2 years is ages. Ride your pushy & enjoy being fit.
You could save like mad & buy yourself a great bike as a reward when you get your licence back.
Good luck buddy.
Its not the licence im worried about mate , its being locked up

ur a bit too pretty?? ull be very popular...

seriously id be seeing solicitors mate, stay away from gaol..

Buck · Post by **Buck** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:41 pm

remember never volunteer and dont drop the soap or :

Buck

Draven · Post by **Draven** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:48 pm

that is the last thing im thinking, Im thinking mainly about my daughter and my life in general

aardvark · Post by **aardvark** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:00 pm

Not usually the one to throw a spanner in the works (

), but how are you going to prove you haven't modified the bike betwen the offence date and the date you get it dynoed?

SenNey · Post by **SenNey** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:06 pm

aardvark wrote:Not usually the one to throw a spanner in the works ( ), but how are you going to prove you haven't modified the bike betwen the offence date and the date you get it dynoed?

Maybe doubt will be enough.

to get them thinking anyway.

Draven · Post by **Draven** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:07 pm

aardvark wrote:Not usually the one to throw a spanner in the works ( ), but how are you going to prove you haven't modified the bike betwen the offence date and the date you get it dynoed?

true true, ill have to ask my solicitor that

I-K · Post by **I-K** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:18 pm

aardvark wrote:Not usually the one to throw a spanner in the works ( ), but how are you going to prove you haven't modified the bike betwen the offence date and the date you get it dynoed?

The woman in Victoria who proved that her Datsun 120Y can't do 160-odd kph didn't have that problem to address...

It's not so much an issue of the GPX not having the power to do 180-odd real kph; they don't have the revs to do it. The only ways to do it would be if an aftermarket ECU, with a couple-of-thousand-rpm-higher revlimit, or a smaller rear/larger front sprocket were fitted.

The former... it's a $1200, 19-year-old GPX250. Even if an aftermarket ECU existed for them, it would cost half as much as the bike. Who would, reasonably, bother with such a modification (your Honour)?

The latter... gearing a bike up might give it the revs to reach that speed, but it won't have the power. This is where dragstrip tickets and video footage from Eastern Creek would come into it and show that the bike can't pull that speed.

I've ridden GPX250's on the highway; on standard gearing, they're more comfortable pulling 120kph on the clock in fifth than in sixth. That means that, even at those moderate speeds, the thing's starting to lose the battle against air resistance. To reiterate, I would be very surprised to hear that a GPX250 can pull more than an actual 150kph.

the kid · Post by **the kid** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:46 pm

87Ninja wrote:that is the last thing im thinking, Im thinking mainly about my daughter and my life in general

Mate , another thing to maybe keep in the back of your mind , is that the magistrate can put stuff , like the thought of jail time , into your head to make you really shit yourself . And at sentence time remove that extreme sentence and lob in a suspension or whatever .

Im not saying that this will be the case , but only 2 mths ago had it suggested to me i might face a mandatory 1month jail time . Had me very worried to say the least .

Reappeared before him and was told what a poor example of humanity i was and got a months license suspension and an interesting fine .

Only reason for mentioning this is to keep your spirits up and fight the speed charge .

aardvark · Post by **aardvark** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:13 pm

I-K wrote:
aardvark wrote:Not usually the one to throw a spanner in the works ( ), but how are you going to prove you haven't modified the bike betwen the offence date and the date you get it dynoed?
The woman in Victoria who proved that her Datsun 120Y can't do 160-odd kph didn't have that problem to address...

The Police obviously had a crap prosecutor.

I'm not saying I believe the GPX was doing that speed, I'm just tossing around some possibilities.

If you want my uneducated opinion, the chance of jail time seems slim. A suspended sentence would likely be the expected outcome. But then, we don't know anything about your criminal history?

To save me reading through the 400 posts that are already here, can I ask how the Police actually recorded your speed? Was it a follow and time, an estimation or did they have a laser/radar?

stevew_zzr · Post by **stevew_zzr** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:04 pm

aardy - yeah it's a case of your word against theirs though, sure they might be able to ask have u modified the bike and all you can do is give a statement under oath that you haven't and it's up to the judge whether they believe that or not.

But yes it's not like getting a dyno result is instantly going to solve all your problems, but it will help you alot if you intend on contesting the charge.

Draven · Post by **Draven** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:05 pm

they said they got me from behind using the radar in the police car

ZZRCHIKKY · Post by **ZZRCHIKKY** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:06 pm

was the police car moving because then its not admissible because it depend how fast the police car was going , how fast it shows u as going

aardvark · Post by **aardvark** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:12 pm

ZZRCHIKKY wrote:was the police car moving because then its not admissible because it depend how fast the police car was going , how fast it shows u as going

You've obviously never heard of mobile radar??

aardvark · Post by **aardvark** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:14 pm

87Ninja wrote:they said they got me from behind using the radar in the police car

Oh look, I did a Neka and double posted. Quick, somebody spank me!

Did you see the reading? Legally, you don't have to be shown the reading, but I'd be interested to know if you saw it?

Regardless, if I was facing two years of walking because of a speeding offence, I'd be getting myself a lawyer.

ZZRCHIKKY · Post by **ZZRCHIKKY** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:15 pm

but wouldnt it hange depending on how fast the cop was going ?

Mobile radars , what will they think of next