Another Speeding Fine question

[Pepscobra]

This morning received a speeding fine in the post.
It was a surprise as did not know it at the time.
Supposedly 111km/h in 100 zone.
Photo is of the rear number plate.
Interestingly, there are other cars in the photo.
As I was on the freeway and had my wife and kid in the car, I know I had the cruise control on.
Could the other cars in the photo have been speeding instead and can I argue the fine on this basis?
Cheers.

[STINKY NINJA]

If you think you have good reason to fight the fine id go for it Joe.

[Road_Warrior]

Don't they have those new fancy pants cameras that can tell which car is speeding and which isnt? Usually the photo highlights the car

[Top_Ghia]

You will get nowhere arguing that other cars are present in the photo.
A mate of mine tried to fight it on that basis and was shot down by the judge as soon as he started speaking. They also cropped the photo they supplied for evidence. Case was over in seconds.

[blackf6]

Is it worth the cost of missing work and stuffing around in court? You will have to lawyer up too. If you want to even remotely have a chance of winning the case.

[Morexbs]

I would say it would depend on the type of camera.If it was one roadside camera I'd fight it,if it was a gantry with a camera for each lane you might struggle.
If you have a good driving record,you could always write and ask for a warning instead.

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by Morexbs

I would say it would depend on the type of camera.If it was one roadside camera I'd fight it,if it was a gantry with a camera for each lane you might struggle.
If you have a good driving record,you could always write and ask for a warning instead.

The old letter trick only works for 10ks or less over the limit and if you had a clean driving record for 3 years...
Sorry, that's for Vic.. Not WA

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

The old letter trick only works for 10ks or less over the limit and if you had a clean driving record for 3 years...
Sorry, that's for Vic.. Not WA

I got one of my ex workmates out of a speeding fine by doing the sob story letter for him, and he was 11km/h over.

Cheap **** wouldn't even buy me a can of coke for getting him out of $250 odd either.

[Magna]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

The old letter trick only works for 10ks or less over the limit and if you had a clean driving record for 3 years...
Sorry, that's for Vic.. Not WA

actually in Victoria its up to 14kmh over with a good driving record

http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content...ument_id=10369

[Buttnekid]

do some research - there are clear guidelines as to what area of the original photograph generated by the speed camera needs to contain your registration plate. If your plate is outside this area, it falls outside the OEM's guidelines for evidentiary accuracy and should be thrown out.

This is why sometimes when you have been flashed you do not receive a fine, because these non-conforming pictures are meant to be removed so a fine is not issued using them.

[Pepscobra]

Originally Posted by Buttnekid

do some research - there are clear guidelines as to what area of the original photograph generated by the speed camera needs to contain your registration plate. If your plate is outside this area, it falls outside the OEM's guidelines for evidentiary accuracy and should be thrown out.

Ok, cool... can you point me in the direction of these guidelines please?

[zilo]

Just go to court and say the same thing you posted here.


"Your honour I recall the event clearly, after passing the camera and seeing the flash i looked down at the speedometer of my car and it said exactly 100km/h.
Alongside me other cars were travelling at the same constant speed.
The conditions were dry and visibility was excellent"

And...if you have as much hatred for traffic operations group cops as I do you would have produced your in car camera footage with speed and time/date stamp as I do.

What's that you say? You haven't got one yet?

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Pepscobra

This morning received a speeding fine in the post.
It was a surprise as did not know it at the time.
Supposedly 111km/h in 100 zone.
Photo is of the rear number plate.
Interestingly, there are other cars in the photo.
As I was on the freeway and had my wife and kid in the car, I know I had the cruise control on.
Could the other cars in the photo have been speeding instead and can I argue the fine on this basis?
Cheers.

You're guilty. Pay up. Simple as that.
They will wheel out endless excuses as to why you're the guilty one. By the way...is yours the only car in the picture with a clearly identifiable number plate? Just curious...because my last camera fine had two cars in it and the other one in the image had an obscured plate by center island vegetation...but you could read ours...and we got the fine even though there is literally no damn way we would have been speeding at that spot. It was near the tourist center as you enter Rockhampton...and anyone who knows the area will know that spot...the cops almost should have a dedicated reserved parking spot for the camera van, it's set up there so often. Every local knows it's there on most days and watches out for it.

[danzvtil]

If the camera in my iPhone can tell how many faces are in the pic, then don't you think, an expensive traffic cam would have the technology to tell which numberplate/car is the speeding one?

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by danzvtil

If the camera in my iPhone can tell how many faces are in the pic, then don't you think, an expensive traffic cam would have the technology to tell which numberplate/car is the speeding one?

With a laser detector carefully aimed at a particular car? Yes.
However, using radar, it's a spreading beam. I work with several ex cops who all say that with a radar detector if there are two cars close to each other all the speed reading does is skip around as it can't differentiate that finely...it's a spreading beam of waves that can't target one particular vehicle. Oh yes yes I know police say they "understand better how the radar system works" and are fining people with more than one car in the picture...but that's only because they were throwing out too many pictures from speed cameras which had more than one car in the shot.

"The Great Road Safety Lie" continues unabated...

[b0son]

Originally Posted by danzvtil

If the camera in my iPhone can tell how many faces are in the pic, then don't you think, an expensive traffic cam would have the technology to tell which numberplate/car is the speeding one?

The camera technology is irrelevant (WRT to taking of the photo). It's the limitations of the radar that are the issue... ie. beam width, the cross-sectional area of the vehicles alongside or even out of frame.

There's a reason why they were defined under the legislation as scientific instruments, so they wouldn't have to prove they were working correctly, YOU would have to prove they weren't.

If you're certain you weren't speeding, the first step is usually to request calibration logs/results. Friend got off when they requested these under FOI, but the police failed to produce them. As far as arguing the physics, it will cost you more to get an expert witness to appear on your behalf than the fine. Even though common sense says two vehicles in frame and yours not the central one should create sufficient doubt, it will still be up to you to prove the reading was erroneous.

[Spurious]

I always drive at least a couple clicks over the highway limit 'cause there's always some twit in font of me who insists on either sitting 5 k's under or doing the old "speed up, slow down, speed up, slow down" thing!

I hate that so I pass them, even if I go over.

Do the speed limit yourself & then the twits sit right up your butt. Oh' yeh there's always one!

You'll rarely beat the ticket. You'd have a better chance of signing a stat dec to the tune of "my car was stolen that day your honour, but I didn't report it stolen 'cause I didn't know it was missing 'til a mate rang me & asked what my car was doing on the beach...or on that median strip"!!!

You know what I hate worse than speed cameras?.......rear view mirrors!

[Revolver]

I don't mean to be negative, but like it or lump it, your just going to have to pay up.

Why? How many people in your state alone have had this same predicament? Now look at Australia. How many people have taken this exact scenario to court and won? None as far as I'm aware. And there is a very good reason for that. And you can call this a conspiracy theory, it's not really, it's fact and we see it all the time in the legal world.

Winning such a case would set a precedent and that's dangerous, because it calls into question every speeding fine ever issued. And that opens the floodgates for this. Every man and his dog would claim that, and the precedent has been set to dimiss. So they would have to do it!

Mate if you have the financial backing (a fair chunk of cash or assess you could liquidate) then go for it, you'd need to be lawyered to the gunnels, and prepared to take it to the high court of Australia, (which in the early 2000's cost $50,000 a day). If not you'll just have to pay it. Too bad, so sad. And unfortunately that's what they prey on....

[Morexbs]

Originally Posted by Revolver

I don't mean to be negative, but like it or lump it, your just going to have to pay up.

Actually,you don't.
They have to prove you were doing what is alleged,not the other way around.
Most people just bend over and cop the fine because it's "too hard" to defend it,and that's what the police and government rely on.A camera is a machine,therefore it can be wrong.Look how many drivers have been refunded in the past after cameras were found to be faulty.Those discoveries only happened after people who didn't think it was "too hard" to object did so.

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by Morexbs

Actually,you don't.
They have to prove you were doing what is alleged,not the other way around.
Most people just bend over and cop the fine because it's "too hard" to defend it,and that's what the police and government rely on.A camera is a machine,therefore it can be wrong.Look how many drivers have been refunded in the past after cameras were found to be faulty.Those discoveries only happened after people who didn't think it was "too hard" to object did so.

Every camera has "alleged speed". So on that basis every fine is cannot be proven. The photo is the proof.

They simply ask two questions.

Is that your vehicle?

We're you driving?

Answer yes to them, and your done like a dinner.

While your notion of them having to "prove" rather than than simply "allege" is how it should work. It isn't how it actually works...... And unless there is a problem with the camera, then you have less than a snowballs chance.

[tut0r]

Originally Posted by Revolver

Every camera has "alleged speed". So on that basis every fine is cannot be proven. The photo is the proof.

They simply ask two questions.

Is that your vehicle?

We're you driving?

Answer yes to them, and your done like a dinner.

While your notion of them having to "prove" rather than than simply "allege" is how it should work. It isn't how it actually works...... And unless there is a problem with the camera, then you have less than a snowballs chance.

Then how would you explain around 400 people getting off fines on the western ring road cameras? If its as simple as your driving and its your car then its your fault I fail to see its that clear cut......I mean with some I can see the judge treating it like that but there are plenty of people who have fought their speeding fines and gotten out of it with little effort.

As said a dash cam showing your speed as you go past said camera would be a huge one of proof and if they still tried to argue that hell yeah i'd go further. At the end of the day it really comes down to what you can prove....If you can't prove **** well then yeah you're up a certain creek.

[Ben73]

This is why I save my dashcam footage every time a car over takes me near a camera. Happened just a few days ago.
I have never received a fine, but I'd rather have the footage, just in case. Of course they will try to say it was still me, but a guess a video is better than just my word against theirs.

[STINKY NINJA]

Fight it Joe,stick it right up the governments ****.

[Pepscobra]

The photo clearly shows the rear of two vehicles... And mine isn't even the one in the centre of the photo, however they've figured I was the one speeding... Go figure...?
I might try to post the photo, it I can scan it clear enough, for further opinions.

Seriously though, I don't disagree with majority of what has been posted; will just end up paying it move on. Who has the time or money to fight it , if my chances are close to zilch.

[mex351]

I get out of speeding tickets by not speeding...

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by mex351

I get out of speeding tickets by not speeding...

Sooooooo, never once found yourself over the limit?

We both know the answer to that. And if it's a no, your either lying or spending about the same amount of time watching your speedo that other people do looking out the window. And if that's the case, I'm glad we are in separate states.

Just happens sometimes that some poor sod happens to find himself over the limit after the flash......

Very much a hypocritical answer.

[BradEL]

Over the last week it has been said that in New Zealand the police and speed cameras will now start giving you fines for doing ANYTHING over the speed limit. So you could be fined for doing 51 in a 50 zone once the changes are introduced.

[mex351]

LOL OK I guess I'll reply. So when you do you learn if you get caught doing something Illegal (like speeding) you accept it and pay the fine. Trying to get out of something you did is called cheating or been dishonest and in NSW we call them a dog.

Others like you seem to moan and cry and blame the system when the person behind the wheel is in control of there own actions. Hard to see how the police are the blame for that and the fact they actually only enforce the laws not make them up.


Regards Rob

[Revolver]

What I didn't mention, was I have been done for speeding whilst unknown. 5 years ago, in a 100 zone. Whilst not closing in on them, and at a safe distance, I was too busy watching 3 cars play what look to be a moving version of a shell game, to this day I have no idea what they were doing but they were changing so fast and often that I genuinely expecting an accident, anyway watching these three go ahead an change lanes multiple time in 30 seconds or so, my speed had crept up to 111, and *flash* "huh? What was?" *look down at dash* 111 "oh look at that". I payed up. Didn't moan, didn't cry, didnt try any form of recourse, just payed up. So your assessment of me is wrong.

The OP has 2 cars in the photo, and had his cruise on, and while he could be lying, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. Where too now? From a moral standpoint he should just suck it up and move on? As I said earlier, he has to because he doesn't have a massive amount to fight it. So if you don't speed an this happene to you, you wouldn't feel wronged? You just say, "oh I must have been that day?".

And you failed to answer my question, you have never found yourself speeding? At which point did you send the appropriate amount of money to government, pay your fine and ask for the corresponding points to be deducted from your licence? Bet you didn't because you weren't "caught" were you?

As for your definition of "dog", wrong there also mate. Dogging is telling the authorities (or other parties) of illegal and/or dishonest activity, hence the sayings "dogging to the cops" "dogged/ing on me".

[MercurySilver]

Originally Posted by mex351

LOL OK I guess I'll reply. So when you do you learn if you get caught doing something Illegal (like speeding) you accept it and pay the fine. Trying to get out of something you did is called cheating or been dishonest and in NSW we call them a dog.

Others like you seem to moan and cry and blame the system when the person behind the wheel is in control of there own actions. Hard to see how the police are the blame for that and the fact they actually only enforce the laws not make them up.

H
Regards Rob

Umm isn't the op saying he is confident he wasn't speeding?