Moron Motorists #3

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Summernight » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:16 pm

I find holidays bring out the worst drivers, Trailgumby. People who may not normally drive (yes, I know peak hour drivers can sometimes be bad, but holiday drivers don't always pay full attention and can be worse).

In my thinking, why would the Police bother doing extra special road blitzes and have all their police on the road during the holiday periods if there wasn't a correlation between worse than usual driving and people being on holidays...
User avatar
Summernight
 
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: Melbourne

by BNA » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:19 pm

BNA
 

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AKO » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:19 pm

A quick update. After not hearing from the cops on the phone I went back in today and actually got to speak to a real (alleged at this stage) police officer. I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave. He told me that if the owner of the vehicle denies being the driver the onus of proof falls on me and there is very little they can do from that point. I asked him if I can do the same thing next time I get a speeding fine through the mail, to which he replied no because what I'm talking about is dangerous operation of a motor vehicle (a criminal offence). When I offered him the USB with the footage he asked me to put it on a spare USB and come back in tomorrow. I assume that means I won't see the USB again.
User avatar
AKO
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby gretaboy » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:21 pm

Summernight wrote:
In my thinking, why would the Police bother doing extra special road blitzes and have all their police on the road during the holiday periods if there wasn't a correlation between worse than usual driving and people being on holidays...



They (the police) do them because the RTA is paying them to get extra Police out there...called user pays. Its good PR to show that things are being done. The Police in return must meet targets of RBT's done, speed checks and so forth

##Edit....it is why you see a Police officer writing down regos at RBT check points...so they can prove they did check so many cars/drivers
Last edited by gretaboy on Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
gretaboy
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 11:23 am
Location: Hunter Valley

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:23 pm

AKO wrote: I asked him if I can do the same thing next time I get a speeding fine through the mail, to which he replied no because what I'm talking about is dangerous operation of a motor vehicle (a criminal offence).


That sounds like BS.
human909
 
Posts: 5287
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby gretaboy » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:25 pm

AKO wrote:A quick update. After not hearing from the cops on the phone I went back in today and actually got to speak to a real (alleged at this stage) police officer. I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave. He told me that if the owner of the vehicle denies being the driver the onus of proof falls on me and there is very little they can do from that point. I asked him if I can do the same thing next time I get a speeding fine through the mail, to which he replied no because what I'm talking about is dangerous operation of a motor vehicle (a criminal offence). When I offered him the USB with the footage he asked me to put it on a spare USB and come back in tomorrow. I assume that means I won't see the USB again.



The best people to actually speak to I have found are the Highway Patrol police, not the standard GD officer. I have personally got more results from the Highway Patrol ones
gretaboy
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 11:23 am
Location: Hunter Valley

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby il padrone » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:30 pm

gretaboy wrote:##Edit....it is why you see a Police officer writing down regos at RBT check points...so they can prove they did check so many cars/drivers

Do you have police experience or evidence to back this up?

Because I would suggest that it is done so that they have a record to enable them to trace the car, should the driver do a runner :idea: Numbers of vehicle checks done is handy data, but hardly the reason for allocating man-power to that.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 19612
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AKO » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:33 pm

Makes sense gretaboy as its their forte. I've been going to my local station but its only a smaller station and doesn't have a highway patrol section (and is closed after 6 pm I think). I'll go to the main station in town if I get no joy at the local. Has anybody heard of a driver being charged with something like overtake with undue care or similar in Qld?
User avatar
AKO
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jules21 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:33 pm

il padrone wrote:Do you have police experience or evidence to back this up?

Because I would suggest that it is done so that they have a record to enable them to trace the car, should the driver do a runner :idea: Numbers of vehicle checks done is handy data, but hardly the reason for allocating man-power to that.

I don't know for sure either way, but police work is heavily embroiled in industrial relations. I know a cop and he constantly whinges about being given a hard time by his superiors - the outward image of public protectors in shining armour is at odds with their self image as (over-)worke(d)r ants. personally, I have found the attitude of too many police I've dealt with as poor and strongly suspect this at least partly explains the seemingly endless troubles encountered by members of this forum and other cyclists in getting them to do anything pro-active about dangerous drivers.
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 9000
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Shifter » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:33 pm

Postieboy wrote:What other things can I do in the future to prevent this as it was very very close.

Probably won't help the close shaves, but it might be worth swapping the camera mount to the other side of the stem so you get your right hand brifter in the view. This would give a better perspective as to how close cars are getting should you need to report it.
Shifter
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:23 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby gretaboy » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:34 pm

il padrone wrote:
gretaboy wrote:##Edit....it is why you see a Police officer writing down regos at RBT check points...so they can prove they did check so many cars/drivers

Do you have police experience or evidence to back this up?

Because I would suggest that it is done so that they have a record to enable them to trace the car, should the driver do a runner :idea: Numbers of vehicle checks done is handy data, but hardly the reason for allocating man-power to that.


its not done because of the potential runner...the runner wont even get into the queue

lets just say..I have internal knowledge :)
gretaboy
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 11:23 am
Location: Hunter Valley

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby il padrone » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:35 pm

AKO wrote: I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave. He told me that if the owner of the vehicle denies being the driver the onus of proof falls on me and there is very little they can do from that point.

Yes..... and that's what your video gives - evidence of the nature of his driving :roll:

Bejeebus these coppers are either no-hopers or hoon apologists :x . Keep at em with your evidence of that crime.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 19612
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby r2160 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:38 pm

There is also a charge that is on the onus of the owner of the vehicle. Should the owner of the vehicle choose not to supply the details of the driver of the vehicle, they can charge the owner with no supply driver details which I think is a $300 or so fine and 3 or 4 points.

cheers
Glenn
r2160
 
Posts: 1091
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:01 pm
Location: Bass Hill, NSW

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AKO » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:41 pm

il padrone wrote:
AKO wrote: I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave. He told me that if the owner of the vehicle denies being the driver the onus of proof falls on me and there is very little they can do from that point.

Yes..... and that's what your video gives - evidence of the nature of his driving :roll:

Bejeebus these coppers are either no-hopers or hoon apologists :x . Keep at em with your evidence of that crime.
Thats what I would have thought but apparently the video only proves "what" not "who". He was only a young officer so may not be totally up to speed with the law in this area. He did say if he was stupid enough to admit to being the driver then great but otherwise :roll:
User avatar
AKO
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby FuzzyDropbear » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:03 pm

human909 wrote:
FuzzyDropbear wrote:On riding in the right wheel track, I would never dare do that, I'd be riding in constant fear that someone would just clean me up. :?


How does riding in the left wheel track (or the gutter) make you less fearful?


That's my opinion with drivers in my town, yours may be different. I ride in the left as I have an easier escape route if I see something about to happen. If I was in the right hand track, I have a choice to either swerve into oncoming traffic, or try and cross the entire lane to get out of harms way. Most drivers, from what I've seen, if something catches their eye at the last minute, will slam on the brakes and pretty much go forward, not to the side, thus, being to the left, and moving, I have a greater chance of avoiding the collision. I dunno, this is my opinion only and it's what I feel comfortable doing, hence why I said I wouldn't dare do it because I don't feel safe there. Note that I don't ride in the gutter (that's just silly and I never said I did) and I will take a lane when it's needed, but I will ride in the centre of the lane at most. A lot of the major roads in Ballarat have bike lanes, so there's no reason for anyone to ride in the gutter.

We're lucky in Ballarat that we don't have traffic congestion compared to bigger cities (well, only one one major road, but it's not on my commute) and so I'm happy to keep out of the way of traffic and only take the lane when required (ie. someone taking up the bike lane, approaching roundabout etc.).

AKO, I would try and talk to someone more senior, if it seems like the officer may not understand every law off the top of their head (which is fair enough), then ask for a supervisor or more experienced officer, that way, it gives the officer the ability to seek further information or clarity. Too often, people approach them and expect them to know everything, so that sort of generic statement is nearly a learned response if they're unsure, so if you give them the chance to seek further information it usually helps. Well, in my experience anyway.
User avatar
FuzzyDropbear
 
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:55 pm
Location: Ballarat, VIC

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Howzat » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:18 pm

AKO wrote:
il padrone wrote:
AKO wrote: I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave. He told me that if the owner of the vehicle denies being the driver the onus of proof falls on me and there is very little they can do from that point.

Yes..... and that's what your video gives - evidence of the nature of his driving :roll:

Bejeebus these coppers are either no-hopers or hoon apologists :x . Keep at em with your evidence of that crime.
Thats what I would have thought but apparently the video only proves "what" not "who". He was only a young officer so may not be totally up to speed with the law in this area. He did say if he was stupid enough to admit to being the driver then great but otherwise :roll:


The rego proves the who. If the owner denies driving he has to provide a stat dec as to the identity of the driver, as you mentioned earlier just like with a camera fine.

Here is the pertinent question for the young officer: what is the likelihood that this driver will continue to drive at high speed dangerously near cyclists in the future? And will his driving behaviour change either a) when he gets a visit from the police, or b) when he causes an injury accident?
User avatar
Howzat
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:08 pm
Location: Canberra

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jules21 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:39 pm

from Vic Road Safety Act (other states have similar provisions):

60 Duty of owner of motor vehicle to give information about driver
(1) An owner of a motor vehicle, or a relevant nominated person in relation to a motor vehicle, is guilty of an offence if, when required to do so by a member of the police force who is acting in the execution of duty, the person fails to give any information which it is within the power of the person to give and which may lead to the identification of any person who was the driver of the motor vehicle on any occasion or had possession or control of the motor vehicle on any occasion or fails to make all reasonable enquiries in order to obtain that information.


so police have the power to compel vehicle owner to identify driver.
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 9000
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AKO » Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:52 pm

I kind of get the jist of what the officer is saying. The driver may say it was Joe Bloggs but Joe denies it when in front of the judge. Seeing as this may be a criminal offence, it may provide enough doubt for the case not to be successful. I could be talking BS here as I have very little knowledge of the legal system as I have always stayed on the right side of the law.
User avatar
AKO
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby birdbrain » Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:55 pm

AKO wrote:
A quick update. After not hearing from the cops on the phone I went back in today and actually got to speak to a real (alleged at this stage) police officer. I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave.


Going on my past experience with the cops on two incidences why am I not surprised!

What I would do is burn a cd and send it with a covering letter to The Police Commissioner if nothing is done.
User avatar
birdbrain
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 6:16 pm
Location: tulla melb

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby ozzymac » Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:58 pm

birdbrain wrote:AKO wrote:
A quick update. After not hearing from the cops on the phone I went back in today and actually got to speak to a real (alleged at this stage) police officer. I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave.


Going on my past experience with the cops on two incidences why am I not surprised!

What I would do is burn a cd and send it with a covering letter to The Police Commissioner if nothing is done.


Did you write out a incident report and supply them with the video?


Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2
User avatar
ozzymac
 
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AKO » Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:11 pm

ozzymac wrote:
birdbrain wrote:AKO wrote:
A quick update. After not hearing from the cops on the phone I went back in today and actually got to speak to a real (alleged at this stage) police officer. I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave.


Going on my past experience with the cops on two incidences why am I not surprised!

What I would do is burn a cd and send it with a covering letter to The Police Commissioner if nothing is done.


Did you write out a incident report and supply them with the video?


Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2

Not today. I have to put the video on a "spare" USB stick and go back in tomorrow. Supply video and fill out report then hopefully.
User avatar
AKO
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby il padrone » Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:26 pm

Aushiker has extensive experience in reporting such miscreants, and on occasion getting prosecutions. I'd suggest you use his strategies as a guide.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 19612
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Howzat » Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:39 pm

AKO wrote:I kind of get the jist of what the officer is saying. The driver may say it was Joe Bloggs but Joe denies it when in front of the judge... it may provide enough doubt for the case not to be successful.

The penalties for perjury and making false statements are more severe than your average traffic fine.
User avatar
Howzat
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:08 pm
Location: Canberra

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby AKO » Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:27 pm

Howzat wrote:
AKO wrote:I kind of get the jist of what the officer is saying. The driver may say it was Joe Bloggs but Joe denies it when in front of the judge... it may provide enough doubt for the case not to be successful.

The penalties for perjury and making false statements are more severe than your average traffic fine.

While I'm aware of that. But maybe I'm a little pessimistic but I doubt the cops see these incidents as worthy of their time in proving perjury. I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong.
User avatar
AKO
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:16 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby London Boy » Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:04 pm

AKO wrote:A quick update. After not hearing from the cops on the phone I went back in today and actually got to speak to a real (alleged at this stage) police officer. I got the distinct impression he wasn't overly keen to do anything about the shave. He told me that if the owner of the vehicle denies being the driver the onus of proof falls on me and there is very little they can do from that point. I asked him if I can do the same thing next time I get a speeding fine through the mail, to which he replied no because what I'm talking about is dangerous operation of a motor vehicle (a criminal offence). When I offered him the USB with the footage he asked me to put it on a spare USB and come back in tomorrow. I assume that means I won't see the USB again.

He's probably right. The legal obligation to identify the driver only exists (in most states) for camera-detected offences and (in Qld) for hooning.

It's nothing to do with whether it is a dangerous driving, driving without due care, or failing to allow sufficient distance when passing offence.
User avatar
London Boy
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:43 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby London Boy » Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:08 pm

Howzat wrote:
AKO wrote:I kind of get the jist of what the officer is saying. The driver may say it was Joe Bloggs but Joe denies it when in front of the judge... it may provide enough doubt for the case not to be successful.

The penalties for perjury and making false statements are more severe than your average traffic fine.

The police have to identify the driver before they can do anything. If the owner says it wasn't him, or he doesn't remember being there at the time, or similar, the police have nothing to go on. Perjury doesn't enter into it until it gets to court, and even then you have to prove a bare-faced lie told under oath.
User avatar
London Boy
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AKO, bychosis, Ken Ho, Shred11, trailgumby



Popular Bike Shops
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Ebay Ebay AU
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers