Quick question.

[Philthy]

Whoops! Post deleted....

 

[vr1uz-fe]

well i would just cop it if it were me personaly as going to court is fairly expencive but like i said i havent got nothing on me cuz i think quick

 

[vr1uz-fe]

and for th record my mate was the first person in australia to be in court reguarding the terriost laws as he was 17 and the cop thought under the new act brought in by jonh howard he didnt have to have his parents there for a dui at the cop shop it was ground breaking in judge wrold for the time he got off he paid the childrens court barrister $3000 then the case was upgraded to the supreem court $7000 for the next barrister see court is expencive he got off but it would be cheaper to just cop it

 

[Ace_VP]

so pretty much what you are saying if four of my mates got together we could go around getting people in **** mmmm it dont sound right it sounds like text book bullshit to me and i know my way around the law seeing as i know many ppl in the system and have gotton off many tickets for lack of evidence

a point of mine is also that if a person commits well lets say murder and a cop uses entrapment to get them to court then it throwen out of court if a cop beats them for a confession it's throwen out of court it go's on and on

police can say they will do this and that but they cant i have seen many ppl go to court and walk out laughing at the cops for traffic offences what ace_vp is talking about is there bigest weapon cops have missinformation ppl just belive them then admit and get fined

well i dont care but ppl should know half of what they say is bull **** and i laugh at ppl that get done when they can walk away dont belive me then go do what you want it dosent worry me but listen to a cop well belive a cop well i think you get it

just to even it up i have had fines where i have been clearly in the wrong but that was my stuip falut

to top it all off no cop will say ahh you can actually get away with this

LOL, yeah real expert. I did also say in my original post that you would need the marks on the road prove that a burnout was actually done.

For many offences police simply wont bother because there is no proof. Such as someone running a red light. Not many police will take a statement for that becuase as you say people could go around stirring ****. but seeing as we are talking about the offence in the original post all that is irrelevant.

WTF has has beating a confession out of someone got to do with what we are talking about? Evidence has to be collected legally and fairly, again no law degree needed to know that. Again not at all relevant to the original post.

No cops wont tell you you can get away with it, you have a right to silence but under some traffic legislation, such as rule 287 of the Australian Road Rules where you are required by law to suply a version after a car accident, you dont have that right to silence. Just the same as when a police officer asks you to supply the name of the person driving your car (if you are claiming it wasnt you) at the time it was used to commit and offence, you have to answer because if you dont its an OFFENCE.

 

[Ace_VP]

well i might be a moron but a happy one with no loss of licence and no points off no record no nothing

You also said above

just to even it up i have had fines where i have been clearly in the wrong but that was my stuip falut

So which is it? you have never lost points or you have cause you have gotten fines when clearly in the wrong.

 

[Ace_VP]

and for th record my mate was the first person in australia to be in court reguarding the terriost laws as he was 17 and the cop thought under the new act brought in by jonh howard he didnt have to have his parents there for a dui at the cop shop it was ground breaking in judge wrold for the time he got off he paid the childrens court barrister $3000 then the case was upgraded to the supreem court $7000 for the next barrister see court is expencive he got off but it would be cheaper to just cop it

What has DUI got to do with terroist laws?

 

[Grouse-mouse]

accuse,being the operative word,hence you are going on 'hearsay'.

 

[Julie]

What has DUI got to do with terroist laws?

lol maybe he was 'drinking' molotov cocktails

 

[Ace_VP]

lol maybe he was 'drinking' molotov cocktails

or maybe he was driving the car bomb drunk because no one would be dumb enough to do it sober LOL

 

[Julie]

or maybe he was driving the car bomb drunk because no one would be dumb enough to do it sober LOL

:rofl2: :rofl: