WTF? Wife was fined for something that a cop accused her of THINKING about doing.

[Jesterarts]

So, last week Tuesday my wife was pulled over for tail gating.

She gave me the spiel, she thought she wasn't tail gating, the cop was going the other way and the cop was a jerk.

Anyway, while telling her off about the tail gating, the cop told her that she was "going to cross the double lines to overtake". So he accused her of thinking about doing something.

I told the wife not to worry about it, clearly a bit of a jerk cop and we'd deal with the tail gating fine when it came. Didn't think any more of it.

Today, the fine came in, and the offence was tail gating AND crossing double lines!

WTF?!?

Safe to say that a complaint will be filled against the cop and I will take this to court.

But, lesson to take away from this, next time you are pulled over you should record the conversation.

At the moment it will be our word against his, and I guess I can pull chat logs from both FB and her when it I was talking about it but I doubt that holds up.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

another good reason for a dash cam that records audio as well as video.

 

[87RB30VL]

I wrote a speel about recording people only if you let them know you're recording, but it turns out you are allowed to record people without their consent (audio wise anyway)

I found this on the net:

You do NOT need the other party's consent. Because they are engaged in a conversation with you, they have exhibited a limited expectation of privacy. Unless you are bound by a confidentiality agreement which you have signed, you are not obligated to keep secret anything that occurred in the conversation, so why not record it? This is how the courts see it.

Don't know how credible the guy's source is, he says he has a criminology major.

PartyVibe - Is It Illegal to Record Somebody's Voice Without Their Consent?

 

[bigneilsen]

some cops wear little cameras on there chest. was he wearing one of them? if so request the footage..

 

[Immortality]

Suck it up and pay the fine, you fail the attitude test, don't take it to court because your word against his (sworn officer) court won't believe a word of what you say, that is what you all said in the last thread when some guy complained about been hard done by, by the plod.

Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot ehh.

sorry, but it had to be said, almost 95% off the forum users who answered in the other thread suggested that the guy been harassed by the plod should suck it up and take it up the ass because your all law abiding sheeples who like been screwed regardless if the law is right or wrong.......

Discuss

(puts on flame suit)

 

[minux]

I wrote a speel about recording people only if you let them know you're recording, but it turns out you are allowed to record people without their consent (audio wise anyway)

I found this on the net:



Don't know how credible the guy's source is, he says he has a criminology major.

PartyVibe - Is It Illegal to Record Somebody's Voice Without Their Consent?

Victoria

You cannot install, use or maintain a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a Private Conversation unless you're a party to the conversation, or you have consent of all the parties to that conversation.

A Private Conversation is one in circumstances where you may reasonably assume the parties to it don't want to be overheard by others, unless the parties should reasonably expect that they may be overheard.

Key points and examples:

If you are a party to the conversation, the use of a Listening Device is not restricted.
If you're not a party to the conversation, you need consent from all the parties - not just one. Consent may be express or implied.
If the conversation is loud enough for you to hear it, in a place where you or other people may hear it, use of a Listening Device is not restricted.
If you're listening to anything other than a private conversation, use of a Listening Device is not restricted.

Suck it up and pay the fine, you fail the attitude test, don't take it to court because your word against his (sworn officer) court won't believe a word of what you say, that is what you all said in the last thread when some guy complained about been hard done by, by the plod.

Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot ehh.

sorry, but it had to be said, almost 95% off the forum users who answered in the other thread suggested that the guy been harassed by the plod should suck it up and take it up the ass because your all law abiding sheeples who like been screwed regardless if the law is right or wrong.......

Discuss

(puts on flame suit)

Fairly sure being caught doing something illegal is a little different to predicting doing something illegal?

 

[TrikkBen]

another good reason for a dash cam that records audio as well as video.

Even just video in this case would have been fine, would of showed no line crossing anyway.

 

[Immortality]

Fairly sure being caught doing something illegal is a little different to predicting doing something illegal?

Ahhh, that is the argument. The cop that defected said idiot in the other thread only had to suspect that the vehicle didn't meet the required standard of said law, there for she only suspected that he broke the law......

All (or about 95% of the users who replied in that thread) agreed that this was the case and that you aussie sheeples like to pay to prove your innocence and it was perfectly acceptable practice.

Now, I totally disagree (with what has transpired) but now that the shoe is on the other foot I'll play the role of the devils advocate some more.

 

[Immortality]

Even just video in this case would have been fine, would of showed no line crossing anyway.

And would also prove/disprove the tail gating accusation

 

[DAKSTER]

As I understand it..

In order for a listening device to be disallowed, you would need to be either intruding on another's privacy... ie recording a conversation at which you were not present.. or attempting to entrap them (cops have so many rules regarding remote recordings and phone taps its ridiculous).

A secret recording without the appropriate paperwork in which you admitted a crime to an undercover cop for instance would not be admissible in court under entrapment laws unless he had an authoritative warrant to make the recording without your knowledge. Even then, the words he used in the conversation would have an effect on the 'entrapment' issue.

In the case of a car camera recording audio, the cop has no reasonable expectation of privacy, and your camera recording would be admissible in a court of law, regardless of whether you had informed him of the recording or not.

Perhaps you should consider a preemptive strike.. take the charges to the relevant authority and make a complaint. Explain that one charge is debatable and the other charge false. The complaints system in the legal circle tends to favour the citizen, you may get lucky. Often police will simply withdraw charges if it turns out they will take too much of their time, unless they plan on making some kind of an example out of you.

I'd say more likely you would be wasting your time, but just like you, I would be inclined to fight it anyway just on principle. Its a shame you don't have a recording, I believe it would have won the case for you before it even went to court.