Guilty by association law - Page 2

Jim Goose · 07-10-2011, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Err no
Drink driving is a crime.
If you are convicted of drink driving you do get a criminal record.
Various other traffic offences are not however.

Oh do tell... it goes on your perminant record does it? for ever?

Not all drink driving offences are criminal offences. Its not cut and dry.
You can be found guilty of drink driving and have NO conviction recorded.

pottery beige · 07-10-2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

You can be found guilty of drink driving and have NO conviction recorded.

yes, quite possible if you're a sports star, son or daughter of a politician.....

fmc351 · 07-10-2011, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Love this idea, from now on every accident is the passengers fault.
Your worship, the passenger misread the speedo due to parallax and thought I was doing 101 in a 100 zone so immediately grabbed the hand brake so as to save themselves for the $100 per week for the rest of your life fine which is now the penalty for exceeding the speed limit by more than 0.05 km/h causing my car to veer into the oncoming lane and therefore running the petrol truck into the kindergarten .

But wait, Ford made car that could exceed the speed limit and the speedo that was not calibrated for back seat drivers.....it is their fault....

Ah but the federal government gave Ford money to build these cars.....it is their fault....

Yep....it is always someone else's fault.....blame them.

Its not blaming someone else, that would imply the driver was not responsible as you've made out in your post. Its holding them all responsible. It doesnt lessen the drivers position, that remains the same, it just adds the other cohorts as well. There will be no penalty to a passenger in a car traveling at 105 in a 90 zone. There might be to a passenger egging on a driver to race or do donuts in an intersection. Given the way some passengers behave towards police Im surprised they havent always been using the existing law to dish a little back at them.

Just like speed cameras taking away your hard earned money, its always someone elses fault including those that fully warn you that they will do it. Yeah yeah, people cant be expected to watch the speedo and the road, its all too hard.

The individuals you describe arent the only one who blame everyone else.

2011G6E · 07-10-2011, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtxb67

if it was on tt, it cannot be a media beat up

I would have thought so too...until they interviewed that head copper who seriously told us they would be cracking down on motorists, and this is just another tool to let them do that better. Once he said it, it makes you pause and think twice about thier intentions...

BAXR8_Ute · 07-10-2011, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Oh do tell... it goes on your perminant record does it? for ever?

Not all drink driving offences are criminal offences. Its not cut and dry.
You can be found guilty of drink driving and have NO conviction recorded.

All drink driving offences are criminal! The traffic matters you referred to are rules not laws. They are set down in the Australian Road Rules. Drink driving, be it PCA or DUI, (yes they are very different offences but that's for another thread) are laws and in NSW set out in the Road Transport (safety and traffic management) act 1999. Just because you get no conviction recorded does not mean it's not criminal. A section 10 (again in NSW) is just another way the courts have of dealing with offenders and punishments. Which means you are convicted but no punishment. It is recorded on the police criminal history for you, so dont think it's lost and no one will know about it! You can also get a section 10 for larceny, malicious damage, or many other offences.

Bush lawyers... Gotta love them...

davenl5l · 07-10-2011, 11:20 AM

i think they are talking about driving under the influence.eg:-legless not p.c.a.eg:-over.05.two different offences you can be under the limit and still be legless we all know a one pot wonder im sure!

BAXR8_Ute · 07-10-2011, 11:24 AM

I didn't see the TT show, but aid and abet PCA has been in for a long time. But it's used when the owner of the car knowingly let's a drunk person drive the vehicle. The owner does not have to be in the car, but it has to be proven that they knew the person was drunk and still gave them the keys and let them drive off. Passengers being held responsible for speeding etc I can't see that being policed or prosecuted effectively... How are they responsible when they don't have any control of the vehicle?

raised by monkeys · 07-10-2011, 11:25 AM

a few years ago a mate of mine did a fruit ball out my car window while i was driving. I copped a fine and loss of demerit points - in SA

james22 · 07-10-2011, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BAXR8_Ute

A section 10 (again in NSW) is just another way the courts have of dealing with offenders and punishments. Which means you are convicted but no punishment. It is recorded on the police criminal history for you, so dont think it's lost and no one will know about it! You can also get a section 10 for larceny, malicious damage, or many other offences.

Bush lawyers... Gotta love them...

Hmmm,

A section 10, is a dismissal of charges. It is recorded on file (record) but there is NO conviction.

The expression “section10” refers to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. This section allows a Court that finds you guilty of an offence, to discharge you without recording a conviction. Because there is no conviction, there is no criminal record. Additionally, there is no loss of drivers license and no other penalty.

Bush lawyers ey.... get it right

BAXR8_Ute · 07-10-2011, 12:21 PM

[QUOTE=james22]Hmmm,

A section 10, is a dismissal of charges. It is recorded on file (record) but there is NO conviction.

The expression “section10” refers to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. This section allows a Court that finds you guilty of an offence, to discharge you without recording a conviction. Because there is no conviction, there is no criminal record. Additionally, there is no loss of drivers license and no other penalty.

Bush lawyers ey.... get it right

[/

If you want to nit pick, it also depends on what subsection under the s10 the court uses. Some dismiss the charges others record a conviction but no penalty. Either way it's recorded on your history that you were charged with the offense and that you received the s10. they don't just disappear, other wise how would the court know your past history?

2011G6E · 07-10-2011, 12:45 PM

I think this was merely a "heads up" that they had "re-discovered", as it were, that this law could be used to "crack down on motorists" as the copper said. They've always had the law sitting there, but now they're going to start using it, because some head honcho sitting in an office who has to make his figures look good suddenly had the 5 watt bulb over his head go on...

Buttnekid · 07-10-2011, 01:03 PM

in WA drink driving does not become a criminal offence (as opposed to a traffic offence) until you are excess 0.15 (DUI). all below is a traffic offence and NOT a criminal offence. The easy way of telling this is get a police clearance, the lower blood alcohol related offences are not recorded, a DUI will be.

It is the same as speeding, careless and dangerous driving are not criminal offences however reckless driving is.

flappist · 07-10-2011, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

Its not blaming someone else, that would imply the driver was not responsible as you've made out in your post. Its holding them all responsible. It doesnt lessen the drivers position, that remains the same, it just adds the other cohorts as well. There will be no penalty to a passenger in a car traveling at 105 in a 90 zone. There might be to a passenger egging on a driver to race or do donuts in an intersection. Given the way some passengers behave towards police Im surprised they havent always been using the existing law to dish a little back at them.

Just like speed cameras taking away your hard earned money, its always someone elses fault including those that fully warn you that they will do it. Yeah yeah, people cant be expected to watch the speedo and the road, its all too hard.

The individuals you describe arent the only one who blame everyone else.

Ah I see your point.

It would be like, for example, local government employees being charged with criminal offences if an elected councillor is found to be corrupt or incompetent.

Is that what you mean?

fmc351 · 07-10-2011, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Ah I see your point.

It would be like, for example, local government employees being charged with criminal offences if an elected councillor is found to be corrupt or incompetent.

Is that what you mean?

Do these employees have a hand in it? Are they willingly taking part in activity they are aware or ought to be aware is illegal? Are they encouraging said activity? You know, kind of like the getaway driver in an armed hold up? Or the person that just hides the money? Is that what you mean? Or maybe like how if a soldier engages in activity that is illegal the fact he is under orders is not an excuse, or conversely, he has an obligation to disobey that order and report it.

Is a customer at a bank aiding and abetting by failing to stop an armed robber? No. But if he is keeping watch or in some way voluntarily involved, then yes they are involved in the illegal activity. Unless a gun is held to their head. Why shouldnt they face charges too?

Or are we going to go off on some belligerent conspiracy the government is taking us into dictatorship nonsense? Its not the 4 horses of the apocalypse, its not a sign. Or is it traffic laws are all minor and silly laws and therefore no-one should face legal action as a result of fun in a vehicle?

vztrt · 07-10-2011, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sudszy

I can see a good case for it when the car is doing a burn out and the passengers are leaning out the windows fist pumping into the air

They're were calling for help!!! Or so their excuse will be.

Tobey · 07-10-2011, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by james22

Hmmm,

A section 10, is a dismissal of charges. It is recorded on file (record) but there is NO conviction.

The expression “section10” refers to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. This section allows a Court that finds you guilty of an offence, to discharge you without recording a conviction. Because there is no conviction, there is no criminal record. Additionally, there is no loss of drivers license and no other penalty.

Bush lawyers ey.... get it right

There maybe no criminal record. But the traffic stop and result will be listed on your record, along with the details of the court case...

Tobey · 07-10-2011, 06:30 PM

Think this is all a beat up and in the quote on the first page was only aimed at drink driving offences. Nothing was said about speeding or any other specific offence.

Geez Louise · 07-10-2011, 08:40 PM

The quote on the first page that I posted was only a part of the story. When you click on the link the first line you see of the story is this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Today Tonight Story

A 111-year-old law has been refined to allow police to book passengers who fail to stop someone from driving drunk, speeding or driving dangerously.

BHDOGS · 07-10-2011, 08:50 PM

I fail to see the problems with this there not gonna go book the pub owner because some retard drove home drunk but if your in the car then tough **** to u

Franco Cozzo · 07-10-2011, 09:17 PM

111 year old law?

Holy crap boys get your shovel and miners hats out!

pottery beige · 07-10-2011, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

111 year old law?

Holy crap boys get your shovel and miners hats out!

.......

pottery beige · 07-10-2011, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

It's stupid if you get in trouble of small traffic offences. It's 3am in the middle of no where. My mates doing 105 in a 100 zone. He thinks it's not a big deal. Do I ask him to drop me off in the middle of no where or do I just pull up the hand brake?

only peeps on the road at 3am are cops.. taxis.. and dudes up to no good....

galaxy xr8 · 07-10-2011, 09:41 PM

What sort of vehicle would one be a passenger in if this law was around 111 yrs ago ?.

geckoGT · 07-10-2011, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pottery beige

only peeps on the road at 3am are cops.. taxis.. and dudes up to no good....

Quote:

Originally Posted by mex351

Nothing good to say about daylight savings.Just a screw around IMO. Try putting your kids to bed when the sun is still up and your neighbour thinks it's cool to mow the lawn at 8.00pm.Stay up longer during the hottest part of the day not the coolest.How doe's that work..?

Mex351

And ambo's cleaning up the mess. On a serious nite you would be surprised at the amount of legitimate traffic, many start work early.

Geez Louise · 07-10-2011, 09:54 PM

geckoGT..what's the second quote got to do with the thread? Did you make a boo boo?

fmc351 · 07-10-2011, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

geckoGT..what's the second quote got to do with the thread? Did you make a boo boo?

Ive noticed that a few times, not sure if it was gecko those times or not, but Im guessing his clipboard is up to shenanigans.

pottery beige · 07-10-2011, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

geckoGT..what's the second quote got to do with the thread? Did you make a boo boo?

he's the bastard that mows his lawn at 3am...

deceptive · 07-10-2011, 11:36 PM

i was to believe the guilty by association was for the anti bikie law where if you liaison with or where mates with bikies you where a part of there going on's

04redxr8 · 07-10-2011, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pottery beige

only peeps on the road at 3am are cops.. taxis.. and dudes up to no good....

And just how fast does the GT go at 3am?

gtxb67 · 07-10-2011, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 04redxr8

And just how fast does the GT go at 3am?

you don't want to know, otherwise you will be guilty by association