Dangerous Driving

[lyric]

yeah should have my car back in two weeks. Im so glad they've lowered the charges! they cop that rang to charge me the first time was so rude, got me so fired up i told him id see him in court and hung up, that was last friday. then on monday a constable from central rang and said he'd reviewed the case and there was no evidence to support a dangerous driving charge, so he was dropping it as low as he could for a crash like mine. so one really bad experience and one really good one, i needed a good one as my confidence in cops is dropping rapidly.

still havnt found out what the charge is excatly, just waiting for the bit of paper in the mail.

i wasnt attempting sideways action!! i may be blonde but im not dumb...

[SnakeEyes]

cespenar, in my opinion you are in the wrong, you failed to give way to oncoming traffic... if you remove the school, and the ped crossing, its blatant ly obvious....

- That's kinda harsh, considering you seem to have forgotten that the person who hit him/her was speeding while overtaking another car outside a school in a residential area. Saying that they're not at fault is just stupid.

K<^-^>E

[86_rolla]

um it comes down to PROVE that they were speeding. If you do not have evidence that the other car was speeding well stiif shit.

I heard bout a chick pulling out and getting smacked into the side by a dude going supposdly 90kmph it was her fault because she couldnt prove that they were speeding and they denied it obviously

[Mr Revhead]

so were u on your side of the road when they hit you, or had you crossed the centre line?

[BlakJak]

Minimum that the cops will usually do you for is Careless driving (as opposed to dangerous).

- I had that when I rolled my 'rolla. $300 fine + court costs and 35 demerits.
Just explain your situ, be humble but accurate,.

Heck if they do successfully find that all the blame is on the other driver you should get an acquittal. If you did anything wrong (fail to give way) then you'll likely get done.

[Psycho_Dad]

cespenar, in my opinion you are in the wrong, you failed to give way to oncoming traffic... if you remove the school, and the ped crossing, its blatant ly obvious....

- That's kinda harsh, considering you seem to have forgotten that the person who hit him/her was speeding while overtaking another car outside a school in a residential area. Saying that they're not at fault is just stupid.

K<^-^>E

i did not say the other driver was not at fault, i just said cespenar is at fault.. he FAILED to GIVE WAY to ONCOMMING TRAFFIC... read that over a few times, then sit back and think about it, then read it again...

example:
if the other car was doing 51kmph, would cespenar still be in the wrong? yes he would, because he failed to give way to oncomming traffic...
if the other car was doing 60kmph, would cespenar still be in the wrong? yes he would, because he failed to give way to oncomming traffic...
if the other car was doing 70kmph, would cespenar still be in the wrong? YES HE WOULD, because he FAILED TO GIVE WAY to oncomming traffic...

is the picture im drawing for you clear enough? poeple have to stop blaming speed and start blaming their own lack of observational skills

Peace
Psycho_Dad

[dougsop]

exactly so what if the girls were 18 in 7th form and the cop was 20 nothin wrong with that

yep totally agree with wat u all, cops are human too they can have girlfriend and yep agree with not all of them ar asshole ~ but in the incident i saw, i m just trying to point out that that the cop picked up the girl, they had a hug and stuff which look like they were a couple(which i m totally ok with of cause as it got nothing to do with me) and they went in a COP car(i m not sure if in NZ u are alow to do that use cop car as ur family and friends transport but i m sure u are not alow to do that overseas) and had a laugh zoom off with the siren ON and got away with the traffic than put the siren off after the traffic ~ while we all sit in the trafic ~

i have nothing against this incident if u tell me police have the privilage of using cop cars to pick up girlfriend and use their power to get away with traffic ~ :p LOL

[cespenar]

Psycho_Dad the point is that if the other car had been doing anything less than 70km/h (remember it's a 50km/h zone) then there would have been no accident. One tends to assume that if you see a car in the distance that is safe enough to turn in front of, in a 50km/h zone, you don't expect somebody to come tearing up at you on the wrong side of the road at 90km/h. We could easily have proved they were speeding due to simply measuring the skidmarks the other car left, the point was that there was no benefit in doing this because it was a civil and not criminal matter (or the other way around). I'm not saying I'm completely innocent, I admit I should have had a better look at the surroundings, it's just that the cahnces of someone coming towards you at 90km/h, overtaking, outside a school, over a crossing, are so low you tend to assume that it will not happen. Lesson learned though, be prepared for anything.

PS, it seems a lot of people have interpreted what happened a bit differently, so its probably best to leave this matter as it is to prevent extended arguments and misunderstandings.

[pc]

hmmmm..... Psycho_Dad. If the other car was doing 300kph???
at what point is it not the "unobservant" one's fault and the person that is speeding?
If I saw a car 100 metres in the distance on a 50k zone I would normally assume it is safe to turn in front of it. Obviously it is a good idea to drive defensibly, but when other people are blatently ignoring road rules, there is going to be a point where there is a 'contact' incident.

[Santa'sBoostinSleigh]

enough bickering already