新西兰天维网社区

标题: Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal(已经回答) [打印本页]

作者: milan24    时间: 2011-4-1 18:34:14     标题: Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal(已经回答)

本帖最后由 AMICUS_LAW 于 2011-4-4 17:42 编辑

此案件是关于Excess 70 km/h temporary speed limit.

20105101100PM在驾车经过 Victoria Park fly-over of SH1路后被警察拦下,警方认为我当时穿过的路段限速70km/h,我的速度97km/h。事实上我当时并未超速。警察先测酒精含量(正常)后开了超速罚单($230),罚款时警察并未出示我超速的证据,我认为那是无中生有。

我的回应方式:
一、写信给警察署陈述此事,警方回信表示照罚不予理睬

二、20101116日在奥克兰地方法庭提起上诉,通过调查我认为70 km/h temporary speed limit在此路段是不合法的,原因是
Land Transport Rule Setting of Speed Limits 2003
5.3(2) A temporary speed limit that is set in accordance with
5.1(2)(b) for a special event must be:
(a) one of the speed limits in 2.2; and
(b) at least 20 km/h less than the permanent speed limit or the prevailing holiday speed limit.

"Temporary Traffic Management Plan"显示这段路的permanent speed limit 80km/h

我还认为警察说我的速度97km/h是没有事实依据的。

法庭上警方找来一个Fletcher ConstructionTraffic Manager驳回我,证明70 km/h temporary speed limit是合法的并且通过Pursuit (Pace Check)
测到我的速度,没有通过Laser或者Radar


注:我没有将自己作为证人在法庭上作证。
三、我对败诉不满同时上诉奥克兰高级法院,在2011年3月14日出庭,申诉理由如下
1. The officer failed to comply with the NZ Police Speed Enforcement Policy里并未说明
Pursuit (Pace Check) 可作为合法的测速手段
2. In accordance with the requirements of section 13 (3)(f) of the Criminal Disclosure Act 2008.
·
A list of all relevant exhibits in the possession of the prosecutor that the prosecutor does not propose to have introduced as evidence


(在奥克兰地方法庭警方并未将有关70 km/h temporary speed limit的证据移交给我,比如一幅显示Victoria Park fly-over of SH1速度是80km/h works end的图)
328日法官的判决
1A failure to comply with an internal policy document would not provide the Appellant with a defence to the offence.

2Even if such map or maps were not disclosed and/or produced, I am not satisfied they could have had any effect on the outcome, given the clear evidence to which I have referred

四、目前我还有最后一次申诉机会,即apply to leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal

希望律师给予我帮助,如果可以希望与您面谈讨论此事。也提醒洋人,我们中国人不是那么好欺负的!!!我就是那只顽强的、碾不死的小强!!!
作者: labrador    时间: 2011-4-1 18:49:52

支持你。没有错被罚很无辜
不过也要考虑到时间及经济成本
作者: milan24    时间: 2011-4-1 21:20:07

正是处于考虑经济成本,所以前两次都是自己出庭没请律师。在这件事上我已花了很多时间和精力,不过从中也收获了很多。我认为警察得到的证据有可能是伪造的。当我向地方法院索取录音记录,她没有给我。拒绝理由是:The notes of evidence and oral decision which has been given to you, is a true and accurate record of what has transpired in court.
The Justices of the Peace, have checked and initialled each page, and signed these notes of evidence and oral decision.
The Court (Justices of the Peace) are satisfied that these notes and decision are true and correct.
在当地法院问起警察我的汽车是什么颜色,警察说I don't know。可是在notes of evidence里却是I dont recall
还有在我提问时,那个police prosecutor悄悄告诉她该怎么回答。但这些话却没有出现在notes of evidence
正所谓官官相护在那个国家都差不多。
一个人的力量永远是渺小的。
作者: kyleparadise    时间: 2011-4-4 12:32:13     标题: Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal

本帖最后由 kyleparadise 于 2011-4-4 11:33 编辑

1. 我觉得关于internal document那条,你不会胜诉。不管提供与否,不能否任你超速的事实。而且施工方也出来作证了。即使那个路段正常限速80来算,你97 也超速了啊. (当然你对97有争议)

2. 如果你要上诉,而且法官同意你上诉也是因为你的第二点关于测速方法的争议。你上诉的话,就需要证明方法的不准确性。而且这个不准确会造成实际意义上的区别。

3. 你上诉下来,如果你输了,你要赔偿的cost,也远比你的罚款要多多了。不过你肯定从中学到很多。good luck
作者: AMICUS_LAW    时间: 2011-4-4 18:42:14

今天已经和您见面谈过了,这里就不多说了。




欢迎光临 新西兰天维网社区 (http://bbs.skykiwi.com/) Powered by Discuz! X2