- Jun 14, 2015
- 17,779
- 38,779
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Port Adelaide Power
What the f are you actually trying to say.and why you and not me? hummm...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What the f are you actually trying to say.and why you and not me? hummm...
Alcohol kills coronavirus, so being drunk in public is a valid health measure. Being drunk at home puts you at risk of a late night shitposting binge on twatter.There's a lot of discriminatory legislation in Victoria that disproportionately effects minority groups and vulnerable people which should probably be amended first. Still waiting for the Drunk in a Public Place law to be repealed, but in fairness to VicGov it was Jenny Mikaka who announced that would happen and her memory clearly isn't the best
It's pretty good. But the best way to get out of that fine is probably just say you're not indigenous...Alcohol kills coronavirus, so being drunk in public is a valid health measure. Being drunk at home puts you at risk of a late night shitposting binge on twatter.
Is that good enough justification?
There's been an update on the Richard Pusey case today.
Charges dropped due to lack of evidence -
Failing to render assistance after an accident.Destruction of evidence.Two counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Will face trial on charges of -
Possession of a drug of dependence.Reckless conduct endangering serious injury (149km/h in a 100km/h zone).Reckless conduct endangering death (separate incident - alleged driving at speeds of 300km/h on a public roadway).Outraging public decency.
He was never charged with leaving the scene.
Police opposing bail. Pusey has been in prison for 6 months now on charges that might be negotiated down and result in fines or good behaviour bonds.
'Very meaningful': Richard Pusey's parents support their son as he applies for bail, court hears
The 42-year-old mortgage broker has applied for bail after a number of serious charges against him were thrown out.www.theage.com.au
Why would there be a trial for the reckless conduct charges?
The outraging public decency charge - that seems very subjective and looks like something his lawyer will drive a nail through. I can't seem to find it in vic law anywhere.
A trial for a couple fo reckless driving offences seems unnecessary. As for the drug possession charges I thought you can't dispute them if police caught you with drugs. Its just a matter of how much drugs and the penalty imposed, again things you don't need a trial for.
This guy is an absolute scum of the earth but the amount of time and taxpayer money spent on him seems absolutely disproportional to the charges he ia up for. Leave it to a judge to decide an appropriate penalty and move on.
so the government has so little on him, they are seeking to abuse their powers and justify locking him up for being guilty of "being a dickhead"
He is a dickhead, he is a danger to the community but he is also a victim of abuse of power
What state is this again?
When he first went to court in April the traffic charges against him were read by a murder detective!
On a moral position based on news reports, I'd support jail for the Porsche driver. but not from a legal position.
From a legal process I would seek criminal manslaughter charges, not of the Porsche driver but the Police Commissioner and the Premier.
Why? If a director of a company had a death in the work place, they would face criminal prosecution
Federal Register of Legislation - Home Page
www.legislation.gov.au
No reasonable employer would instruct employees, as a procedure, to pull over drivers on a freeway and stand in harms way. This is no different to lives lost on construction sites
Safety of Curtin University worksite questioned after building collapse which claimed life of apprentice
The Electrical Trades Union says workers had previously raised concerns about safety on the site of a roof collapse at Curtin University yesterday, where a 23-year-old apprentice fell to his death and two others were injured.www.abc.net.au
Sadly though, governments are above their own laws
On a moral position based on news reports, I'd support jail for the Porsche driver. but not from a legal position.
From a legal process I would seek criminal manslaughter charges, not of the Porsche driver but the Police Commissioner and the Premier.
Why? If a director of a company had a death in the work place, they would face criminal prosecution
Federal Register of Legislation - Home Page
www.legislation.gov.au
No reasonable employer would instruct employees, as a procedure, to pull over drivers on a freeway and stand in harms way. This is no different to lives lost on construction sites
Safety of Curtin University worksite questioned after building collapse which claimed life of apprentice
The Electrical Trades Union says workers had previously raised concerns about safety on the site of a roof collapse at Curtin University yesterday, where a 23-year-old apprentice fell to his death and two others were injured.www.abc.net.au
Sadly though, governments are above their own laws
It's in the nature of the job that police officers are faced with high risk situations. Having them pull speeding drivers over is not an unreasonable thing of the government to request.
The safe thing to do would be to instruct a driver to pull off a motorway before stopping.
We already have a number of laws regarding safe use of motorways and this should be one.
We can hide behind “if not for a drug fkd truck driver” but the reality is there are many drug fkd divers. It is a known and avoidable risk. As such it meets the triggers for criminal charges of the “directors of the dead officers”. That’s the law civilians are held to account.
Just reading the 40km/h law I see it has been changed on high speed roads that you must slow down gradually and avoid sudden braking. So common sense in terms of that it isn't absolutely essential you slow to 40 on a freeway when you see emergency vehicle lights but you must slow down gradually.
NSW has scrapped the 40km/h rule for roads where the speed limit is over 90km/h after concerns were raised that slowing down from a high speed might cause accidents.
Victoria is having a bob each way. The law is that you have to slow down to 40km/h but the Vicroads 'advice' is that
drivers should slow down safely when they first see flashing lights, taking into account the current road conditions and avoiding sudden braking.Reducing speed, even if the vehicle does not get down to 40km/h, will still have safety benefits for law enforcement or emergency workers and will help drivers take evasive action if needed.
Regardless of Vicroads you can still be fined $777.30 if you don't slow down to 40km/h when passing an emergency vehicle.
I don't see how a fine can stand on a freeway if you slow down in a gradual manner upon seeing emergency lights. The actual law itself implies attaining a speed of 40km/h isn't realistic in some instances on a high speed road and even acknowledges that sudden deceleration should be avoided.
I don't think the law states this.
There's a clear implication in the law that slowing to 40km/h may not be possible in some circumstances.
Reducing speed, even if the vehicle does not get down to 40km/h, will still have safety benefits for law enforcement or emergency workers and will help drivers take evasive action if needed.
Really, Victoria needs to follow NSW and remove the 40km/h requirement completely from the law on high speed motorways (can you imagine the confusion this will cause to NSW residents in Victoria).
That was my point. Vicroads are saying that but the legislation doesn't include it.
Pussy released on bail:
Porsche driver Richard Pusey released on bail as he fights charges over Eastern Freeway tragedy
The 42-year-old who pleaded not guilty to charges over a crash which killed four police officers on a Melbourne freeway has been released on bail. Mr Pusey has been in custody for close to six months, after he was arrested following the crash in April.www.abc.net.au
Not good enough that Vicroads has advice that contradicts the written law. That sounds like a legal nightmare.
A WA cop explained you have 200m from a speed sign, to change speed. If this advice is correct and applies to flashing lights, you have 200m from the flashing lights.
A bizarre circumstance if the same rules apply.
Not good enough that Vicroads has advice that contradicts the written law. That sounds like a legal nightmare.