NSW Riding a Scooter in Car Park Without a Helmet?

[Adam1user]

@Adam1user .... At the risk of regretting asking, but since I haven't seen an actual explanation anywhere ..... What was the incredible defence to this charge you brought to court that made the magistrate dismiss it ..

Hi, why would you regret? the infringement related to that I rode my scooter in a carpark going from one shop to other which was about 300 meters away in an open mall and as it was hot, I did not put on the helmet, there were cops and saw me, the rest is history, you can read the whole thing in the following link:

NSW - Riding a Scooter in Car Park Without a Helmet?

Hi all, I found this site and read some of the info in here, it seems very good site. I am facing this issue which I am planning to go court: Last time I was riding my maxi scooter is a car park of a shopping centre (has several big retail stores: toysRus, Good Guys, Bing Lee, Supercheap...

www.lawanswers.com.au

The issue started with Tim W insults people when writing, and not just to me, I noticed it that he does it to others, he just wants me to take it and bend down. I just hate it. If people write and provide constructive criticism in respectful manner, there will be not be any issues. It is simple, You say "Good morning" to me I will answer "Good morning" , you tell me to "F@#k off", what do you think the answer will be?

 

[Docupedia]

If people write and provide constructive criticism in respectful manner, there will be not be any issues.

Really? I don't think so because in the NSW - Shouted the words 'Hey Sexy Lady' and 'Jihad Gun'. Got charged and convicted of Stalking, Threatening and intimidation thread:

- You posted words to the effect that Tim W isn't a 'real, practising lawyer', saying, "claiming to be a lawyer", "If you were a true lawyer", and "Not practicing law for sure!!!" (that's not the point of what I'm saying, I'm just setting the scene).

- I responded to the effect that Tim W has been verified by LawTap - who run this site - as a credentialed lawyer, and that "the circumstances appear to indicate your claims of 'so-called-lawyer' are out of line". For clarity - I said your claims were out of line. There was no personal denigration of you whatsoever.

- You respond to me, saying:

Are you Tim W with other account, trying to get additional support? ... As your signature states, you don't give legal advice, so keep to yourself, and if I want your opinion, I will give it to you.
...
He read couple of law books and thinks he masters it. He does not, nor do you. I really doubt that you and are different people. Why you interfere? No one asked you anything, just keep your smarts to yourself.

I may have misunderstood you, but I don't believe my simply pointing out LawTap's verification process quite warranted your:
- Accusing me of being a proxy account, without any substantiation, in a possible attempt to invalidate what I had to say by making it appear it was a self-interested instead of arm's length comment;
- Saying I should 'keep to myself' because I 'don't give legal advice' - which is ironic considering your status;
- Saying that 'if you want my opinion you'll give it to me' and implying I should shut up because 'no one asked me anything'; and
- Somehow alleging I've made a claim to have 'mastered law', when I made no such claim - effectively a straw man argument.

Your claim about being respectful is utterly ridiculous. If you react to a simple statement of fact with 'shut up... you're a fake... you're not a lawyer so you have no right to say anything... no one asked you anyway' then you need to wake up to yourself thinking that you're being respectful in any way whatsoever.

 

[Atticus]

At the risk of regretting asking, but since I haven't seen an actual explanation anywhere ..... What was the incredible defence to this charge you brought to court that made the magistrate dismiss it ..

the infringement related to that I rode my scooter in a carpark going from one shop to other which was about 300 meters away in an open mall and as it was hot, I did not put on the helmet, there were cops and saw me, the rest is history

I know what the infringement was but that's not what I asked.... You keep stating that your success was not down to mere luck, but nowhere have you told us what argument you used to have the infringement withdrawn.... You didn't have proper grounds to argue the offense was trifling, so If you can't tell us what argument you you brought to court that swayed the magistrate, then we can only conclude that you were just plain lucky not clever.

 

[sammy01]

Hey Atticus, do you regret asking now?
docupedia - what this guy said of you was wrong. But far worse was the personal attack on a man with mental health issues.

O'l mate's contribution here has been nothing but negative and he is unable to see that.
I'd strongly encourage the nice folk here who give of their time to help others because they have knowledge of how the law is applied should spend their time doing that rather than flogging a dead horse.

 

[Adam1user]

I know what the infringement was but that's not what I asked.... You keep stating that your success was not down to mere luck, but nowhere have you told us what argument you used to have the infringement withdrawn.... You didn't have proper grounds to argue the offense was trifling, so If you can't tell us what argument you you brought to court that swayed the magistrate, then we can only conclude that you were just plain lucky not clever.

Hi Atticus,
In summary, I rode without the helmet, that is against the law and I was wrong, but due to being in a car park for a short distance with very low traffic, I think the police officer should have not given an infringement, a warning would be enough for that case only, if I rode on the main road then I deserve the infringement and I am sure that I will not get off given the same argument I gave above (I would not go to court if I rode on the road, also I would wear the helmet on the main road). This is what I mean by applying the law. I am sure I was not lucky in this, as this was my point of view and I have written this in my comments. I hope that clarified my point. The reason for getting the infringement would have affected my driving record which will affect any discounts I get when I renew the licence (I found out this after the event, not before this event), and the insurance for example etc... and also, for applying jobs for NSW Police or other agencies. This is why I did not want the infringement. I am not above the law but in this case, the infringement was not right.

Now others just jump in and think they are GODS because they read part of the issue. As for Tim W, I started answering his comments with respect, then he started saying I think I am above the law and other comments, read it yourself, and that is why I got pissed off, everything is written and I am admitting I am wrong and then he goes back and insults me. Read his comments in other issues, he does that to every one, in one comment for someone he wrote to the similar word (security officer Monkeys), notice how he crossed the security officer and then wrote Monkeys,,,, how professional of a lawyer, isn't it? and then you have Docupedia stating he has Lawyer next to his name, so what? I refuse to listen to anyone who insults me or interferes in what I write without knowing the history and taking sides.

 

[Atticus]

I'm not going to get involved or comment on any runs ins you've had with other forum members.

due to being in a car park for a short distance with very low traffic, I think the police officer should not give an infringement, a warning would be enough for that case only, if I rode on the main road then I deserve the infringement and I am sure that I will not get off given the same argument I gave above.

So you asked for leniency based on the fact that you were in a carpark at low speed with little traffic ... The magistrate saw in your favour & good for you..

I'm not a lawyer, but if I were my advice would have also been to pay the fine & not risk court... Reason being is because you admitted to the offense, there was no defense to your actions, & the odds of being granted leniency are slim... Going to court & seeking leniency is not a defense or question of law.... You could have just as easily (more likley actually) come out of court with court costs on top of your fine & demerits.....On another day or with a different magistrate that may well have happened.

On that basis, you must accept that you were quite lucky on the day.

 

[Adam1user]

I'm not going to get involved or comment on any runs ins you've had with other forum members.

So you asked for leniency based on the fact that you were in a carpark at low speed with little traffic ... The magistrate saw in your favour & good for you..

I'm not a lawyer, but if I were my advice would have also been to pay the fine & not risk court... Reason being is because you admitted to the offense, there was no defense to your actions, & the odds of being granted leniency are slim... Going to court & seeking leniency is not a defense or question of law.... You could have just as easily (more likley actually) come out of court with court costs on top of your fine & demerits.....On another day or with a different magistrate that may well have happened.

On that basis, you must accept that you were quite lucky on the day.

As mentioned, that was in summary, I also wrote that I wear all the right gear, I will not do it again, and the negatives of having the infringement, etc.... I did admit I am wrong and that is why I was asking for section 10 (forget whether it is applicable or not- I was not sure then, I will find out if that is true, as two lawyer stated I can get section 10- I will check that) which means guilty with explanation, I never said I was above the law or not guilty. I understand that if I go to court and not win, I would have to pay court fees in addition to the infringement, also one point you did not mention, is my time to go to court and spend most of the day there. I assure you I was not lucky, I knew that the result will be to my favor. If I had doubt that the result will not be to my favor, I would not go to court. I went 3 times (including this one) and in the 3 times, the result was to my favor. As I assessed the situation and I knew most properly the result will be to my favor. Other infringements I paid them and did not bother with the review process.
Thanks,

 

[Tim W]

It's your choice to make, but I suggest no further engagement with this chap.
You've expended enough time and energy on him without any prospect at all of him ever changing his mind accepting reality.

The only reason to have anything more to do with him
is to continue, in the greater interest, to indicate when he is incorrect.

For reasons best known to themselves, the @lawanswers Admins (I am not one)
continue to indulge him, and we must... endure... his continued presence.

 

[Atticus]

My last comment

I assure you I was not lucky, I knew that the result will be to my favor. If I had doubt that the result will not be to my favor, I would not go to court

To not accept that luck was a huge element in the outcome is incredibly naive.... of course you were lucky

 

[Adam1user]

It's your choice to make, but I suggest no further engagement with this chap.
You've expended enough time and energy on him without any prospect at all of him ever changing his mind accepting reality.

The only reason to have anything more to do with him
is to continue, in the greater interest, to indicate when he is incorrect.

For reasons best known to themselves, the @lawanswers Admins (I am not one)
continue to indulge him, and we must... endure... his continued presence.

Mate,
Prove me wrong and I will change my mind, but coming with insults and making yourself as GOD.... I put an example how you write to other people's comment in above comment, show the true nature of you.
Answer this, why in the 3 cases that I went to court for traffic issues, I got the result to my favor? does not that mean I assessed the issue and put a solid strong convincing argument that managed to convince a Magistrate?
All I need to do is convince a Magistrate and I don't need to convince you.
I read a lot of your answers to others and in my opinion some were wrong, I did not comment on yours that it was wrong. that was your choice. You gave bad advice. Even if you are a lawyer but doubt a good one.
You should know how to write to people, you should be respectful. I mentioned above about know your target audience, this is one good skill to learn when communicating with others, it makes the job a lot easier.
As mentioned I am a chartered accountant by profession and when talking to non-accounting staff, I use plain simple English.
I hope you will learn from that.
I will quote you:
"For reasons best known to themselves, the @lawanswers Admins (I am not one)
continue to indulge him, and we must... endure... his continued presence."