Qld Police lose court case against car enthusiast, democracy prevails

[Wretched]

In what may feel like justice for car enthusiasts nationally, a court in Queensland today dismissed a case from Queensland Police against a car enthusiast that had been charged with a Type 1 hooning offence (2297) for ‘wilfully creating undue noise’ in his Lamborghini Huracan.

The ticket was issued October last year and given the strong anti-hoon laws in Queensland, had the police officer chosen at the time, could’ve seen the green Huracan confiscated for 30 days on the spot. For unknown reasons, the original offence was modified to a lesser charge – essentially the same charge without it being ‘wilfully’ – once it become obvious the case was being contested.

Usually, this is not something I would care to bring light to – and I have chosen to do so as an opinion piece for that is what this is – but having attended the first day of the two-day court case, the manner in which Queensland Police attempted to vilify the Lamborghini owner really struck a chord. The waste of time to both the tax payer-funded court system, the driver, and the tax payer-funded police officer, for a charge that should never have been issued in the first place was staggering.

His victory this week was not only justice taking its course, but also a reminder for all of us car enthusiasts that the courts are a fair and balanced system for disputing an unfair charge, one which in this case had not been issued in the spirit of the law on which it was intended for enforcement.

The victim, entrepreneur Mark Trueno, who is the founder of StreetFX, one of the largest automotive social channels globally, successfully defended his right to drive his Lamborghini without being unfairly targeted.

Sergeant Russell Waters testified in court that Mr Trueno had turned on his Huracan, revved the engine, then driven the car in a wilful manner of operation that created undue noise. According to Sergeant Waters, the stock-standard Lamborghini was the ‘loudest car’ he had heard in his 30-plus years of policing.

Waters, who presented himself as a qualified driver training instructor and one that has seen plenty of race tracks and apparently even driven Lamborghinis in the past (though when questioned as to which model Lamborghini he had driven, he oddly couldn’t recall), testified that Mr Trueno deliberately drove his vehicle to generate undue noise.

He presented a shortened version of the audio recording between himself and Mr Trueno to court, suggesting that the remainder of the near 45-minute audio recording of the event was not available. Again, rather odd.

According to the notes on the ticket issued to Mr Trueno, Sergeant Waters estimated the Lamborghini’s speed at 90km/h (in a 60km/h zone) and on his estimate, the car had managed to reach that speed in around one second (yes, one second!)

Mr Trueno denied all charges, disputing the estimated speed and pointing out that the noise generated is part of the characteristic of the Lamborghini and not a fault of its operation.

Having personally seen plenty of court cases where it’s the officer’s word against the driver, in most cases the officer comes out on top. So, what saved Mr Trueno?

His dash-cam’s built in GPS unit. The verified data from the unit proved that Mr Trueno stopped at a red light before the officer (an event Sergeant Waters said did not happen), then never reached the speed limit (GPS data showed a maximum speed of 54km/h), nor accelerated to that speed in a manner which would suggest the car was at full throttle to generate the alleged noise.

The data also showed that the Lamborghini didn’t reach 90km/h in around one second – as had been alleged – which even if it was intended to do so, would’ve been impossible given the car’s 0-100km/h time of 3.2 seconds.

This was backed up further by Anthony Webb De Zen from Lamborghini Brisbane who testified the Huracan is by its design a vehicle that generates engine and exhaust noise beyond that of a standard car, but still within Australian Design Rule (ADR) limits. He also noted the car automatically revs on a cold startup, dismissing claims that it was a deliberate attempt at creating noise.

“Our vehicles are designed to be emotional and pure sports cars, the noise which they generate is within the means of Australian design rules, and today’s victory in court shows that our owners can enjoy their vehicles within the legal means of the law.” De Zen told CarAdvice.

Having reviewed the case, Magistrate Judith Daley found there was insufficient evidence that would suggest beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Trueno drove his vehicle to create undue noise.

Speaking to CarAdvice today, Trueno said “I felt pretty victimised at the time. They held me for 45 minutes, photographed me, threatened to search the car. Drug tested and breath tested me, all for some egregious claims that it was the ‘loudest car’ he had heard in his career.”

Trueno, who had earlier in the day been taking kids for drives in his vehicle for charity, said he believed the police had targeted him unfairly.

“If I had been in a Toyota Corolla going faster, he wouldn’t have even noticed. He saw something bright that made a noise he didn’t like and decided he could enforce the law in a manner which suited his own obvious anti-car enthusiast agenda. Thankfully the courts saw through it. I am very happy that the Judge saw the evidence for what it was and dismissed the charge.”

Mr Trueno’s legal representative, David Abrey, the principal of Harper Finch Lawyers told CarAdvice: “This was a case where the magistrate found that Mr Trueno had done nothing wrong. In the end I believe he was unfairly targeted by the police because of the car that he was driving and it’s reassuring to see that not only did justice prevail but common sense too.”

The reason this is worth covering, apart from the fact that it proves there are really some officers out there that either have a terrible memory of events, or a personal agenda against car enthusiasts, is that we – as car enthusiasts – are not left to the mercy of the men in blue when it comes to traffic law.

We live in a digital age that allows for enormous data tracking, but we also live in a democracy that keeps the law and its enforcers in check.

Defending a traffic fine is something very few of us ever do – personally I have done it twice in the last decade, with a 50 per cent success rate – there is a great deal of time involved, the legal costs can also be prohibitive to some and even if the charge seems utterly erroneous, unless there is solid indisputable proof – such as the data used in this case – it may not be worth it. But sometimes, it is worth it. Because justice is always worth defending.

So, what can you do? Get a forward- and rear-facing dashcam with a solid GPS unit that tracks everything. The few hundred-dollar up-front investment may save you a lot more down the track.

Abrey told CarAdvice that from a legal perspective, if you’re pulled over by a police officer for a traffic offence that you believe is unjust, turn your vehicle off and record the conversation on your phone – you’re legally allowed to do this and it may come in handy. Also, don’t make any admissions, say as little as possible, record everything you are saying, and in the end if, you think you’ve been unfairly charged, contact a lawyer.

Of course the great majority of tickets issued by traffic police are for legitimate traffic infringements. It’s your duty as a valid licence holder to always drive within the legal limits of the state you’re in and get to know the traffic laws. It will help you become a better driver and understand your rights if situation ever calls for it.

QLD police did not respond for requests for comment.

You can see the video footage of the TV news coverage of the court case on Facebook here.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/480177/q...racy-prevails/

I am usually a defender of Police but this case just shows even they have rotten people.

Have to laugh at the 1 sec to 90km/h...didn't the cop know only a Falcon could do that.

But in all seriousness, this country really needs to get its ***** together. We're going backwards faster than a Falcon in reverse (, couldn't resist). It used to be the phrase, "only in America." Now it is "Only in Australia." We're embarrassing.

[383hq]

That cop would have a heart attack if he ever attended the woodward dream cruise in Detroit.
Full blown drag cars, Funny cars, you name it, cruising up Woodward boulevard.

Hell, burnouts even occur.
Car nuts love it. Clearly no such discretion in Australia

[Express]

Originally Posted by 383hq

That cop would have a heart attack if he ever attended the woodward dream cruise in Detroit.
Full blown drag cars, Funny cars, you name it, cruising up Woodward boulevard.

Hell, burnouts even occur.
Car nuts love it. Clearly no such discretion in Australia

Yeah but all those people died didn't they?

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by 383hq

That cop would have a heart attack if he ever attended the woodward dream cruise in Detroit.
Full blown drag cars, Funny cars, you name it, cruising up Woodward boulevard.

Hell, burnouts even occur.
Car nuts love it. Clearly no such discretion in Australia

Just went to NYC. Place is full of cops, especially near the WTC. Trying to get a few photos and a biker pops a wheelie right in front of the cops. Zero hoots given. Its a different world in the 'land of the free'. Guess their priority of national security far surpasses that of road safety...

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by malazn mafia

Just went to NYC. Place is full of cops, especially near the WTC. Trying to get a few photos and a biker pops a wheelie right in front of the cops. Zero hoots given. Its a different world in the 'land of the free'. Guess their priority of national security far surpasses that of road safety...

Big city for you. Too much going on to worry about most traffic offenses.
I have seen a cop in Sydney CBD do nothing but shake their head after a car almost ran down 20 pedestrians and another car almost hit the first car.

Land of the free also allows 'trained' offices to issue speeding fines based of visual estimation.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010...s_by_poli.html

Having said that, I have to say the US overall seams more laid back with their roads and vehicles.

[Spurious]

Police are human like the rest of us, so by default they can sometimes say inappropriate things, make assumed allegations, & allow their ego to get in the way.

I've been targeted for hooning in the past. A cop parked in someones driveway saw me enter/exit a corner on route to an IGA, which was right next to the house where the cop had parked btw.
As I drove past, this cop yelled at me, I took no notice, drove another 20m around a corner & parked.

The cop was then in "hot pursuit" (in a divy van) thinking I had deliberately ignored him & sped off!
I saw him pull up near my car as I was about to enter the IGA, instinct told me the guy was gunning for me. I was right.

What ensued was a roadside debate on "hooning" regarding the alleged incident moments prior where I had entered/exited a corner at high speed with smoke coming off my tyres!
To make things weirder, the cop leaves his colleague with me & walks off to his vehicle. He then re-appears from behind the corner of his vehicle & demands that I approach him. Didn't say why!

I refused to move on the grounds that he hadn't given me adequate reason. After a brief debate he makes it clear he wants to breath test me. So I oblige.

After returning a negative blood alcohol level, & now being alone with the officer, I took the time to explain to him exactly what was going on.

I had just finished work & with my brother & young son in the car, along with 2 hot pizzas on brothers lap, I was going to the IGA to get shopping, then home to enjoy dinner.
I also made it clear that it's virtually impossible to have smoke coming off my tyres driving the way I was & there would be clear evidence of feathering on the tread if I had been smoking my tyres. I made him check my tyres, & no feathering.
Plus the fact I wouldn't have endangered the edibility of those 2 pizzas by driving like a tit!

I then proceeded to school the foreign officer to try & make him understand that, just because he deals with the scum of society everyday, that not everybody he meets deserves to be treated as such.
In my case he got his wires crossed quite badly.

In an instant, he saw me & decided I was a hoon that was trying to evade him, & by the time he confronted me his adrenaline was racing & he was ready for a fight, a foot pursuit....or something, man he was PUMPED!!!

At the end of the day, no charges were laid against me for any traffic violations & hopefully that pigheaded British bobby has either gone back to the UK or has modified his attitude.

[NTF6]

Originally Posted by 383hq

That cop would have a heart attack if he ever attended the woodward dream cruise in Detroit.
Full blown drag cars, Funny cars, you name it, cruising up Woodward boulevard.

Hell, burnouts even occur.
Car nuts love it. Clearly no such discretion in Australia

Full blown drag cars were driving around Alice Springs streets two weeks ago for a few days on special permits, one even went through Macca's drive through.

[b0son]

This cop is either a liar, or is incapable of estimating speed, or counting time. Either way, why is he still employed?

[mik]

It seems pretty obvious , the driver was targeted , some vehicles are nice easy targets , hands up truck drivers if you have met senior constable ben d over before .

had he been driving a an old peasant working stiffs car with tyres on the edge of life and a fluffy exhaust system , it probably would motored down the road without even a second look .

[Junkyard-Dog]

Police officers are human after all and this is nothing new. Jealousy is as old as time.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Police officers are human after all and this is nothing new. Jealousy is as old as time.

Might have been having a bad day, which clouds most people's judgments...

[Stefan]

This is the problem with giving Police too much power in an area where is not required.

Cops busy chasing members of the community to raise revenue for infractions as opposed to chasing crooks.

Did the cop face a contempt charge for deliberately lying in court?

[Bolly47]

Originally Posted by Stefan

This is the problem with giving Police too much power in an area where is not required.

Cops busy chasing members of the community to raise revenue for infractions as opposed to chasing crooks.

Did the cop face a contempt charge for deliberately lying in court?

This is true as Qld Cops busy chasing members of the community to raise revenue for infractions as opposed to chasing crooks

Queensland are are the worse backward state in Australia. become Police state

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by Stefan

This is the problem with giving Police too much power in an area where is not required.

Cops busy chasing members of the community to raise revenue for infractions as opposed to chasing crooks.

Did the cop face a contempt charge for deliberately lying in court?

I was thinking the same thing.

If I made up a lie that a person who lives in my street (who I don't like) was commenting an offense, you can guarantee that if It was ever proved in court that the alleged offensive never happened, I would be charged. I guess police get away with making false reports.

[Bossxr8]

Hopefully this poor excuse for an officer get's punished by his superiors.

[Highway star]

The bloke still lost anyway, he had to pay the court costs $1500. tell me who the winner was? You will never win in the end!

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by Highway star

The bloke still lost anyway, he had to pay the court costs $1500. tell me who the winner was? You will never win in the end!

Anyone who stands up for themselves and what is right is a winner in my book..

[Highway star]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Anyone who stands up for themselves and what is right is a winner in my book..

The judges are to **** weak to award costs because they know it would open Pandora's box. Meanwhile the antics of QP will not change because they know 99% of the punters will not contest. So who is the real winner again?

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Highway star

The judges are to **** weak to award costs because they know it would open Pandora's box. Meanwhile the antics of QP will not change because they know 99% of the punters will not contest. So who is the real winner again?

Cop had a brain fart thinking some BS charge on a Lambo driver will go uncontested. Old mate is obviously not short a quid, so he has the means to call BS.

For the rest of us who may not have the spare $$$ to risk having costs awarded against us if the case is lost or have the time to spend a few days in court and paying for an expert witness. We just cop it where the sun don't shine.

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by Highway star

The judges are to **** weak to award costs because they know it would open Pandora's box. Meanwhile the antics of QP will not change because they know 99% of the punters will not contest. So who is the real winner again?

The victim who stood up for himself, the self respecting thing to do in his situation was to stand up for what was right..

He obviously is not short of a dollar so losing some money far outweighs disrespecting himself and accepting BS behaviour like from that so called law enforcer.

[Tassie f100]

Wonder how more times same S.A copper has pulled up others and B.S that they were driving at 80-90 kmh when in actual fact they might have been at 70.Just because someone gets a knock back from his boyfriend that morning shouldn't take it out on the public.

[Sabantien]

Ah, everyone has the right to a fair trial, but not everyone can afford the lawyer.

Mind you, the GPS unit was probably the main thing that saved him. Not a bad idea (assuming you don't speed)

[barnz_xr8]

Originally Posted by Sabantien

Ah, everyone has the right to a fair trial, but not everyone can afford the lawyer.

Mind you, the GPS unit was probably the main thing that saved him. Not a bad idea (assuming you don't speed)

yeah good idea, just when it comes time to go to court get ready to pay 1000's of dollars for a expert witness.

[Shonky.]

guilty until proven innocent, and have to pay to do so

its just not right

[Shonky.]

http://d3bcndadptrp71.cloudfront.net...2/IMG_1672.jpg

keep up the good work Sergeant

[mike_nofx]

This is why I feel cops should never be able to use an estimated speed to issue a fine. Can you really judge the speed of a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction to you with any real accuracy?

[2011G6E]

"Loudest car he ever heard"...stock standard Lambo with the "rev on start up" feature.
Obviously he's never heard some of the WRX's getting around...much less most Harleys on the road which are, staggeringly, the ONLY vehicles of any sort which apparently are legally allowed to completely remove all muffling and drive around with straight through pipes blasting a wall of noise.

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

This is why I feel cops should never be able to use an estimated speed to issue a fine. Can you really judge the speed of a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction to you with any real accuracy?

No, they can't. No one can. Full stop. We're human beings, not laser-calibrated measuring devices...if you're moving towards a moving object yourself, you have literally no idea how fast an approaching vehicle is moving, beyond just a vague impression if you can compare it to other vehicles near it going the same direction as it.
It's similar to people who say "A speed tolerance of a couple of kph shouldn't worry you...you shouldn't have to watch your speedo to know how fast you're going", or some such crap.
Not within a couple of kilometers per hour you can't.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

This is why I feel cops should never be able to use an estimated speed to issue a fine. Can you really judge the speed of a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction to you with any real accuracy?

Who told you this?

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

Who told you this?

I work with several ex-cops, and they all say the same thing...if someone is foolish enough to contest a speeding fine, they always say the same thing in court. Something along the lines of "I observed the vehicle travelling towards me at a speed I judged to be approximately 80kph. I confirmed with the radar/laser that the vehicle was doing 76kph in a 60 zone".

This cleverly means they have now planted the idea in the magistrates mind that you are no questioning a sole-less piece of electronics, but rather the professional judgement of an experienced traffic officer, whose "expert estimate" was only backed up by the radar/laser gun. It's an important psychological tactic.

[noflac52]

There have been various tests done on visual speed estimation and they have returned findings that visual speed estimation is very inaccurate in most cases.