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.