https://www.facebook.com/groups/947272755285436/user/100013672755930/?__cft__[0]=AZVW8DDUcTAccex9zg0CPjMWd07_SiDozSxnmNGtObI29ZP9REJd2oixzlDmgwvakkEgB13ioGFncORAUSeERzq7tEzHlLQ-3G9N3vQk6XFiYEMHSIfbNUnKAQYJO0Dwn1WpharlK8t2kjJmVwrKbBI-cs15kWJHZPK60uFJSuAfQwYdoG4GASsBVNuNZ6DJI6Q&__tn__=<<,P-R
Chris Kalpage
Top contributor· 13h ·
POLICE PURSUIT OR IS IT?
Hi All,
I have previously published an article on police pursuits and will give you a recent case I was involved in where the officer thought he was pursuing my client whilst clearly not.
My client had ridden his BMW adventure bike from his home on the central coast doing a circuit through Kulnurra where he stopped for a break and then travelling through the Watagan State Forest back to his home. A trip he had done many times before and the bike was designed to travel over the rough terrain.
As he was on Great North Road a couple of kilometers from Laguna, he passed a police vehicle and thought nothing of it. He was traveling along Watergan Creek Road when pulled over by the highway patrol officer who stated to my client that he had called in a police pursuit which was a total surprise to my client. He was subsequently charged with the following:
Police Pursuit which carries 3 years jail for a first offence and disqualification of 3 years with a minimum of 1 year
Drive speed manner dangerous disqualification of 3 years with a minimum of 1 year
Exceed speed over 30 with a 3-month disqualification
When I was retained the first thing, I did was attend the police station and observe the In Car Video (ICV).
This was a revelation. It appeared to show my client travelling past the police car over 10 kmh over the speed limit, nothing to get excited about. So why the fuss and a police pursuit. A closer examination of the ICV indicated that after the bike went past the police vehicle the police vehicle did at least a 5 point turn on a short straight between two corners over double unbroken lines which consumed about 10 seconds and possibly about 13 seconds since the bike past the police vehicle.
As I have previously written the speeds that a police vehicle has to get to with that kind of delay are considerable. Furthermore, the police vehicle had shot past the right hand turn to Watergan Creek Road and had to reverse to turn into that road adding to further delay.
As part of the preparation of the case for a hearing I had a scientific expert prepare evidence as to where the bike would have been based on the delay in making the u turn and overshooting Watergan Creek Road. Based on the time the bike went past to when it was pulled over a calculation could also be made on the average speed.
More importantly evidence was given that the allegations by the officer that the bike dived whilst braking after he had passed the police vehicle, and then the rider looking down and to the right mirror and the bike squatting under acceleration were also debunked. The nature of this bike’s braking system and suspension would not allow for diving forward under braking and squatting under acceleration. Further being an adventure bike, the seating was upright with high handlebars and mirrors also at eye level. So, unlike a sports bike no need to look down and to the right.
Further the officer in his statement maintained that as the motorcycle was near the front of the police vehicle, he activated the red and blue LED light bar on the roof and front grill lights, again my examination of the in-car video illustrated that the lights were activated only when he was doing the five point turn over double unbroken lines well after the bike had gone past. Further whilst doing the u turn it would be unlikely, he was looking at the bike and more likely trying to make the five-point turn and ensuring that he was keeping an eye to his left for oncoming traffic that he was obstructing between the two curves.
The officer further alluded to travelling at high speed but couldn’t catch up with the bike and therefore the bike must have been doing at least that speed again debunked by the delay in going after the bike and the calculated speed of the bike.
A final argument that the speed on Watergan Creek Road was 50 or 70 kmh was debunked by evidence obtained from Transport for NSW that it was 100 kmh.
Once the defence evidence was established fruitful negotiations were undertaken with the prosecutor, the highway patrol supervisor and the police officer concerned. Based on our argument the two serious charges were withdrawn and a plea of guilty was entered to a speed over 20 which resulted in no loss of licence and was consistent with the time distance evidence of the scientific expert.
The article as written is for your information and interest only. It is not intended to be comprehensive, and does not constitute and must not be relied on as legal advice. Please be aware that every case is different and the matters I am raising may not be of specific relevance to your situation but may have a general application and you must seek specific advice tailored to your circumstances. I will also gladly talk to anyone on the phone if confused or want clarification.
Chris Kalpage