POLICE WARN GO-SLOW MOTORISTS TO STICK TO THE LEFT LANE OR FACE FINES

Jon Kaila 

From:Sunday Herald Sun 

June 17, 2012

PRUE ROBERTSON IS ANNOYED BY PEOPLE DRIVING SLOW IN THE RIGHT LANE. PICTURE: JAKE NOWAKOWSKI SUNDAY HERALD SUN

RIGHT-lane road hogs will be the target of a sweeping new police crackdown.

Under the blitz, selfish motorists caught refusing to move to the left will be punished with an on-the-spot $122 fine and the loss of two demerit points.

It is the first time Victoria Police's highway patrols will seek go-slow motorists - often dubbed "Sunday drivers" - and enforce the law of failing to keep as far left as possible.

The tough stance on these drivers will also pinpoint tailgaters as winter brings dangerous low light levels and wet conditions.

Sen-Sgt Allen Inderwisch said the two offences went hand-in-hand and officers would be clamping down on the "double-edged sword".

"We've studied the crash data and there is a huge spike in nose-to-tail collisions in winter months," Sen-Sgt Inderwisch said.

"We are seeing people in their own world travelling under the speed limit in the right-hand lane and that can create a road-rage scenario, with tailgaters literally trying to push them out of the way.

"They are both wrong and don't make a right."

Sen-Sgt Inderwisch said 12 fines had been handed out on Princes Freeway and South Gippsland Highway since the operation began in the past two weeks.

Failing to drive at a sufficient distance and failing to keep as far left as applicable have been law since 1999 but rarely enforced.

"We find a lot of 'lane-locked' drivers are nervous about merging into another lane, but the repercussions of tailgating aren't helping the situation," he said.

"It makes the drivers scared and causes unpredictable and erratic behaviour, which only raises the blood pressure of tailgaters even more and then we have a serious crash on our hands."

The pilot scheme is being spearheaded by Cardinia Highway Patrol throughout June and July, and closely monitored by units across the state.

If successful in bringing down the amount of crashes, it will be actively enforced statewide.

Marked and unmarked cars as well as police motorcycles are being used in the crackdown.

"Some drive in the right-hand lane out of habit, some ignorance, others are just completely unaware or too scared and inexperienced - but their actions do have a roll-on effect," Sen-Sgt Inderwisch said.

"These are two of the biggest pet hates of drivers on the road and it's an issue that needs to be addressed.

"We would rather be handing out a fine now and correcting behaviour and educating people than dealing with a road-rage assault, serious injury or even death in the months to come."

He urged drivers to double the space between their vehicle and those in front, from the standard two-second rule to about four.

The best way of calculating distances was to count the seconds between the time the car in front passed a road post and the time it took their vehicle to reach it, he said.

The Transport Accident Commission's road safety manager, Samantha Cockfield, said: "The Transport Accident Commission accepts a large number of claims each year from people suffering soft-tissue injuries arising from rear-end crashes.

"These injuries often leave people with long-term pain and suffering and unable to work and perform every-day tasks. Avoiding these types of crashes is simple.

"Stick within the speed limit, share the roads and drive or ride to the conditions."

Fines for drivers tailgating are $183 with the loss of one demerit point.

LITIGANT PESTS COST $6.2M

• by:Carly Crawford 
• From:Herald Sun 
• September 11, 2007

VICTORIA'S litigant pests–hoons etc, the-Murdoch owned-H.S is not above name calling– have bled millions of dollars from taxpayers–fake outrage– with more than 400 hopeless legal claims.

While genuine victims wait years to find justice, 14 troublemakers have clogged the courts with hundreds of futile actions.–Did these so-called troublemakers get a V.I.P type quick service that was denied to ‘genuine victims’ or is the H.S attempting to manipulate you emotionally??–The state has been forced to spend up to $6.2 million fighting off their claims, which have been described by judges as scandalous, contemptuous and irrelevant.–Yeah, and, So What. What else would an employee with a vested interest say?

The Department of Justice confirmed there were 14 declared vexatious litigants in Victoria, who have pursued police, politicians, judges, banks and even relatives with a range of complaints, from fanciful conspiracies to imagined debts.

The parliamentary Law Reform Committee–only the public can change a law–has launched an inquiry into how they affect the justice system.–How much are they spending on an inquiry into the activities of FOURTEEN PEOPLE OVER SEVENTY SEVEN YEARS? Is there better things to spend the ‘taxpayer dollar' on? How much money is being spent on this inquiry? 

Available figures show they have launched more than 400 proceedings in various courts.

A Herald Sun analysis reveals:

MASS murderer Julian Knight cost taxpayers $250,000, launching 16 claims in just three years. Only three of those had legal merit. Notice that they start with a particular type of person? This is an attempt to embed into your mind, what type of person they are talking about, a criminal. 

JILTED divorcee Ian Kay, who was involved in 53 cases over a decade, boasted in court of the financial burden he had imposed on the state.

THE most recently declared vexatious litigant, Brian William Shaw, tried to bring 35 criminal charges against 20 people including the Prime Minister whom he accused of treason for altering laws that referred to the Queen.

The Supreme Court has the power to declare someone vexatious if they consistently launch action without proper legal grounds.

It bans them making further claims without court permission. Victoria's foremost expert on the subject, Monash University scholar Simon Smith, found there has been a 190 per cent increase in the number of vexatious litigant orders made nationally since 2000. Selective facts? Remember that there are only 14 vexatious litigants (v.l). If there was 7 v.l’s in 2000, we have had a 100% increase. Typically in this situation, the corporate media refers to a percentage increase when they want to manipulate you into thinking that something is developing, or growing quickly, and, they refer to a number increase if they wish to downplay the growth. It is one of the oldest journalistic tricks in the book. The real issue here is why have courts increased their censorship over people seeking justice by 190% in just 8 years, and, why does the same business that is being sued or charged, get to adjudicate the claim?


Is the Australian colony a free country or a plantation?

"The large numbers of courts and the explosion of laws has increased the potential for vexatious litigation in recent time," he said. Can you believe this shit? Seriously. The large number of courts? How many more courts are there in 2008 than 2000? The explosion of laws? Given that there was no referendum between 2000-2008, there were no law changed, never mind an explosion, but, to be fair, this so-called expert is referring to legislation, or Acts of Parliament. Legislation is created, voted on, and enacted by politicians, so it would seem it is the politicians fault there was a 190% increase in v.l’s....sounds fair, but is that the point that our so-called expert was trying to make?? Of course you are supposed to be emotionally caught up in this drama, demanding that the Government do something about it....
Yes, it is the Hegelian dialect at play again, just like Port Arthur, Bali, London, the Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbour and most famously, 9/11.

Mr Smith said litigants made an average of 20 claims each. But they soaked up few resources compared to lost-cause corporate claims such as Seven Network boss Kerry Stoke's failed bid to sue over football broadcast rights, which racked up $200 million in legal fees. 

Victoria is among the states most plagued by court pests, eclipsed only by Queensland, which has so far declared 17.

The Department of Justice was unable to estimate their financial impact on the system, but–that hasn’t impeded the H.S deciding the figure and publishing it in a headline dressed as a fact–each of Julian Knight's claims cost the department an average of $15,652 to fight in legal fees and labour.

Most of the 400-plus claims made by Victoria's vexatious litigants were levelled at public figures or institutions, taking the potential cost to taxpayers towards $6.2 million.

Victoria's 14 vexatious litigants were declared between 1930 and 2007.

They are: Julian Knight, Brian Shaw, Ian Kay, Gabor Horvath, Michael Weston, David Sjostrom Clemens Lindsay, Constance May Bienvenu, Edna Frances Isaacs and Geza Laszloffy, Kathleen Gallo, William Cousin, Abdul Madjil Ben Hemici, and former Fitzroy footy great Goldsmith Collins.

The first was Rupert Millane in 1930, who launched 200 actions in five years.

LAW SLAMS DOOR ON TONY MOKBEL'S ESCAPE

• Keith Moor 
• From:Herald Sun 
• February 28, 2012

Tony Mokbel's bid to get off drug charges will be thwarted by new legislation. Picture: Trevor Pinder Herald Sun

TONY Mokbel's bid to get off drug charges he has already admitted to will today be thwarted by rare retrospective legislation.

Attorney-General Robert Clark's new law–on what date was the referendum?–to fix up the problem of dodgy affidavits will also stop the hundreds of other convicted and accused criminals who were expected to follow Mokbel's lead.

Mr Clark's retrospective legislation–as opposed to law–should put an end to Mokbel's attempt to change his plea and he is likely to be sentenced as soon as he is well enough.

The Herald Sun last week revealed more than 9000 Victoria Police officers had confessed to illegally preparing affidavits used to get search warrants and other warrants going back at least 15 years.

Evidence gained from those faulty warrants stood to be excluded from more than 6000 pending court cases involving murders, sex offences, drug dealing and other major crimes.

His retrospective legislation covers every unsworn affidavit made before November, which is when the problem was discovered.The unsworn affidavit bungle was threatening to throw the justice system into chaos for years, which is why Mr Clark is moving to head off the problem.

It means evidence gained from warrants obtained with dodgy–read UNLAWFUL– affidavits can be used in court, including evidence in the Mokbel case.

THESE CRIMINALS/PUBLIC SERVANTS ARE THE BIGGEST PROBLEM OUR COMMUNITY FACE. 

"The Victorian Coalition Government considers the potential consequences for the legal system arising from these affidavits remaining unremedied to be so grave that legislation is required," Mr Clark said yesterday.

"If this legislation were not enacted,–Victoria Police would be held accountable for their unlawful actions, which our government/business/crime syndicate cannot tolerate because we’ve worked hard to fool you into thinking that legislation applies to the community, rather than the public servants– there would potentially be a heavy toll on–profits–victims of crime, community safety–LMFAO– and our court system as a result of criminal proceedings being delayed, disrupted or unable to be determined on their merits solely because of procedural defects in the swearing or affirming of affidavits.”–It follows that if your case was thrown out because of a procedural defect, you can reactivate it.

Police are supposed to swear an oath or affirmation as to the truth and accuracy of the contents of affidavits.

But an investigation discovered thousands of police had just been signing them instead of swearing them.

MoorK@heraldsun.com.au

CONTRACT MEANS CITYLINK PRICES ALWAYS GO UP

• by:Michelle Ainsworth 
• From:Herald Sun 
• January 03, 2012

Motorists will have to pay more to use CityLink. Picture: Mark Smith Herald Sun

MOTORISTS face yet another toll rise this week on CityLink, with a Herald Sun investigation showing the cost of a 24-hour pass has risen almost 100 per cent since the road opened - double the rate of inflation.

Under the latest toll increase, drivers will have to pay $13.80 for a 24 hour pass, a 97 per cent increase on when the road opened in 2000.

Transurban, the company that runs CityLink, made $434.6 million from the tollway in the last financial year, raking in almost $1.2 million a day from Victorian motorists.

The company's contract with the Victorian Government allows it to increase tolls by the rate of inflation or 4.5 per cent, whichever is greater.

The inflation rate has only been above 4.5 per cent once since the road opened, with tolls having risen 48 times in that time.

National Road Users Association spokesman Michael Long said there was nothing road users could do about the rising tolls. Here is the first government shill peddling the ‘you can’t beat city hall line'

"Short of rewriting the contract there's not a lot you can do," he said.

"Unfortunately, it's part of the original contract with the Government.

"The real question is, does the motorist get a reasonable run on the road, is there a lot of congestion and do they get value for money?” Is that the real question? of course not, the real question is ‘how can the Victorian Government lease something that it never owned to begin with?'

He said unfortunately major roads would not be built without tolls but road owners needed to ensure they finished roadworks quickly and with minimal disruption to drivers. Bullshit shill. How much are they paying you to tell lies?

Transurban's 2011 annual report said its profits from CityLink tolls had jumped more than 11 per cent in the past year and average daily use had increased by almost 9 per cent.

It said much of the increase came after roadworks on the Southern Link finished in October 2010.

RACV public policy manager Brian Negus said a privately backed road with tolls was built faster than a government-funded road. Government shill Brian Negus also tried to imply that passenger death rates somehow should be factored in to driver behaviour theories that he peddles.

"To imagine Melbourne without CityLink we'd have permanent gridlock across the city area, especially the south side and major routes in and out of the city," Mr Negus said. Did the government pay you to spew this drivel Brian?

"Public private partnerships and tolls are the only way Melburnians are going to see key pieces of infrastructure delivered. Stop lying Brian.

"If you factor in the benefits that Victorians have received over the 12 years now they would outweigh the tolls people have had to pay.” Interesting that Brian made this ludicrous claim without mentioning ONE example.

CityLink tolls are allowed to rise every three months for 30 years.

FAMILY ORDERED TO DEMOLISH CUBBY HOUSE OR FACE COSTS OF UP TO ONE MILLION DOLLARS

• Henry Budd From: Herald Sun December 27, 2011 

Sonja Keller and Andrew Burgmann must demolish their son's cubby house. Picture: Tracee Lea Source: Herald Sun

A FAMILY refusing to tear down a child's cubby house put up without council permission may face costs of over $1 million.

Penalties of $1.1 million - plus a further daily fine of $110,000 - await the family if it doesn't agree to the council's demand to demolish the structure.
The cubby house, which measures just 1.5m by 1.5m, was deemed a "fire risk", and the NSW council wants it removed by January 5.
Earlier this year, Sonja Keller and husband Andrew Burgmann used leftover building supplies to erect the cubby house behind their home for their son, Yaan, 9.
They received a notice just before Christmas telling them to remove the play house, which had not been given "development consent", as it posed a bushfire threat.
"Council has become aware that a cubby house has been erected within the premises adjacent to a dwelling; within a bushfire prone and environmentally sensitive area, without development consent," Wollongong Council wrote.

Ms Keller said she would try to fight the decision, but could not afford to pay the fines.
"This decision is a joke. It's ridiculous to say it's in a fire-sensitive area. The garden shed is in a fire-sensitive area. The pergola is in a fire-sensitive area. The whole house is in a fire-sensitive area," she said.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/family-ordered-to-demolish-cubby-house-or-face-costs-of-up-to-1m/story-e6frea6u-1226230880227?sv=32bc8a139827de6aafa4355865478368

CHIEF JUSTICE MARILYN WARREN WANTS AN OVERHAULING OF VICTORIAN JUDGES

• James Campbell 
• From:Sunday Herald Sun 
• August 01, 2010 

Chief Justice Marilyn Warren. HWT Image Library

VICTORIA'S Chief Justice, Marilyn Warren, has asked Attorney-General Rob Hulls to consider a radical change to the way Victoria's judges are appointed.

In response to a Sunday Herald Sun invitation to respond to the Attorney-General's mooted changes to judicial appointments, Ms Warren says Victoria should consider adopting the system used to appoint federal judges.

---

How should judges be appointed? Have your say in a comment below.

---

"I have encouraged the Victorian Attorney-General to examine the federal system for a little while now," she writes in Sunday Herald Sun.

Judicial appointments to the Federal Court are made on the advice of an advisory panel of retired judges and public servants. Ms Warren writes: "Importantly the process has assisted in the expedition of appointments at a federal level."

The system in Victoria, in which judges are appointed by the Attorney-General after an informal consultation process, Ms Warren acknowledges has been criticised as being "too informal, too secretive and taking too long".

Despite that, she defends the current system:

"For many people, taking on the role of a judge involves giving up a successful career with a large income and losing personal freedom."

But Ms Warren says the advantages of the current system "far outweigh the negatives and most people feel honoured and privileged to be offered judicial appointment and accept the approach".

Last week, Mr Hulls announced plans to make prospective judges undergo training

New judges might also be required to undergo health checks to make sure they were mentally and physically fit enough to withstand the rigours of long trials.

SUPREME COURT RULES PERSON IS ENTITLED TO DO RUNNER IF NOT UNDER ARREST

Norrie Ross Herald Sun November 26 2011

• Fr
• Herald Sun 
• November 26, 2011

Watch

Green light to run

Lawyer Thomas Bevan, who helped his client dodge a resist arrest rap, explains why you don’t need to stop for the cops

Play

0:00 / 2:09

Scrubber

mute

Share

Fullscreen

If you're not under arrest you can do a runner from police, Judge rules. Picture: Thinkstock Supplied

IF the police ask to have a quiet word with you, it's OK to do a runner, a Supreme Court judge confirmed yesterday.

Justice Stephen Kaye said that a man who bolted when police wanted to speak to him about an unpaid restaurant bill was entitled to make himself scarce, leaving the officers trailing in his wake.

After the judge ruled, the man at the centre of the test case was in no doubt of its importance.

"This decision does for Australian civil liberties what Mabo did for native title,'' Andrew Hamilton declared.

The 25-year-old Sydneysider said he was so drunk he couldn't remember why he ran. But when he sobered up, he knew his rights.

"At no point did they say I was under arrest,'' he said. "I hadn't committed a crime . . . I ran because I was just a drunken boor.''

Justice Kaye said it was an ancient principle of the common law that a person not under arrest has no obligation to stop for police, or answer their questions. And there is no statute that removes that right.

"(Mr Hamilton) before being placed under arrest did not have any obligation to stop when requested to do so, or to answer questions asked of him,'' the judge said.

"The conferring of such a power on a police officer would be a substantial detraction from the fundamental freedoms which have been guaranteed to the citizen by the common law for centuries.''

The judge dismissed a Director of Public Prosecutions appeal against a magistrate's dismissal of a charge of resisting police.

Mr Hamilton said he was amazed that after the chase began, police in a car and on foot took 600m to catch him.

"I play rugby. I'm a winger, but I'm not a particularly good runner,'' he said. "I never thought I'd make it that far when I'm being chased by a car.

"I don't know why I ran. At the time I was pretty heavily intoxicated . . . it was just lucky I didn't get run over or shot.''

Mr Hamilton said he spent $9000 fighting the case; but Justice Kaye made a costs order in his favour.

It was established after the incident Mr Hamilton was not responsible for the restaurant bill.

Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Ken Lay last night said it was too early to act on the decision.

"We'll go through the judgment vary carefully, then we'll decide what we need to do,'' he said.

rossn@heraldsun.com.au