In the weeks prior to my first appearance, I had gone along to about 3 sessions of court to get a handle on what to expect.

In most cases the defendant entered a Guilty plea, to which the magistrate always responded ‘and you make this plea without duress?’

That made we think that if I entered a plea of Guilty, that I would have to respond that I felt duress. I decided to see what was behind the duress question.

That’s when I learned about the existence of Section 25 of the Criminal Code and the provisions of ‘extraordinary emergency’. I decided that this would be an excellent back up argument if I failed to prove reasonable doubt about the speed camera reading, and printed out the document with relevant clauses marked to take with me to the Court.

First Mention

So finally the day of my first court appearance arrived.

I was on time, informed the person at the desk that I would be pleading not guilty, and waited my turn.

A policeman was sitting in the public gallery watching proceedings. I later learned that he was the Senior Prosecutor who I had been corresponding with.

The lady Prosecutor turned to me with my 300 page submission in hand – it had page markers scattered throughout. She explained (with some exasperation I thought) that it had been hand delivered from Brisbane just this morning, and so she had been unable to absorb it all in time to prepare her case – she would be seeking an adjournment. I replied that you have had it for 2 weeks, to which she said ‘but you sent it to Brisbane!”. I responded that the Brisbane address was the only one provided on the form. Priceless!!

So the judge asked for my plea (not guilty) and granted a 4 week adjournment.

I left the courtroom and was chatting to a friend in the foyer who had come along to watch how I fared. A uniformed policeman approached me and introduced himself as the Senior Prosecutor. He wanted a chat.

I suggested that it was my understanding that the police were not able to have a case conference with self represented defendants. He replied that they are able to negotiate with a defendant.

My friend stayed with me for the discussion (nice to have a witness). The Prosecutor discusses my story (‘so you thought you were about to be made a metal sandwich?’). it was clear he understood what had happened on the day. He told me that I was using a scattergun approach to my defence in trying to prove the speed camera inaccurate. We had some discussion about the various issues raised by the images and video – the distance between wheel contact points, the frame rate of the video and the 0.04 seconds interval between frames, and the existence of a stationary Landcruiser in the middle of the photo that could have reflected a semitrailer passing in the opposite direction.

I told the Prosecutor that I had been fully prepared to offer the Judge an argument based on Section 25 of the Criminal code and commenced to show him the relevant Clause, to which he said -‘don’t worry – I know about that’. I responded, ‘then why are we here – you’ve been telling me that I don’t have a case all this time?’

He responded that I had made a step in the right direction. He outlined the four possible outcomes –

1. I could plead guilty right now and he would have court costs waived
2. I could plead not guilty and lose and be saddled with witness expenses etc
3. I could plead not guilty and lose, in which case the court may show some lenience in view of my story about escaping a rear end collision and reduce the fine, but court costs would still apply.
4. I could plead not guilty and win and walk away at no cost

He also commented that he would not spend thousands of dollars of public money on witness expenses etc if there was a chance that he would lose.

He enquired whether my wife had been with me at the time and why didn’t I use her as a witness. I explained that she was reading a Kindle at the time and could offer no evidence other than she felt the sudden acceleration and wanted to know what I was doing. I further explained my wife’s age and medical condition and said that I was not prepared to submit her to the stress of a cross examination over a $180 speeding fine. The Prosecutor stated that a Magistrate would accept that argument.

The prosecutor then suggested that if I spoke to Legal Aid and had them submit a letter to himself that I had a valid defence, then he would have the case dropped. Aha!! He said that Legal Aid was not financially means tested- the advice would be free but Legal Aid would not represent me in Court.

Legal Aid

I rang Legal Aid who told me that they would not see me until such time as I had a Brief of Evidence that they could see. I emailed the prosecutor and told him the story, and requested it to be expedited in time for the next Court Appearance.

No response.

I went to the Police Station and requested a QP9 (a sort of mini Brief of Evidence, but after a few days of waiting, all it contained was a summary of my traffic history for the past 30 years. No photos of the offence or Certificates etc were included. I had been given the traffic history along with my Summons anyway, so I learned nothing from the exercise.

Second Court Appearance

Round 2 and this time I had a different Magistrate. I again said ‘Not Guilty’ and the prosecutor handed me a sealed envelope marked Brief of Evidence. I told the Magistrate of my discussion with the Senior Prosecutor after the First Mention, and his suggestion that I talk to Legal Aid to seek an opinion supporting my case, but Legal Aid required the Brief of Evidence- the magistrate said that he certainly would not want to interfere with that arrangement and granted a 3 weeks adjournment. I explained to the Magistrate that I was also seeking technical information to support my case but my requests had so far been declined – he stated that they must provide evidence that they hold that could have the effect of supporting my case.

Legal Aid Again

I secured an appointment with Legal Aid a few days later and the lawyer listened to my arguments and remarked that I should have been a traffic lawyer. 🙂

The Brief of Evidence held nothing other than the two large images and multiple pages of Certificates etc. There was one glaring error on one page detailing the location (image was for a similar looking car, the same location, but a totally different and unrelated offence at a different time and date.

The lawyer said that I was free to offer both my arguments, but thought that my Section 25 Defence had the best prospects of success, and agreed to write a letter to the Senior Prosecutor in support of my case on that ground. The lawyer said that I should make a point of stating in Court that I had been rear-ended on 3 occasions in the past (which was true).

The lawyer also commented that the very fact that the Senior Prosecutor had encouraged me to see Legal Aid suggested that the Police thought I had a good case as well, but needed a way out by way of a second opinion from Legal Aid.

Their email to the Senior Prosecutor read:

Dear Colleague (at QPS)

I understand you are the appointed prosecutor handling this matter.

I confirm, Mr. xxxxx recently attended upon our office seeking advice in relation to his alleged speeding infringement. Without prejudice, it is submitted that the prosecution discontinue this charge in favour of Mr. xxxx.

Mr. xxxx has previously provided your office with correspondence outlining his version of events. Mr. xxxxx maintains his explanation.

Mr. xxxx was driving his (make of) vehicle on (date). He had slowed behind a vehicle in the right turning lane with the view of waiting behind the turning vehicle until he was able to continue straight ahead within the same lane. He was starting to slow down in anticipation of the vehicle ahead of him who was waiting to turn, when he observed in his mirror, a vehicle which he initially thought to be a truck approaching behind him at an increased speed. Instead of stopping behind the stationary vehicle in front of him, Mr.xxxx indicated out of the turning lane and accelerated with some speed in order to avoid being hit from behind. The footage that has been provided in this matter, whilst not captured in its full, appears consistent with Mr. xxxxx’s version, in that the large vehicle behind him can be seen pulling out into the middle lane perhaps also realising he couldn’t brake in time to save hitting Mr. xxxx. The vehicle which Mr. xxxx now understands to have been a F Series Ford, can be seen in the footage braking across the intersection. Even though Mr. xxxx was initially mistaken as to what the exact vehicle was that was approaching him from behind, he recognised it to be a vehicle of some size and it was most certainly travelling at speed. It would appear that these vehicles weigh approximately 4219kg in comparison to Mr. xxxx’s car, weighing approximately 1225kg. In that moment, having been previously hit from behind on three separate occasions in the past, Mr. xxxx genuinely feared for his safety and his life, had he remained in his lane. He made the sudden and emergent decision to avoid collision, resulting in him exceeding the speed limit by 9km/hr. As soon as Mr. xxxx thought he was safe again, he immediately applied his brakes to comply with the speed limit.

On Mr. xxxx’s version which is somewhat supported by independent evidence, it is clear that a s.25 defence is raised and it is submitted that the prosecution cannot exclude the operation of this provision as is required by the legislation. On that basis, it is submitted that the prosecution discontinue proceedings against Mr. xxxx.    

If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind Regards,

Legal Aid

I heard nothing from the QPS in response to that email.

The Final Court Appearance

It was all pretty painless really.

While I was waiting my turn in the public gallery, the prosecutor tapped me on the shoulder and led me off to a second and deserted courtroom. I was told ‘this won’t take long’.

A magistrate eventually appeared (my third different one), and asked for my plea.

Not Guilty.

The prosecutor then explained that they had received an email from Legal Aid that suggested I may have a valid defence under Section 25 of the Criminal Code, and that the QPS had decided to offer no evidence in the matter.

The Magistrate told me that I was free to go. I asked him if I could be compensated the $300 that I expended in direct costs in defending myself, whilst waving a spreadsheet of costs and receipts) since I had told them of the circumstances 12 months earlier, but they persisted in pursuing me despite that. The Magistrate enquired of the prosecutor about the events, I agreed that they were a fair summary, and the Magistrate declared that since the Senior Prosecutor had fully engaged with me over the final few weeks, then I had no right to further compensation (being self represented). I decided to leave it at that and take the win. Had I been quicker on my feet, I could have raised the point that at one point the QPS had lied to me in writing about the existence of the video of the event ( I was told initially that no video existed), but I missed the opportunity to tell the Magistrate. It may not have changed his opinion anyway.

Would I do it Again?

I honestly don’t know. If I had a valid Section 25 defence, then yes. But I would raise the words ‘Section 25’ much earlier in the proceedings to leave them in no doubt that I was aware of it.

It would be a lot less stressful the second time around due to my understanding of the process.

If I just wanted to dispute the accuracy of the equipment, then probably not. It would be risky.