Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 26 of 26

Thread: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

  1. #16

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Delisser View Post
    You're kidding arn't you Pin. It happens every day, happens in every State, was also happining when the Nats ran Qld, and happens to be legal.

    PinHead said "This Govt does not care what it does..nearest thing to dictatorship I have ever lived under...they will change rules to suit themselves at any times...but you may want to try and bribe the officers...obviously worked with some coppers and a Minister...and probably a lot more if the truth comes out."

    Too true Pin, I never thought live to see this sort of behaviour from police or Gov Ministers in Qld.

    Cheers
    I was involved in a legal case where a recording of a conversation was deemed illegal...it is not legal in all instances..and if I knew they were recording i would just nod..that would annoy them.

  2. #17

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Mike, what you have said about past history being brought up in court is 100% total BS. The officer's history is totally inadmissable in court, as is any prior offences of the accused. I might add that once it goes to court, it turns criminal, therefore any charges MUST be proven BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, so the officers argument of "Oh, I'm pretty sure old mate's fishing line was in the green zone" will be thrown out faster than a fat kid eats cake, put simply he can't prove it was definately in the green zone. However, those that aren't clued up will still be fined in hopes that they will be too ignorant to realise they've just been duped.

    As for recording video/conversations by authorities,,,,,,also not admissable to prosecute, as Pinhead said. These recordings are only taken and can only be used in the defence of the officer if they are accused of abuse and or assault.

  3. #18

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    I was involved in a legal case where a recording of a conversation was deemed illegal...it is not legal in all instances..and if I knew they were recording i would just nod..that would annoy them.
    Well Pin at least you've gone from "that cannot be done" to "it's not legal in all instances" I think we're getting somewhere.
    Evidence??? I just said that if the officers are confident you're in breach they will hit the record button when you're approached, they always do, goes for police as well. Are you saying they don't Scott?

    Past history being brought up in court total BS??? An officer stating his experience (10 years service ect; as I put it) in not inadmissable at all, in fact it is the norm.

    And Scott, I said "If the officers are confident that your lines are in the Green Zone"
    And you turn that into "Oh, I'm pretty sure old mate's fishing line was in the green zone"
    When used in court that's a fair difference mate.

    Do you two read the posts before commenting on them.
    I suppose it's a mute argument anyway because we all know now you only have to "Tell them to shove it" an they let you off.
    Have a nice weekend guys.

  4. #19

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Mike..if you read my post properly I said that cannot be done if they tried it with me...I don't care if it is legal or not..I would just not reply.

    I have no respect for these EPA officers or whatever they call themselves..they won;t get any cooperation from me at all in any circumstance...I rate them alongside parking meter nazis.

  5. #20

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    why on earth would anyone anchor up that close to a green zone gets me stumped, i know why, but i cant type it on this forum as its kid friendly, to me its guys like that which stir the pot and make all fishos look bad, i have been pulled over quite a number of times by the fisherys and every time they have been more than good to us. Guys like that really piss me off,

  6. #21

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Most police and local law officers these days tape, particularly if they suspect and offence. Under the Invasion of Privacy Act it is not an offense if they are a party to the conversation - they dont have to tell you they are taping.

    The best advice I can give is to give your version clearly and nicely...you never no when you are going to hear it played back to the Court and if you say nothing you risk the court thinking that you are being half smart of beligerant or having somthing to hide. If you think you are totalling incapable of telling your version without making a hash of it then I suppose you could remain mute, but there are certain powers some types of officers have to demand certain details.

    Cheers
    Boat: Seafarer Vagabond
    Live: Great South East....love Moreton Bay fishing

  7. #22

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Quote Originally Posted by ozscott View Post
    Most police and local law officers these days tape, particularly if they suspect and offence. Under the Invasion of Privacy Act it is not an offense if they are a party to the conversation - they dont have to tell you they are taping.

    The best advice I can give is to give your version clearly and nicely...you never no when you are going to hear it played back to the Court and if you say nothing you risk the court thinking that you are being half smart of beligerant or having somthing to hide. If you think you are totalling incapable of telling your version without making a hash of it then I suppose you could remain mute, but there are certain powers some types of officers have to demand certain details.

    Cheers
    what would those be Scott?

  8. #23

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Quote Originally Posted by ozscott View Post
    Most police and local law officers these days tape, particularly if they suspect and offence. Under the Invasion of Privacy Act it is not an offense if they are a party to the conversation - they dont have to tell you they are taping.

    The best advice I can give is to give your version clearly and nicely...you never no when you are going to hear it played back to the Court and if you say nothing you risk the court thinking that you are being half smart of beligerant or having somthing to hide. If you think you are totalling incapable of telling your version without making a hash of it then I suppose you could remain mute, but there are certain powers some types of officers have to demand certain details.

    Cheers
    very true but it can be an offense if that tape recording is played to a third party who is not involved in the original conversation...that was what the legal action I was a witness to involved. And the person that recorded the conversation lost big time. But I guess it is like most of the laws...a lot of ambiguity.

  9. #24

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Mate - there is a public interest section of the act allowing it to be played say to a Court. As for powers - police have powers to require you to produce your license and provide a name. I dont know what specific powers epa and local law have but you can bet they have analagous powers. I for one think that local councils have way way to much regulatory power.

    Cheers
    Boat: Seafarer Vagabond
    Live: Great South East....love Moreton Bay fishing

  10. #25

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Quote Originally Posted by ozscott View Post
    police have powers to require you to produce your license and provide a name. I dont know what specific powers epa and local law have but you can bet they have analagous powers.
    Fisheries Act http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LE.../FisherA94.pdf

    170 Power to stop persons

    (1) An inspector may require a person to stop, and not to move on
    until permitted by the inspector, if the inspector—
    (a) finds the person committing an offence against this Act;
    or
    (b) finds the person in circumstances that lead, or has
    information that leads, the inspector to suspect on
    reasonable grounds the person has just committed an
    offence against this Act.

    (2) The inspector may require the person not to move on only for
    as long as is reasonably necessary for the inspector to exercise
    the inspector’s powers under this Act in relation to the person.

    (3) A person must comply with a requirement under subsection
    (1), unless the person has a reasonable excuse for not
    complying with it.
    Maximum penalty for subsection (3)—200 penalty units.

    171 Power to require name and address

    (1) An inspector may require a person to state the person’s name
    and address if the inspector—
    (a) finds the person committing an offence against this Act;
    or
    (b) finds the person in circumstances that lead, or has
    information that leads, the inspector to suspect on
    reasonable grounds the person has just committed an
    offence against this Act

    (2) When making the requirement, the inspector must warn the
    person it is an offence to fail to state the person’s name and
    address, unless the person has a reasonable excuse.

    (3) The inspector may require the person to give evidence of the
    correctness of the person’s stated name or address if the
    inspector suspects, on reasonable grounds, the stated name or
    address is false.

    (4) A person must comply with an inspector’s requirement under
    subsection (1) or (3), unless the person has a reasonable
    excuse for not complying with it.
    Maximum penalty—200 penalty units.

    (5) The person does not commit an offence against this section
    if—
    (a) the inspector required the person to state the person’s
    name and address on suspicion of the person having
    committed an offence against this Act; and
    (b) the person is not proved to have committed the offence.

    172 Power to require information from certain persons

    (1) This section applies if an inspector suspects, on reasonable
    grounds, that—
    (a) an offence against this Act has been committed; and
    (b) a person may be able to give information about the
    offence.

    (2) The inspector may require the person to give information
    about the offence.

    (3) When making the requirement, the inspector must warn the
    person it is an offence to fail to give the information, unless
    the person has a reasonable excuse.

    (4) The person must comply with the requirement, unless the
    person has a reasonable excuse for not complying with it.
    Maximum penalty—200 penalty units.

    (5) It is a reasonable excuse for the person to fail to give
    information if giving the information might tend to
    incriminate the person.

    (6) The person does not commit an offence against this section if
    the information sought by the inspector is not in fact relevant
    to the offence.

    173 Power to require production of documents

    (1) An inspector may require a person to produce for
    inspection—
    (a) a document required to be kept by the person under this
    Act; or
    (b) if the person is engaged in the business of buying or
    selling fisheries resources by wholesale or retail—a
    document about the buying or selling of fisheries
    resources in the person’s possession.

    (2) A person required under this Act to have a document available
    for immediate inspection must produce it immediately for
    inspection by the inspector or someone else specified by the
    inspector, unless the person has a reasonable excuse for not
    producing it.
    Maximum penalty—500 penalty units.

    (3) In any other case, a person required under this Act to keep a
    document must produce it immediately, or within a
    reasonable time allowed by the inspector, for inspection by
    the inspector or someone else specified by the inspector,
    unless the person has a reasonable excuse for not producing it.
    Maximum penalty—200 penalty units.

    (4) The inspector may keep the document to make a copy of it.

    (5) The inspector must return the document to the person as soon
    as practicable after making the copy.
    Regards

    mod5

  11. #26

    Re: First Angler fined for fishing green zone

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott nthQld View Post
    Mike, what you have said about past history being brought up in court is 100% total BS. The officer's history is totally inadmissable in court, as is any prior offences of the accused. I might add that once it goes to court, it turns criminal, therefore any charges MUST be proven BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, so the officers argument of "Oh, I'm pretty sure old mate's fishing line was in the green zone" will be thrown out faster than a fat kid eats cake, put simply he can't prove it was definately in the green zone. However, those that aren't clued up will still be fined in hopes that they will be too ignorant to realise they've just been duped.

    As for recording video/conversations by authorities,,,,,,also not admissable to prosecute, as Pinhead said. These recordings are only taken and can only be used in the defence of the officer if they are accused of abuse and or assault.
    Sorry to tell you this Scotty and destroy your obviously inexperienced knowledge of the REAL law but in court, in front of a magistrate, I promise you that the LAW, our Westminster System of law that says, "your innocent until proven guilty" is a lie.
    SCENARIO 1) Bloke had argument over the phone with missus. Missus says accused said he was going to drive his car through the house and cut the dogs throat. Accused says "WHAT"??? Magistrate says GUILTY. All heresay. No witnesses or recordings.

    SCENARIO 2) Bloke stops blokes/youths smashing bottles on a school playground across from his house after calling cops and being told by cops they are busy and handle it himself. Bloke cops a gob full of abuse from one of bottle breakers girfriendsl. Bloke gives a gobfull back to said bitch. Boyfriend/bottlebreaker attacks bloke and bloke knocks him on his arse and clean out. Bloke (victim and citizen) calls cops to report. Cops charge bloke with assault. Bloke goes before magistrate buck who is a drunken mate of Bitches father and bloke gets convicted of assault. Agressive bottle breakers get nothing but a bit of sympathy.

    The Australian INJUSTICE system is a joke. Trust me.

    P.S. Your past certainly can be brought up in court. If you agree to recordings, it certainly may be used in court. BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT in our INJUSTICE system means "F#$%CK the evidence, I reckon they are guilty so there. You have to prove your innocence, not them prove you guilty.

    PS Said bloke is ME.
    I CAME INTO THIS WORLD KICKING, SCREAMING AND COVERED IN SOMEONE ELSES BLOOD. I HAVE NO PROBLEM GOING OUT THE SAME WAY.
    NEWBY T.G.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us