Other motorists have little sympathy for a female driver who intends to contest a hefty fine for holding a phone while driving based on a technicality.
The Queensland mother was issued a citation when a traffic camera in Brisbane captured an image of her with her hands off the steering wheel and a rectangular object in her left hand.
The woman took to social media to inquire if others would contest the fine in her situation, despite the fact that she was holding her cigarette rolling machine and not a phone.
In Queensland, the fine for holding a phone while driving is $1,078 and four demerit points.
Even if the phone is turned off, the penalty still applies if any part of your body is in contact with it.
Australia has deployed a vast surveillance network of mobile phone detection cameras, dramatically increasing the number of individuals caught.
In New South Wales, it has been stated that the new technology has added $61 million to government coffers without necessarily saving lives.
The woman inquired in a public Facebook group about traffic camera locations, “Would you take this to court?”
The fine specifies holding a mobile device or testing on the body. However, it is not a telephone.
“I’m smoking outside the rolling machine. It is evidently not a telephone.’
While some Facebook users believed that contesting the fine was ‘worth a shot,’ the majority did not.
“Your hands are off the wheel,” wrote one individual. “You merit every penny of this fine.”
‘Telling the judge that it’s a rolling machine and not a phone won’t help your case. A judge might not consider it innocent,’ a woman said.
You continue to smoke while driving while preoccupied.
One commenter noted from personal experience that utilizing a rolling machine was still annoying.
My ex-spouse hit three automobiles while smoking a cigarette. He is liable for nearly $40,000 in damages.’
But the driver argued that she wasn’t rolling a cigarette when the camera caught her on the western motorway at Mount Coo-Tha west of Brisbane, and that she had a “pre-made” cigarette in her mouth.
She stayed intent on determining if she could contest the fine on the basis of a literal interpretation of the statute.
“Yes, I had something in my hand, but it was not a phone.” So I cannot be held responsible for something I did not do,’ she stated.
I concur totally I do not claim innocence, as I am not innocent by any means. However, it’s not a phone.
If I am to be penalized, at least it should be for the correct offense.
However, she did not receive much assistance from the organisation that exists to assist people with traffic camera-related issues.
“If you take it to court, they will also cite you for not wearing a seatbelt.” Another woman advised, “Just pay the fine; you may end up worse off.”
A second individual pointed out that regardless of what she was doing, a judge could view her conduct as “dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.”
↯↯↯Read More On The Topic On TDPel Media ↯↯↯
Also On TDPel Media
- Australian city is the most recent to lose its banks
- Shamima Begum’s husband’s Western life before joining ISIS in Syria
- Biden is planning major deportations to Mexico of non-Mexican migrants
- Facebook users can’t find brown snake hidden in Adelaide vineyard steps
- Competing explanations for Nicola Bulley’s disappearance are described
- Australia debuts the recruitment app Hunt, which matches job searchers with companies
- Sex scandal minister Alan Tudge resigns amid death threats to teenage children
- Firefighters call off the first nationwide strike in the United Kingdom since 2003 as they ponder a 7% wage raise
- Bill Gates’s new girlfriend’s daughter is an investigative journalist who exposes abuses of power
- Do I want this for my son? Elizabeth Chambers, Armie Hammer’s ex-wife, speaks