Leadsled, the incident? occurred in 2013, so like you am wondering why charges are being laid now.
Reckless flying may be difficult to gain a conviction - now that I understand what
actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea means
Have finally (well I think so
) deciphered the difference between absolute and strict liability
In Victoria: Offences under
s 49(1)(f) of the
Road Safety Act 1986 are
absolute liability offences. The assertion of a claim of
honest and reasonable mistake has no effect against such a charge
Where as:In NSW,
drink-driving is an offence of strict liability. Defences of honest and reasonable mistake are available, and sometimes successful. In
DPP v Bone [2005] NSWSC 1239, the accused was found not guilty of drink-driving charges after convincing a magistrate that his beer had been spiked with vodka without his knowledge.
The strict liability offences we are hammered with, have the same defences of an honest and reasonable mistake,I have been told we have one other called external force, although that would have a legal term.
Go here if interested
quis custodiet ipsos custodes: Drinking & driving - no honest and reasonable mistake
In English: Who Guards the Guards
Edit: A random thought: I thought it was the DPP that decided if an offence had been committed, and whether it would succeed at trial ?