Old 20th Dec 2015, 10:58
  #82 (permalink)  
Eddie Dean
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
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 ?

Last edited by Eddie Dean; 20th Dec 2015 at 11:38. Reason: more
Eddie Dean is online now