Outcome

[9hundred]

No luck whatsoever! I tried to contact you previously for representation on my behalf, however I couldn't get through.
You did signal that "we can beat the lot". Anyway the lawyer I got in the end did a terrible representation of myself, essentially reinforcing the police statement of events, and that I am not really the person painted in the report. Therefore the outcome was a very blunt "well why shouldn't I just send him directly to Prison??". Magistrate Paul Smith at the Moorabbin Court House handed me a suspended jail term+fine+impoundment+"the program".

[Hardy]

I never said you would beat the lot - or anything at all - perhaps because you didn't want to make an appointment to allow me to investigate your case to determine if you could beat the lot. My recollection is that $300 was far too much to spend without a prior guarantee that you would win! You were clearly under the misapprehension that a lawyer could read about your mundane traffic incident on whirlpool and then tell you whether or not you will win. See viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3217&start=18 in case you don't recall. Indeed, you finally inquired about seeing me only one day prior to your hearing!

Sent: 01 Sep 2014 10:44 pm
by 9hundred

No answer from Mary.... well my case is tomorrow, so... ... mmmm yeah.

Re: Moorabin Court House
Sent: 01 Sep 2014 10:38 pm
by Hardy

I'm quite busy and my next available appointment to see someone is 22 September.
Call me on 9225 8661.

The best time to come and see me is prior to your first mention date, not after you lose your case. Your only option now is to suck it up or have your case reheard on appeal to the County Court.

[9hundred]

I recall everything thank you. I was prepared to use your paid service and made several attempts, not just the one. This is feedback on the outcome of the case.

[Day]

I'm not surprised that his version of events maybe slightly skewed. He had trouble with getting his story straight with regards to his interactions with you back over six months ago between here an Whirlpool forums.

[Day]

Received this-

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Daydreaming nobody. Who are you?
Date: Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:40 pm
From: 9hundred
To: Day

What's your problem mr.?? How would you know otherwise? huh. Nothing is "skewed"

In reply. All you need to do is read your posts in Whirpool to know that you had a habit of making shit up when it came to Hardy and other things. It is all archived. Why don't you go for a trip down memory lane and re-acquaint yourself with your posts.

[Day]

To save you time for one lot of them.
https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-r ... &ux=482877

How about you return there and give the gang an update? See what they think?!
Cheers.

[9hundred]

I have never contradicted myself

Sat Jun 20, 2015 8:46 pm
"I never said you would beat the lot - or anything at all"

Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:39 pm
"Its either beat the lot, or you'll be off the road for 12 - 15 months."

[Hardy]

If you have recent drink driving priors it's more likely 12 - 20 months.
Beating only one charge still leaves you with significant licence loss, so you needed to beat the lot.
I'm guessing you got 18 months...

[Gravy]

You did signal that "we can beat the lot".

Does not mean the same as:

Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:39 pm
"Its either beat the lot, or you'll be off the road for 12 - 15 months."

You're not reading what Sean is writing, you're just reading what you want to be told. Frankly, I believe Day.

[Day]

Where did he state that you would beat the lot? He purely stated that you needed to beat the lot to keep on the road. Big difference to saying he would win the case for you.

[Day]

Beat me to it Gravy.

[9hundred]

Quoted statements are exactly that-"Quoted statements".

So, I did get 15 months licence cancellation, as I did not have any prior drinking matters.

[Day]

Well your comprehension of what you're quoting is the issue.

[9hundred]

No, rather your interpretation. Quotes are as stated, especially in regards to LAW.

[Day]

You are seriously deluded. No wonder you copped so much animosity over at WP. Read the quote again. He never promised to win. Only told you what you needed to do. It is in black and white. You just can't get your head around it.

[Day]

This is the actual quote -

Re: 165km/h in an 80zone highway
Postby Hardy » Sun Aug 31, 2014 11:39 pm

Its either beat the lot, or you'll be off the road for 12 - 15 months.
Seeing a lawyer would be a good start if you are interested in winning.

He is advising you what you need to do to which is to "beat the lot" or you will be "off the road for 12 - 15 months" he did not say - " I can beat those charges" or "I will get you off".

[9hundred]

ACTUAL QUOTE

Sat Jun 20, 2015 8:46 pm
"I never said you would beat the lot - or anything at all"

(The Law not open to interpretation ok)

[Day]

Exactly. He never said "you would beat the lot" he said you "needed to beat the lot.....or be off the road" there is a subtle but important difference. No interpretation needed.

[Hardy]

The starting point is to assume that every case can be won. This is consistent with the presumption of innocence.
Put another way - it would be negligent to assume a client will not be acquitted if you have not even looked into it.
So it is essential to see the charge and summons and its usually important to see the police brief. Sometimes you might also need to ask the client one or two questions.

[9hundred]

idiot, you just interpreted the quote!