Fine

The status quo of the courts system in Victoria

Dear Department of Justice,

I am writing to tell you about a recent experience I had going through your court system.

On January this year I was riding my bike to work and got stopped by the police when I dismounted the bicycle and started crossing what I recall, was a green pedestrian light.

I don’t actually remember what the police officer said to me from inside his car, but he asked for my details; name, address and date of birth. Given there’s not much to win when you decide to argue with the police I thought, I gave them my details and off I went to the office.

A few weeks later I received a paper-written fine -which I so wished I had taken a photo of- for running a traffic light. The cost; $450. Not only was I getting a fine for something I thought I hadn’t done, but the fine was hand-written in an envelop-size piece of paper which looked like a kid had written, specially given it had my name spelled wrong.

I had always wondered what the process of contesting a fine was like:

• What are the chances that If I contest a fine I could win?
• Do I need to get a lawyer or can I represent myself?
• Could we be spending more resources on those that most needed, instead of contesting fines like these?

So given I was pretty sure my memory was correct and I was curious to solve these questions, I decided to contest the fine. I circled the contest the fine option, bought an envelop and post the letter to the police.

I remember telling my story to a few of my colleagues and buddies and how incredible that running a pedestrian crossing was so expensive and the fact that the police was trying to be avoid pedestrian mischief with traditional fines when behavioural change tactics has been proven to be a lot more successful. See examples here and here.

Weeks went by and I didn’t receive any correspondence. I thought I had dodged it. Maybe all you needed to do when you got a fine was to contest it and voila, it disappears.

A few months later around June I think, I was proven wrong; I received a fine for not appearing in court that sat on top of my other fine and a notice that I could get into further trouble. The matter had been heard in court and I hadn’t shown up.

According to the fine I received there was a way to apply for a rehearsing in case I needed it. I decided to do this given I had not received any information about my court appearance. The process was a lot longer to deal with, but here is a short version:

• I went to Magistrate’s court to inform the court I had not receive any information about the hearing
• I was informed I needed to send a physical document to the police
• After visiting the Victorian police I found the letter needed to be sent to the station where the officers that fined me were based, not delivered to the Victorian police station
• Once I sent the letter I went back to the Magistrate’s court and I got a letter to apply for rehearing with a date for it

On the application to rehearing day I had to go to court and wait to be called. Whilst I got called to be at court at 9am as soon as the doors open, people line up to register. It’s an interesting process given that every person whether they have registered or not will get called before the judge based on the cases that get scheduled for that day. Is it in case you were there, but left the court and that somehow counts more than not being there? Not sure.

I also found that the courts are still using paper, LOTS of paper. And faxes too.

paper, lots of it

Luckily the application for a rehearing was pretty straight forward and got granted in 3 weeks time; September 12.

On rehearing day I called Victorian Legal Aid to find out if there was anything I should be aware of in the process given that I didn’t have any legal background and was representing myself. I was lucky Victorian Legal Aid opened their call centre before 9am given that I left it until the last minute to seek legal help. The person I spoke to mentioned they couldn’t give me recommendations but if I thought I was not guilty I could ask for a Summary Case Conference, a special way to review evidence.

Apart from that, I had nothing else to contest what I thought was my word against a police officer’s.

Upon being called, the judge read the charge; running a red traffic light on a bicycle. At that point it didn’t click that the charge was something completely different to what had happened in my mind; walking my bicycle on a green pedestrian light. I explained to the judge what had happened and he asked the officer for further details from my file given the 2 statements were completely different.

After the officer looked through all the paper files he had on his desk, he found nothing; I didn’t have a file. Luckily you can request one and in a couple of hours I got called up again as my file had arrived. My file made it to the court but it didn’t make any mention if I was riding or walking my bike.

I thought how the system relies on police officers making notes of every matter. On this case it was a pedestrian crossing, but what if it had been something more serious?

At this stage something that I never thought it could happen at court took place. The police officer asked the judge if he could have a word with me before we continued. I thought “what have I done wrong?”, “what is this guy going to tell me?”

The police officer said that if I pleaded guilty, he would strongly suggest to the judge to dismiss the case. I’m sure I’m not using the exact terminology, but that’s essentially what he said. I’m also sure I wasn’t the only case when a police officer intervenes when they suspect the court should be dealing with much bigger problems. This however, baffled me; both for the fact the the police was trying to get me out of the situation, but also that there was a loop hole that involved agreeing to be guilty of something that I was not, instead of having a legitimate system on how this could be organised.

I’m sure this is incredibly common, but it shows how people who are at the margins of society have to deal with a system that has not evolved since it was established.

I can’t deny I was feeling quite happy. It seemed that I was going to get away.

I pleaded not guilty.

Given there wasn’t enough information on my file for the judge to make a decision, the police officer suggested making a Case Conference to review the details.

20–30 minutes later I got called to meet with the police officer to review the details of my case. After a short conversation we identified there wasn’t enough information and there were 3 options:

• plead not guilty and have the police officer who gave me the fine attend court on a different day. I asked myself, what are the chances that a police officer will remember if I was riding my bike or not, on a morning 10 months ago or accept he had made a mistake.
• plead guilty and hope the judge will dismiss the charges based on the recommendations from the police officer to dismiss them. For this, I could ask for a sentence indication were the judge tells you what he’s planning to say
• apply to the police to have my case diverted, meaning the charges get dropped and I get dismissed. This was a recommendation from a Barrister who happened to be standing behind me.

I went with the case being diverted given it felt somewhere in the middle and it seemed to be a fairer option. I went back to court.

The last time I was called, the judge read the police’s recommendations to divert my case and made one of those face expressions when you are surprised at what people come up with. He asked, if we divert the case it means that I was accepting the charges of running a traffic light, but given what we had discussed, I was walking my bike and legally, riding is different from walking so this would have to be a completely different charge.

I hadn’t registered this piece, but given I was there I said yes, I accepted the charges.

The judged asked me again given I had clearly mentioned I was not riding my bike. At this point I lost my strategy whether I should be pleading guilty or not guilty and said to the judge; I’m doing this because it was a recommendation one of the barristers that works here did and something the police officer agreed to do. You know what I did, and my intentions here are to not pay for something I didn’t do, prove myself and others that the system is not always right and more importantly, don’t waste public resources that should be going to things that deserve a lot more attention than this. So I’m not sure what to do.

The judged a bit perplexed said, I needed to come up with a decision on what I wanted to do.

I pleaded guilty so I could get my case diverted. I was annoyed and I could see the judge agreed with me, that the justice system needs to change.

I want to help.

During my day to day I work with an organisation called Code for Australia that is helping government come up with new technologies and processed to deliver better services. I’m incredibly glad we’re starting to work more on this space that really needs to change. We worked with the Neighbourhood Justice Centre and build a new triaging system, an intranet and an online tool to plead guilty for those people with minor offences. We also have an application to the Google Impact Challenge to find ways technology can help those with a criminal record and people in prison access services easier and more efficiently.

I really believe this is just the beginning and just like the judge acknowledged that the system needs to change I agree with him, but to change this is going to take us all and is going to take us forever, but then, that’s the point.

I also want to acknowledge and thank all the people I came across, from the police officers to the judges. They were incredibly helpful, amicable and had a sense of purpose to their job, something not everyone can say. Thank you for your service.