Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Crime Transportation Your Rights Online

Online Forum Speeding Boast Leads To Conviction 457

Posted by Soulskill
from the life-in-the-fast-lane dept.
Meshach writes "In Canada, a nineteen-year-old man has lost his driving license for six months and is facing one year of probation after the police arrested him for dangerous driving as a result of a post on an online message board. The tip apparently came from an uninvolved American who called the Canadian authorities after he saw the post bragging about how fast the man went."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Online Forum Speeding Boast Leads To Conviction

Comments Filter:
  • by tumutbound (549414) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:11AM (#33213054)
    What evidence was there, other than the bloggers post, that an offence had occurred? How could the police charge him without it?
    • by odies (1869886) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:16AM (#33213068)

      What evidence was there, other than the bloggers post, that an offence had occurred?
      How could the police charge him without it?

      He admitted it himself. Admitting your crimes on the internet are no different than admitting them in real life. There also were pictures and videos of his crime.

      Same laws apply to Internet as real life. It would be pretty stupid to go tell police that. Well, they can read the internet too.

      • by Trepidity (597) <delirium-slashdot@hacki s h . o rg> on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:34AM (#33213156)

        I think the pictures and videos are the important elements, because they constitute actual evidence. Otherwise, there are fairly stringent tests for what makes something a legitimate confession that's admissible in court. People do sometimes brag about things they didn't actually do, especially in pseudo-anonymous environments, and that isn't a crime. It may be stupid, and it may cause you a lot of hassle as you try to convince police / a judge that you were just making empty boasts, but courts do still have to try to sort that out: if they determine the confession was indeed not a genuine confession, it isn't sufficient for conviction.

        For things of this sort, I don't think police would normally pursue it even IRL unless there were more evidence (like the photos/video in this case). If someone in a high-school hallway tells their friend that they were going 90 last night, that's pretty weak evidence, since it's quite likely to just be bravado.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by macemoneta (154740)

          As far as I understand, pictures and video are not evidence unless someone testifies to their veracity. Under questioning, all he has to do is say he photoshopped the "evidence" for his own amusement at the reaction they would provoke in the forum. I suspect what happened instead is that he verified that the media were real to the police, and that's why he was charged. That's speculation though, as the article doesn't have enough information to determine the basis for the charge.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Antony-Kyre (807195)

            This should be modded up. I was going to say something similar. Someone could be bragging and be using doctored video indeed. But, more importantly, is there a timestamp to the video? Like, maybe someone did it years ago. What prevents from someone being charged multiple times for the same crime if there lacks a timestamp? Aside from one's aging body.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by jimicus (737525)

          I think the pictures and videos are the important elements, because they constitute actual evidence. Otherwise, there are fairly stringent tests for what makes something a legitimate confession that's admissible in court. People do sometimes brag about things they didn't actually do, especially in pseudo-anonymous environments, and that isn't a crime. It may be stupid, and it may cause you a lot of hassle as you try to convince police / a judge that you were just making empty boasts, but courts do still have to try to sort that out: if they determine the confession was indeed not a genuine confession, it isn't sufficient for conviction.

          Which is not to say it won't fuck your life up royally.

          Interviewer: "So, can you explain what you've been doing for the last 9 months?"
          Interviewee: "I was remanded in custody because I wanted to look big and clever and so bragged about a serious crime which I didn't commit"
          Interviewer: "Okay, so we've established that you're a prat. Have you got any questions you'd like to ask me?"

        • by sosume (680416)

          > I think the pictures and videos are the important elements, because they constitute actual evidence.

          How are they sure the evidence isn't tampered with? Did the camera correctly register the vehicle's speed? Have the pictures been edited?

        • by thegarbz (1787294)

          If someone in a high-school hallway tells their friend that they were going 90 last night, that's pretty weak evidence, since it's quite likely to just be bravado.

          And if overheard by the teacher it would likely land you in the principles office. And if you then admitted it again to the principle by pleading guilty you'll likely get ... [won't go into if your school can punish you for something outside of school but the point was made].

          I'm willing to bet that any dumbshit lawyer could have fought this off, this guy just said "guilty".

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Jeff DeMaagd (2015)

          The CBC story doesn't mention photos and videos.

      • by Teun (17872)
        The Netherlands is not the only country where the legal system will never convict someone based solely on his own statement.

        A fair system of justice should never rely on (such) a single point of failure.

      • by jabuzz (182671)

        In the United Kingdom even a signed confession is insufficient to get a conviction. There *MUST* be other corrborating evidence. Unfortuantely people with learning disabilities and other problems have in the past confessed to crimes right up to murder when they where in fact innocent, in the process leaving dangerous criminals roaming free.

    • "A 19-year-old man from a Toronto suburb has pleaded guilty to careless driving"

      I'm not sure about newspeak. Is there a tripleplusstupid? Speeding on a residential street is stupid. Bragging online was stupid. PLEADING GUILTY was the tripleplus part of it. Had I been stupid enough to pull the first two stupidities, I certainly wouldn't have admitted to a judge that it were so.

      "Your Honor, I wasn't going half as fast as I claimed - I was just bragging for all those dilrods on the forum! Hell, man, I'm

    • So the police asked if he'd been speeding as he had bragged. he admitted it. Where's the need for any evidence. The guy doesn't sound particularly bright (for oh, so many reasons) and I would guess that he wasn't too good at thinking up plausible excuses.
  • A BMW? (Score:3, Funny)

    by cgenman (325138) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:16AM (#33213072) Homepage

    Doesn't he know he should be driving an Audi now [thespoof.com]?

    • Re:A BMW? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Xest (935314) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:56AM (#33213230)

      I'm not sure why that's posted on a spoof site, in my experience it's quite fucking true! BMWs seem pretty common and run of the mill in the UK now and I don't really encounter many that are driven badly above the norm for most cars, One series seem common as muck and I even saw one with one of those learner signs on the top of it the other day which made me chuckle.

      Most Audi drivers on the other hand, there's generally two types, there's the middle England Daily Mail reading wife who drives one because her husband bought her it and she thinks it makes her cool but actually scares the living shit out of her to drive so she sticks to 30mph on safe 60mph roads, and then there's the dickhead, who drives 60mph on safe 30mph roads, overtaking on blind corners down country lanes because he thinks the national speed limit sign means "Drive as fast as you fucking can at a minimum of 60mph down every part of this road", when in reality it means something along the lines of "Drive whatever speed is safe for the section of the road you are on, upto 60mph on safe open straight parts with good visibility".

      But then it's also no suprise that on the 25 mile commute each way a day I do, that the cars I see in bushes are also nearly always Audis, driven by both types of driver- the dickhead who lost control, and the middle England Daily Mail reading wife who did a 90 degree turn off the side of the road into a ditch because a tractor was coming the other way on the other side of the road towards her at 10mph and that made her panic.

      Still, it could be worse, at least they're not the annoying Nissan Micra and Fiat 500 drivers that seem to exist solely to slow the flow of traffic down to something like 5mph on every stretch of road possible whilst still managing to drift across the other side of the road because turning the wheel to navigate a 2 mile long 10 degree turn is just too much for them!

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by zippthorne (748122)

        On my 45 mile commute each way, the only cars I ever see in the bushes have red and blue lights bolted to the top, and everyone slows down by 10-20 mph when approaching one whether speeding or not. They're a real menace.

        • by Teun (17872)
          He was referring to the UK, for starters they commonly drive on the other side of the road.
  • by captain_dope_pants (842414) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:16AM (#33213076)
    Heisenberg got pulled over for speeding. The cop says "Do you know how fast you were going?" And Heisenberg sayd "No, but I know exactly where I am."
    • by Jedi Alec (258881) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @06:07AM (#33213274)

      In this season's last episode of Top Gear there was a review of iirc a Ferrari where the same screen was used for the satnav and the digital speedometer, so one can have either one or the other, but not at the same time. The perfect car for Heisenberg. :)

    • I posted the same joke [slashdot.org] a few days ago. Maybe I should issue a DMCA notice :)

    • A quantum memory may be all scientists need to beat the limit of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, according to a paper published in Nature Physics.

      According to a group of researchers, maximally entangling a particle with a quantum memory and measuring one of the particle's variables, like its position, should snap the quantum memory in a corresponding state, which could then be measured.

      This would allow them to do something long thought verboten by the laws of physics: figure out the state of certain pai

  • by feedayeen (1322473) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:17AM (#33213086)
    I am here telling you guys that my car was traveling at 299,792,459 m/s along the I80 free way, it only took me 1/10,000th of a second to reach my destination though so nobody else saw.
  • He was speeding as a result of a post on an online message board?
  • by HonestButCurious (1306021) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @05:40AM (#33213184) Journal
    There you go [5series.net]
    • by SeaFox (739806) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @06:05AM (#33213266)

      I'm actually rather impressed at the attitude of the other forum members. Most of them felt it was a bad choice and put pedestrians who might have been in the area at risk, suggesting the racer should go to a local track instead to wind up his wheels.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by socrplayr813 (1372733)

        I've actually been a part of a few car forums and that's usually the attitude I run into. It's generally just the occasional young asshole who openly admits to speeding like that. The rest either speak out against it or at least don't admit to it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Robert Zenz (1680268)
      He went 90mph in a residential street? And then he's saying that he's a careful and experienced driver with 19? I do not own a drivers license (because I didn't needed one or cared about it) so I'm not going to pretend that I know what I'm talking about, but...can we get a ban for some years on such people?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Excerpt:

      #1 by bmw550ifreak > The title says it all basically. Anyways, yesterday I was going back home during the day time after the GYM, and when I hit the street next to my house " Appleblosom dr" the zone there is 40 km/h, as soon as I turn into that street, I stopped the car, pressed the (M) button, DSC off, max short shift, and take off 1st gear ( 8000 RPM, switch) and so on... I hit 140 in like 6 or less seconds lol, some old guy was standing on the sidewalk tlaking to another guy, he had a pencil

    • by Malc (1751)

      What an idiot. Should have locked him up for two years... see how fast he can race out of the showers.

      IIRC, some kids racing in Toronto (Mt. Pleasant area?) one evening at 140 caused an accident that killed a taxi driver a couple of years ago. He left a family with young kids behind him. I've driven in a lot of countries, but some of the worse driving (yes, worse than in Shanghai!) has been in Toronto and along the 401 and 400 (overly fast, tailgating, etc). People in that area seem to have no clue abou

  • by abhi_beckert (785219) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @06:42AM (#33213418)

    As someone who owns a motorbike with similar performance to that M5 (though it's almost 10 times cheaper!), I have to say there really are times when 100KPH over the speed limit is still safe.

    I don't know if these particular circumstances were safe... but he may have been able to accelerate to that speed and drop back down to safe speeds over a very short stretch of road... one where you may have perfect visibility of potential dangers.

    Laws based on fixed speed/rules suck. There should be only one offense: driving dangerously under the conditions. Traffic police should be required to prove that it was dangerous every time.

    Disclaimer: I was recently fined $300 for something that would have, at the very worst, given me a few bruises if I'd fallen off my bike.

    • by hey! (33014) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @08:40AM (#33214068) Homepage Journal

      100 km/hr over the speed limit safe?

      Not on public roads. 100 km/hr period is not safe on a residential street or any other roadway that gets significant pedestrian traffic crossing.

      Part of driving safely is being predictable, and nobody expects somebody to overtake them from a quarter km back in under ten seconds. I had a friend who once pulled this stunt on me. We were on a relatively deserted stretch of interstate in his brand new sports car when he turned to me and said, "watch this." Then he punched it. It was like going to hyperspeed. We hit 155 mph (200 km/hr).

      At 200km/hr the horizon comes up very fast. There was an underpass with a slight rise past it, and as we zoomed under it I thought, "what if there's a little econobox trying to pass a big rig up this grade?"

      As important as control is to driving safety, it's a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition. A machine that gives you plenty of control allows you to drive faster than is safe with the illusion of safety, until you discover you need inhumanly fast reflexes to avoid trouble. Furthermore, my friend was totally focused on what was in front of him (as was I). For all we knew we were leaving a dangerous trail of startled drivers behind us.

      If I'd been a cop, I'd have arrested my friend on the spot, friend or not. If I'd been the judge, I'd have thrown him in jail. It was an incredibly stupid, inconsiderate, and unnecessary thing to do. Fortunately my friend got the message, and shortly thereafter he found a closed track and got the need for speed out of his system, becoming an exemplary driver after that.

      Nobody's impressed by your ability to drive faster than most people would on a residential street. That doesn't take balls, it just takes a willingness to endanger other people who, by the way, don't get to share in the fun. Go to the track, where you can push yourself as far as you dare, and we'll see what you're made of.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SpeedyDX (1014595)

      You misunderstand the point of the rules of the road. They're not to punish drivers after they've driven dangerously. They're an attempt to prevent drivers from ever driving dangerously. So when you get to the point where a situation may turn dangerous, the law should have the power to stop you. Driving is not some game. Lives are at stake. Nobody gives a shit if YOU bruise your knee, or if YOU fall off and die because of a stupid decision you make. That's why there are tracks that let you drive faster than

      • by tehcyder (746570) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @11:02AM (#33215626) Journal

        Speed limits generally take into consideration road conditions and population density. They're not simply arbitrary.

        Of course they're arbitrary. In the UK you have a speed limit of 60mph (max) for single lane roads, 70 mph for dual-carriageways motorways.

        The single track road might be a congested winding country lane or an empty dead straight smooth A-road.

        The motorway might be crawling like the M25 during rush hour orbe light on traffic with two clear lanes and excellent visibility.

        There are plenty of times when you can get to 180 mph (talking about bikes) and not be dangerous. The middle of a city is *obviously* not one of them.

        I can't believe the number of posts on this thread which on any other subject would have attracted a derisory "but think of the children" flood of sneers.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Abstrackt (609015)

      As someone who owns a motorbike ... I have to say there really are times when 100KPH over the speed limit is still safe.

      (and that says enough)

      Don't be an idiot. Seriously.

      I was driving safely under the conditions once, following the speed limit, wearing the gear, and a truck didn't stop at a stop sign. I hit that truck at highway speeds and spent nearly two years in rehab, and that was when doing everything right. The day after I landed in the hospital some kid had hit a dog in a residential zone and ended up in a coma, and from what I heard he did everything right as well. One guy I knew put his bike down and broke his leg when a bee flew in

  • The Track (Score:3, Informative)

    by whisper_jeff (680366) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @07:28AM (#33213586)
    From the thread, skelevirus had it right:

    How about this rocket scientist, take your baby to the track. Go as fast as u want

    Bought a kickass cool car that goes fast fast fast? Go for it - take it to the track and drop the hammer and see what the car is really made of. The public streets, with kids and grandmas and, you know, everyone else in the damn world, is not the track. Getting someone else killed just so you can enjoy an adrenaline rush is disgusting.

    I'm glad the cops nailed him - I wish they'd confiscated the car (100kmh above the speed limit is, to say the least, excessive).

  • It's just a shame that this moron didn't weed himself harmlessly out of the gene pool and save Canada the cost of prosecuting his sorry ass.

  • by antifoidulus (807088) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @07:56AM (#33213726) Homepage Journal
    100 kph over the speed limit?! I didn't even think you could get a moose to run that fast! Whats he feeding him?
  • The Real Story.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by kevinNCSU (1531307) on Wednesday August 11, 2010 @12:17PM (#33216444)
    If you read the original forum [5series.net], his real problem is he admitted he was a telemarketing manager. After that he was pretty much fucked.

Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too." -- Dave Haynie

Working...