Yeah, I think you're right. I have until Friday to hear back from the longer-term contracts that I've interviewed for, and perhaps even longer than this if it takes some time for the short-term contract to make a decision. It's a weird situation because I know the short-term contract is being paid for out of the manager's discretionary budget, meaning she can hire me on the spot no questions asked if she feels like it. She also made it very clear that I am not going for an interview but instead for a conversation to talk about my skillset and the demands of the job. Which I've never really done before. I'll throw out a few phonecalls to the already interviewed-for positions on Thursday to see if I still even have a shot at them.uziq wrote:
take the experience, and get out of the chicken-and-egg graduate purgatory of 'needing experience for entry-level role'. so long as it is paid you have absolutely nothing to lose. 3-4 month contract is perfect if you know you'll be looking for bigger, better jobs. that's no time at all and you may even discover a few things about the career itself that you didn't know before.Pocshy2.0 wrote:
So as you all know (thanks to my timely updates) I am on the job hunt. My school has employer profile binders designed to help head-hunters place our students. I got a call from one of these head hunters looking to fill a short term contract with the Ontario government. Great. Meeting scheduled.
So here's the problem: Do I take an almost guaranteed short-term contract (3-4 months) and build some experience, or do I wait to hear back from other positions I've interviewed for that are longer-term but stand a lower chance of landing?
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +635|3712
Yes, if you want to fight a speeding ticket they have to summon a grand jury of your peers. This is a very long legal process where you would need to get a lawyer. Within a few blocks of every traffic court is at least one lawyer's office who specializes in traffic offenses who will fill out paperwork on your behalf for usually much less than the ticket. $100 to a traffic lawyer is a lot better than $400 for reckless driving. You don't even have to show up in court after you you get the lawyer involved. You just get the reduced court ticket or letter absolving you of the ticket in the mail.Cybargs wrote:
Generally its much better to wear a suit to court to show 'respect' to a court. Some judges care some don't, but it's not worth risking it. I've seen homeless dudes wearing a suit to court, judges are somehow way more sympathetic.Jay wrote:
If it's minor you can just plead guilty and send them a check. If it's more serious like DUI you have to show up.DrunkFace wrote:
so everyone who gets a speeding or parking ticket has to go to court? What a waste of time.
Same. You have to rock up to court for DUI since they give penalties and you can challenge it.
Ken: are traffic tickets jury trials? Local court offences are magistrate trials (much faster) while indictable offences (5 years+ gaol) are jury trials.
95% of people plea guilty anyway. we got court discounts.
It is a pretty corrupt system if you think about it. But it's the American way.
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
You have two options - plead guilty or plead not guilty and get a date for your trial. The judge is there to give you the fine if you plead guilty or give you the court date if you plead not guilty.
both the above options require a visit to court, no? The second requires 2 visits.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Yeah. That's why I responded to Cybargs with "what you described is essentially what our traffic court is." I thought it was very clear but I guess not?
You forgot the first part - "You can't talk your way out of a ticket in front of a judge." This implies that the person is already IN court - something you don't need to do, as Cybargs mentioned in his post and I was reaffirming.
yeh you don't NEED to go to court here for the first bit as they just set the date for your trial like ken said but I felt it was probably better to plead guilty in court than by post as it shows I'm taking it more seriously. Again not sure it made any difference and couldn't find anything to confirm or deny that theory but I did it anyway.
I am wondering if I should've tried to fight it now though, it would've been a bigger fine if I was found guilty but might've been worth trying.
I am wondering if I should've tried to fight it now though, it would've been a bigger fine if I was found guilty but might've been worth trying.
Though if it goes to trial they can take the piss and make you pay their fees:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … -bill.html
lol
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … -bill.html
lol
Fighting it when you're 100% caught red handed isn't really a good idea. Don't know about the UK but in Aus the earlier you plea, the more 'sentencing discount' you get as it 'saves the courts time' and shows 'remorse'Dauntless wrote:
yeh you don't NEED to go to court here for the first bit as they just set the date for your trial like ken said but I felt it was probably better to plead guilty in court than by post as it shows I'm taking it more seriously. Again not sure it made any difference and couldn't find anything to confirm or deny that theory but I did it anyway.
I am wondering if I should've tried to fight it now though, it would've been a bigger fine if I was found guilty but might've been worth trying.
I've heard judges give a little speech before the court is in session - "You have three options. You can plead not guilty and we will set a preliminary trial date; You can plead guilty and get assessed your fine (and usually I will do whatever is within my powers to lower that fine if you show remorse); or you can plead guilty with a reason. I will allow you to explain your reason but I will not lower your fine at all."
Even after that, people go up and try to plead guilty and offer a reason, and/or argue with the judge. It makes me cringe and laugh every time.
What do my little anecdotes tell? Mostly that I've been to court faaar more times than I'd like to admit. I was a bad kid growing up
Even after that, people go up and try to plead guilty and offer a reason, and/or argue with the judge. It makes me cringe and laugh every time.
What do my little anecdotes tell? Mostly that I've been to court faaar more times than I'd like to admit. I was a bad kid growing up
I was caught by a policeman with a speed gun, I was definitely going above 40 but honestly didn't think it was 72. Also there was a BMW that was in front of me the whole time so he was doing at least my speed.
Supposedly the policeman was pointing the gun at me and not him but that's just my word against his I guess... Also his written report confused a few immaterial facts like which lanes we were in.
I dunno, if I'd have had a dash cam I might've fought it.
Anyway... definitely need to invest in one of these:
https://store.valentine1.com/store/
Supposedly the policeman was pointing the gun at me and not him but that's just my word against his I guess... Also his written report confused a few immaterial facts like which lanes we were in.
I dunno, if I'd have had a dash cam I might've fought it.
Anyway... definitely need to invest in one of these:
https://store.valentine1.com/store/
or you could just slow the fuck down
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +635|3712
It is really great that the U.S. has sub-par infrastructure sometimes. We don't have traffic cameras like that in our tunnels. NJ just got rid of all our red light cameras. And I never even seen a speed camera.globefish23 wrote:
I overtook a slower car on the right in a tunnel, which stayed in the fast lane, 10% below the speed limit.
Either one of the other drivers reported me, or the surveillance cameras saw me, because I got a €70 ticket.
Nah I'm not a boy racer - I just sometimes like to put my foot down a bitKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
or you could just slow the fuck down
Yeah and if a cop pulls you over you can just hand him your get out of jail free cardSuperJail Warden wrote:
It is really great that the U.S. has sub-par infrastructure sometimes. We don't have traffic cameras like that in our tunnels. NJ just got rid of all our red light cameras. And I never even seen a speed camera.globefish23 wrote:
I overtook a slower car on the right in a tunnel, which stayed in the fast lane, 10% below the speed limit.
Either one of the other drivers reported me, or the surveillance cameras saw me, because I got a €70 ticket.
hahaha what a system
Take this job, work hard and see if they extend your contract.Pocshy2.0 wrote:
Yeah, I think you're right. I have until Friday to hear back from the longer-term contracts that I've interviewed for, and perhaps even longer than this if it takes some time for the short-term contract to make a decision. It's a weird situation because I know the short-term contract is being paid for out of the manager's discretionary budget, meaning she can hire me on the spot no questions asked if she feels like it. She also made it very clear that I am not going for an interview but instead for a conversation to talk about my skillset and the demands of the job. Which I've never really done before. I'll throw out a few phonecalls to the already interviewed-for positions on Thursday to see if I still even have a shot at them.uziq wrote:
take the experience, and get out of the chicken-and-egg graduate purgatory of 'needing experience for entry-level role'. so long as it is paid you have absolutely nothing to lose. 3-4 month contract is perfect if you know you'll be looking for bigger, better jobs. that's no time at all and you may even discover a few things about the career itself that you didn't know before.Pocshy2.0 wrote:
So as you all know (thanks to my timely updates) I am on the job hunt. My school has employer profile binders designed to help head-hunters place our students. I got a call from one of these head hunters looking to fill a short term contract with the Ontario government. Great. Meeting scheduled.
So here's the problem: Do I take an almost guaranteed short-term contract (3-4 months) and build some experience, or do I wait to hear back from other positions I've interviewed for that are longer-term but stand a lower chance of landing?
Meanwhile if you're still interested in the other work and get offers then just quit.
I always say it's better to be selfish in these situations because it's your life and chances are your employer wouldn't think twice about asking you to leave if they were facing resourcing issues.
If all else fails, you're welcome to my job if you can bear it...
So I guess I'm not the only one who has had to attend the Speed Awareness course to avoid the points. Everyone there blamed their speeding and road rage on London cyclists...Dauntless wrote:
I was caught by a policeman with a speed gun, I was definitely going above 40 but honestly didn't think it was 72. Also there was a BMW that was in front of me the whole time so he was doing at least my speed.
Supposedly the policeman was pointing the gun at me and not him but that's just my word against his I guess... Also his written report confused a few immaterial facts like which lanes we were in.
I dunno, if I'd have had a dash cam I might've fought it.
Anyway... definitely need to invest in one of these:
https://store.valentine1.com/store/
This. Plus employers will most likely appreciate that you've accepted even short time options for getting the experience. Also you never know who you might talk to at the short term place.uziq wrote:
take the experience, and get out of the chicken-and-egg graduate purgatory of 'needing experience for entry-level role'. so long as it is paid you have absolutely nothing to lose. 3-4 month contract is perfect if you know you'll be looking for bigger, better jobs. that's no time at all and you may even discover a few things about the career itself that you didn't know before.Pocshy2.0 wrote:
So as you all know (thanks to my timely updates) I am on the job hunt. My school has employer profile binders designed to help head-hunters place our students. I got a call from one of these head hunters looking to fill a short term contract with the Ontario government. Great. Meeting scheduled.
So here's the problem: Do I take an almost guaranteed short-term contract (3-4 months) and build some experience, or do I wait to hear back from other positions I've interviewed for that are longer-term but stand a lower chance of landing?
Hehe. Reminds me of when I got my first (and so far only) ticket. Was in a hurry after some icehockey (back home to take a shower and get going to the clubs) and I was speeding on the highway in a 100km/h zone. Wellll there was a Kawasaki with them blue light waiting behind a bush and he came after me. Copper told me he didn't get my speed, but the car I went past had a 142km/h reading... As there was no point in denying anything I was being completely honest with him and he was pretty cool to me. As the fine is based on your income over here (google speeding tickets and Finland and you have something bizarre to laugh at) I told him how much I earned, he said "nah, your income is probably more like this and that" and went way below what I told him. Also got to keep my license. Cool cops do exist.Dauntless wrote:
I was caught by a policeman with a speed gun, I was definitely going above 40 but honestly didn't think it was 72. Also there was a BMW that was in front of me the whole time so he was doing at least my speed.
Supposedly the policeman was pointing the gun at me and not him but that's just my word against his I guess... Also his written report confused a few immaterial facts like which lanes we were in.
I dunno, if I'd have had a dash cam I might've fought it.
Anyway... definitely need to invest in one of these:
https://store.valentine1.com/store/
Never had a ticket, never been to court, I was once stopped for "driving carefully".
If you have to go to court wear a suit, its a no-brainer.
If you have to go to court wear a suit, its a no-brainer.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X wrote:
Never had a ticket, never been to court, I was once stopped for "driving carefully".
Doesn't surprise me.
The "first bit" doesn't exist in Australia. The only reason you would ever go to court or see a judge is if you were fighting the ticket. It's no that you don't have to go, you literally can't.Dauntless wrote:
yeh you don't NEED to go to court here for the first bit as they just set the date for your trial like ken said but I felt it was probably better to plead guilty in court than by post as it shows I'm taking it more seriously. Again not sure it made any difference and couldn't find anything to confirm or deny that theory but I did it anyway.
I am wondering if I should've tried to fight it now though, it would've been a bigger fine if I was found guilty but might've been worth trying.
You get pulled over by the cops they give you a ticket with your fine. The amount is predetermined by your speed above the limit. You then have 2 options:
1. Pay the fine like you would any other bill. ie go to the website and use credit card/direct debt etc. or go to a post office and choose whatever payment method you want. You have I think 2 or 4 weeks to do this.
2. You fight the ticket, organise a court date, argue your case in front of a judge (no jury).
This applies to most minor traffic offenses. Speeding, parking, not wearing seat belt, talking on phone, not indicating, running a light etc.
This is a lot of talk for us all to be confirming that we're saying the same thing.
Tell you what, I did one of those speed awareness courses a few months ago to avoid points but it was a special course just for people caught speeding over Tower Bridge. The only one of it's kind apparently...teddy..jimmy wrote:
So I guess I'm not the only one who has had to attend the Speed Awareness course to avoid the points. Everyone there blamed their speeding and road rage on London cyclists...Dauntless wrote:
I was caught by a policeman with a speed gun, I was definitely going above 40 but honestly didn't think it was 72. Also there was a BMW that was in front of me the whole time so he was doing at least my speed.
Supposedly the policeman was pointing the gun at me and not him but that's just my word against his I guess... Also his written report confused a few immaterial facts like which lanes we were in.
I dunno, if I'd have had a dash cam I might've fought it.
Anyway... definitely need to invest in one of these:
https://store.valentine1.com/store/
It's so stupid. Because Tower Bridge is a 'monument' they don't have to make the signage or cameras as visible as they usually do. Spent over two hours just talking about Tower Bridge.
What a waste of my life
Sounds like an angry letter waiting to be written. I know I'd be interested in reading it.
Sounds like you're being sarcastic but I'm going to write that letter and you're going to be fucking interested
be glad you don't drive in 'Merica. i've been to a speed awareness course in every county of this state, and now they actually track you. the posted limit in the middle of the state is 80 mph (we call it Upper Buttcrack, Utah) and if you do eighty you'll get run over by a crack-head trying to get to Vegas before the buffet deal is over.Dauntless wrote:
What a waste of my life
Cyclists are actually worth 2 points, and if you can prove they were over the line you get to mount their head over your fireplace. My wife get's pissed when i mount their head because she knows i won't clean up after them . . .
Nope, not sarcastic. I would actually take the time to read the letter. Do I think the letter will do anything? No. But I would still read it.Dauntless wrote:
Sounds like you're being sarcastic but I'm going to write that letter and you're going to be fucking interested