Create False Entry in Log Book x 4 (s. 191Z of the Road Safety Act)

Client operated his own business as a truck driver delivering freight interstate. The police alleged that on 4 separate occasions, client had deliberately entered false details as to the distance covered driving his truck over certain periods. The police allege that if the entries were true, the client’s truck would have been travelling at a speed over the permitted limit of 100km/hr.

He was charged with Create False Entry in Log Book x 4 (s. 191Z of the Road Safety Act).

Each offence under s. 191Z carries a maximum fine of $10,000 (100 penalty unit). Although not mandatory, a Magistrate can impose a period of suspension for offences under s. 191Z.

Client worked full-time as a truck driver, and business would fold if subject to any period of time off the road.

Shaun Pascoe represented our client at the Sunshine Magistrates’ Court.

After negotiations with the informant (police officer responsible for laying the charges) and the prosecutor, an application for diversion was made.

The application for diversion was ultimately granted by the relevant Magistrate.

The conditions of the diversion were to be of good behaviour for 3 months.

As a result of the successful application for diversion, the client avoided a heavy fine, he kept his license, and avoids any entry unto his Vic Roads traffic history, as a successful diversion results in the Court dismissing the charges.

 


Shaun PascoeShaun Pascoe

Shaun is an Accredited Criminal Law Specialist and a partner of the firm. Shaun runs the Heidelberg branch of Doogue + George.

He is an experienced criminal law solicitor and works hard to achieve the best possible outcomes for his clients. Shaun handles indictable and summary criminal offences and is an expert at criminal defence for both contested and non-contested cases.

Visit Shaun's profile to read more about his background and experience.

DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 25/02/2013