1

Topic: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Back the Author: VladD2 Date: 30.05 22:34 photos of the decision containing a motivation part are More low resulted. Actually, as well as in last times I expect from you a wise advice. Last councils helped me much. Though and not all. As well as in last times, receiving a good advice I will take down subjects in AvtoMotoVelo, for now I use not auxiliary  to receive a wise advice at audience of the given forum as separate, legal at us while is not present. You will laugh, but in the decision of the World judge there is a recognition of my innocence at violation of point 8.6 made to me inspector Ignatov! It is possible to be convinced of it looking at the fourth page (it is outlined red). However the resultant decision all the same applies point 4 of article 12.15 of KoAP. Thus to me point 1.3 violation (look page 3, in its most top) is already made. Actually this acknowledgement of my words on ignorance or incorrect treatment of traffic regulations as Ignatov, and a member of group of analysis who pointed a finger to me at a crossroads. So the concept changes also my task there is a proof of that violation of point 1.3 of traffic regulations of the Russian Federation cannot the base for deprivation be right. The judge refers to point 8 of the Decision of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from 10/24/2006 No 18 "About SOME QUESTIONS ARISING At COURTS AT APPLICATION of the ESPECIAL PART of the CODE of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION ABOUT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENCES". Here its text (pay attention that point 1.3 of traffic regulations in it is not present!) : 8. As regards 4 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation qualifications of action which are connected to violation by drivers of requirements of traffic regulations, traffic signs or a marking, entailed departure on a band intended for oncoming traffic, or on tram ways of a counter direction, except for the cases provided by a part of 3 given articles are subject. Immediately such requirements are installed in following cases: on the two-way roads having four or more bands, it is forbidden to leave for overtaking or a detour on a band intended for oncoming traffic (point 9.2 of traffic regulations). Thus the violation of the given requirement connected to a detour of a hindrance, it is necessary to qualify as regards 3 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation; On the two-way roads having three bands, designated by a marking average of which is used for driving in both directions, it is forbidden to leave on the extreme left band intended for oncoming traffic (point 9.3 of traffic regulations); overtaking at adjustable crossroads, and also at nonadjustable crossroads is forbidden at driving on the road which is not principal; on pedestrian crossings at presence on them pedestrians; on railway crossings and is closer than for hundred meters before them; on bridges, overpasses, platforms and under them, and also in tunnels; in the end of rise, on dangerous turns and on other sections with restricted visibility (point 11.4 of traffic regulations); it is forbidden to go round with departure on an oncoming traffic band vehicles facing a railway crossing (the paragraph of eighth point 15.3 of traffic regulations); it is forbidden to leave on tram ways of a counter direction. However driving on the tram ways of a passing direction allocated at the left flush with  by a part when all bands of the given direction are occupied is authorized, and also at a detour, turn on the left or a turn taking into account point 8.5 of traffic regulations if thus there is no noise to a tram (point 9.6 of traffic regulations); turn should be carried out so that at departure from intersection of travelers of parts the vehicle did not appear on the oncoming traffic side (point 8.6 of traffic regulations). (Subitem"  "it is entered by the Decision of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from 2/9/2012 N 2) Driving on a two-way road in violation of requirements of traffic signs 3.20" Overtaking is forbidden ", 3.22" Overtaking is forbidden lorries ", 5.11" Road with a band for routing vehicles "(when such band is intended for oncoming traffic), 5.15.7" Direction of driving on bands "when it is connected to departure on an oncoming traffic band, and (or) a road marking 1.1, 1.3, 1.11 (opposite directions dividing transport flows) also forms the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 4 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. Besides, the objective side of the given composition of an administrative offense violation of a traffic sign forms 4.3" Circular motion ". Considering that the traffic sign 3.20 means the prohibition of realization of overtaking for all vehicles, except for low-speed, and also animal-drawn vehicles, mopeds and two-wheeled motorcycles without a carriage, overtaking of such means in an operative range of the given sign other vehicles in the absence of other prohibitions installed by traffic regulations (for example, point 11.4 of traffic regulations), does not form the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 4 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. It is necessary to mean also that overtaking of low-speed vehicles cannot be qualified as regards 4 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation in cases, when: in an operative range of a traffic sign 3.20 there is a road marking 1.1 or 1.11 as according to point 1 of Application N 2 to traffic regulations at the contradiction of value of traffic signs and lines of a horizontal marking the priority has a traffic sign by which the driver should be guided; The driver in an operative range of a traffic sign 3.20 produced vehicle overtaking for which the manufacturer installs the maximum speed no more than thirty kilometers per hour, including at absence on it of the recognition symbol informing participants of traffic about an accessory of the given vehicle to low-speed vehicles. In this case the driver made manoeuvre according to requirements of the specified traffic sign in this connection it cannot be attracted in administrative responsibility for inactivity of the proprietor (owner) of the low-speed vehicle which has not installed on this vehicle an appropriate recognition symbol in violation of requirements of point 8 of Substantive provisions under the tolerance of vehicles to maintenance and duties of officials on safety of traffic. Actions of the driver who has made in an operative range of a sign 3.20 overtaking of a mechanical vehicle, moving with a speed no more than thirty kilometers per hour, but not being on the design features a low-speed vehicle, are subject to qualification as regards 4 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. 8.1. As regards 1 article 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation it is necessary to qualify the actions of the driver expressed in non-observance of requirements, ordered by traffic signs or a carriageway marking, except for the cases provided by parts of 2 both 3 given articles and other articles of chapter 12 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. The objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 1 article 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation, in particular, is formed by actions of the driver who has made turn to the right in violation of requirements of traffic signs 3.18.1"Turn to the right is forbidden" and a road marking 1.11 at entrance on parking place, gasoline station or other territory adjoining to road or at violation by the driver of a sign 3.1"Entrance is forbidden" and marking 1.11 at departure from such territory. The actions of the driver connected to turn on the left or a turn in violation of requirements of traffic signs or a marking form the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 2 articles 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. For example, violation by the driver at realization of the specified manoeuvres of the requirements ordered: a marking 1.1, 1.3, 1.11, 1.18; Traffic signs 4.1.1"Driving directly", 4.1.2"Driving to the right", 4.1.4"Driving directly or to the right", 3.18.2"Turn on the left is forbidden", 3.19"Turn is forbidden", 5.15.1"Directions of driving on bands", 5.15.2"Directions of driving on a band", 6.3.1"Place for a turn", 6.3.2"Zone for a turn". Violation by the driver of requirements of any traffic sign, the entailed driving of a vehicle controlled it in a counter direction on road with one-way traffic, forms the objective side of the administrative offense provided by a part of 3 articles 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation (for example, violation of requirements of traffic signs 3.1"Entrance is forbidden", 5.5"Road with one-way traffic", 5.7.1 and 5.7.2"Departure on road with one-way traffic"). At application of this norm it is necessary to mean that, proceeding from the content of point 8.12 of traffic regulations, driving by a backing on road with one-way traffic is not forbidden, provided that this manoeuvre is safe for participants of traffic and, taking into account the added road situation, is caused by objective necessity (for example, a detour of a hindrance, a parking). Violation by the driver specified above conditions forms the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 3 articles 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. On the same norm it is necessary to qualify actions of the driver, left on road with one-way traffic in violation of requirements of a traffic sign 3.1"Entrance is forbidden by a backing", and in a case when such manoeuvre has been made at a crossroads - as well as regards 2 articles 12.14 of KoAP of the Russian Federation.

2

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> you will laugh, but in the decision of the World judge there is a recognition of my innocence at violation of point 8.6 made to me inspector Ignatov! It is possible to be convinced of it looking at the fourth page (it is outlined red). VD> However the resultant decision all the same applies point 4 of article 12.15 of KoAP. Thus to me point 1.3 violation (look page 3, in its most top) is already made. VD> Actually this acknowledgement of my words on ignorance or incorrect treatment of traffic regulations as Ignatov, and a member of group of analysis who pointed a finger to me at a crossroads. VD> so the concept changes also my task there is a proof of that violation of point 1.3 of traffic regulations of the Russian Federation cannot the base for deprivation be right. Taking into account it I would operate as the forward who is before empty collars. I.e.  reasonings "would be hammered by any", and would beat with the maximum concentration and preparation - for certain. Namely - would call at last the lawyer - to it, seemingly, remains simply  a ball in empty gate. You of it most likely will not manage that reduced a foot

3

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> you will laugh, but in the decision of the World judge there is a recognition of my innocence at violation of point 8.6 made to me inspector Ignatov! It is possible to be convinced of it looking at the fourth page (it is outlined red). VD> However the resultant decision all the same applies point 4 of article 12.15 of KoAP. Thus to me point 1.3 violation (look page 3, in its most top) is already made. VD> Actually this acknowledgement of my words on ignorance or incorrect treatment of traffic regulations as Ignatov, and a member of group of analysis who pointed a finger to me at a crossroads. VD> so the concept changes also my task there is a proof of that violation of point 1.3 of traffic regulations of the Russian Federation cannot the base for deprivation be right. Oh not the fact. Point 8.6 - it about that after you left from a crossroads you should not appear on . And you how I understand, make what at arrival on a crossroads you appeared on , type cut off a corner? (I can be mistaken, I not so in a subject, did not track for last, only esteemed that here in this decision is written) better to you really to consult with the lawyer how correctly to make the appeal. And that then you will find still a new subtlety as already found about that that video data are stored month and it should be foreknown. The person, such affairs often engaged can already know similar details.

4

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, fmiracle, you wrote: F> Oh not the fact. Point 8.6 - it about that after you left from a crossroads you should not appear on . And you how I understand, make what at arrival on a crossroads you appeared on , type cut off a corner? (I can be mistaken, I not so in a subject, did not track for last, only esteemed that here in this decision is written) To me and did not show where  on which I got. That 8.6 I did not break that is unambiguously told in a judgement. I speak, open the fourth page and read. I even the red outlined proper words. F> it is better to consult really to you with the lawyer how correctly to make the appeal. And that then you will find still a new subtlety as already found about that that video data are stored month and it should be foreknown. The person, such affairs often engaged can already know similar details. From video, my jamb, certainly. However, the oral petition for their request  was. And that it did not satisfy that are too violation. With the lawyer I will think. Though what to write to appeals and so like clear. I already  articles about this business read. In due time I one of them even here . But nobody understood what for did not estimate. Here this article the Author: VladD2 Date: 09.04 22:32.

5

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> From video, my jamb, certainly. However, the oral petition for their request  was. And that it did not satisfy that are too violation. VD> with the lawyer I will think. Though what to write to appeals and so like clear. I already  articles about this business read. In due time I one of them even here . But nobody understood what for did not estimate. Here this article the Author: VladD2 Date: 09.04 22:32. So to you also say that the lawyer to you about this video would tell at once. With it such jamb would not be. They can also blood-suckers, but in a subject, and at least it a part of money fulfill.

6

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: F>> Oh not the fact. Point 8.6 - it about that after you left from a crossroads you should not appear on . And you how I understand, make what at arrival on a crossroads you appeared on , type cut off a corner? (I can be mistaken, I not so in a subject, did not track for last, only esteemed that here in this decision is written) VD> To me and did not show where  on which I got. That 8.6 I did not break that is unambiguously told in a judgement. I speak, open the fourth page and read. I even the red outlined proper words. I read. But performance 8.6 yet does not relieve automatically of violation 12.15. Violation 8.6 is when at departure from a crossroads pass on . But it is possible to pass and to it (https://pddmaster.ru/shtrafi/povorot-na … metki.html) - on it they rest examples in the decision (the middle 3 pages - "that passed arguments under 90 degrees and on  did not get are refuted..." ). I simply pay to you attention that you were careful, at appeal compilation.

7

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, Ops, you wrote: Ops> So to you also say that the lawyer to you about this video would tell at once. With it such jamb would not be. They can also blood-suckers, but in a subject, and at least it a part of money fulfill. Here just those nearby spoke who used lawyers that all not so is unambiguous (. The pro is necessary not simply  with the diploma (I  its and will descend), and. And the pro for one document takes from 5 . Plus still should be understood somehow that it the pro. To consult I likely I will try. And there it will be visible.

8

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, fmiracle, you wrote: F> I read. But performance 8.6 yet does not relieve automatically of violation 12.15. Violation 8.6 is when at departure from a crossroads pass on . But it is possible to pass and to it (examples https://pddmaster.ru/shtrafi/povorot-na … etki.html) - on it they rest in the decision Here the main nuance that I turned at a crossroads. There is not present any . It is a separate part of road. On it there are only intersections of travelers of parts. F> (the middle 3 pages - "that passed arguments under 90 degrees and on  did not get are refuted..." ). Here the matter is that are not especially refuted. There is only a statement of the inspector. I not so understand, why it should be the law. But put at all in it. The judge explicitly breaks that decision of plenum  on which refers. She read only the first sentence and on its base does an output. And there it is a lot of letters further away. And here in this article, just also it is said that in these letters all is accurately described. Also that item 1.3 of traffic regulations cannot be the base for application of article 12.15 of item 4. F> I simply pay to you attention that you were careful, at appeal compilation. I understand. But it just not true treatment of the law. On such  article of item 2 of article 12.16 of KoAP cannot operate at all as you  on  as soon as start to carry out turn. After all machines they after all on a place are not torn. In them always is though small but radius. But 12.16 2  is! And it is an exception from 12.15. In that decision of plenum  also it is told as it to treat. But the judge treats this interpretation painfully funny. Here it also should be broken.

9

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: Vlad, be short.

10

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, alzt, you wrote: A> Vlad, be short. Here it I somehow are not able. It is necessary, certainly. But all time I am afraid of a detail to miss.

11

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: And generally, at me the proof sensation was added that at the second meeting the judge has been somehow suppressed and tried  this inspector. And the training for a new profession on item 1.3 of traffic regulations is sick is similar that the chief of group of analysis spoke. Whether was a magic call? Here in what a question. After all small not sickly itself substituted, when started to say lies under the oath. Allow to file the judge my video with its way and it could already most be condemned for lie under the oath. It there it is accurate .

12

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: A>> Vlad, be short. VD> here it I somehow are not able. VD> it is necessary, certainly. But all time I am afraid of a detail to miss. I fluently transversed, but did not understand - deprived or not, and that happens.

13

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> And generally, at me the proof sensation was added that at the second meeting the judge has been somehow suppressed and tried  this inspector. And the training for a new profession on item 1.3 of traffic regulations is sick is similar that the chief of group of analysis spoke. Hardly, the same ordinary business for system, they so condemn, without regaining consciousness, hundreds people a month. Whether VD> was a magic call? Here in what a question. After all small not sickly itself substituted, when started to say lies under the oath. Allow to file the judge my video with its way and it could already most be condemned for lie under the oath. It there it is accurate . Put at the appeal. Generally that I here will tell, if select the rights I , without being soared, these three months. Across Moscow the probability that stop, is close to zero. If it is finite traffic regulations so you will frankly not break)

14

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, viellsky, you wrote: V> Taking into account it I would operate as the forward who is before empty collars. I.e.  reasonings "would be hammered by any", and would beat with the maximum concentration and preparation - for certain. Namely - would call at last the lawyer - to it, seemingly, remains simply  a ball in empty gate. You of it most likely will not manage that reduced a foot At people who did not face representatives of this most ancient trade, extremely exaggerated representation about their favor.

15

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, alzt, you wrote: A> I fluently transversed, but did not understand - deprived or not, and that happens. I lost the first instance. But I will go on the second and if it is necessary and on the third. Thus the judge made strange and in the decision specified that item 8.6 (made to me the inspector) we do not apply (I did not break it, as well as stated from the very beginning). And on 1.3 with which it replaced 8.6 should not at all rights to deprive. I.e. on the person the full arbitrariness. The decision of plenum  to which she referred, contains accurate point in my favor. In general, I will fight further in the following instance. Now to me 8.6 it is not necessary to beat off any more. It is not necessary to prove that on road one intersection, and it is necessary to prove, it is necessary what to judge under the law. If there is 12.16 part 2 in which is written that for turn on the left in sign and marking violation it is necessary to take the penalty 1.5  it is necessary and to do. And I will try to make it. I hope at me it turns out. But all rests against the human factor.

16

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: F>> (the middle 3 pages - "that passed arguments under 90 degrees and on  did not get are refuted..."). VD> Here the matter is that are not especially refuted. There is only a statement of the inspector. I not so understand, why it should be the law. It the witness. Not the claimant and not the responder, unlike you. Therefore its words take into consideration, and you - are not present.

17

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, LaPerouse, you wrote: LP> It the witness. Not the claimant and not the responder, unlike you. Therefore its words take into consideration, and you - are not present. Generally it an accuser. And why at the explicit facts of concealment of proofs the judge continues to trust it is a big question.

18

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, LaPerouse, you wrote: LP> Hardly, the same ordinary business for system, they so condemn, without regaining consciousness, hundreds people a month. And where groans on the Internet about it? Or I one such courageous? LP> put at the appeal. I will try. But after all can and refuse there. LP> generally that I here will tell, if select the rights I , without being soared, these three months. Across Moscow the probability that stop, is close to zero. If it is finite traffic regulations so you will frankly not break) the Probability very much even is great. Here literally 30th stopped me. I often go at night. And brake often enough at night. Besides they have all data. I remember when at me came to an end  started to hunt for me simply. So the machine on which it will be attributed  to be braked only in a way.

19

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> photos of the decision containing a motivation part are More low resulted. , Vlad, yes you appear all of us deceived? What it was for circus that the inspector stood far, what there a hump, what he could not see as you turned? In a judgement it went!!! Your words about turn under 90 degrees too a fairy tale??? There is no to you a faith, is correct you the rights deprived.

20

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> And generally, at me the proof sensation was added that at the second meeting the judge has been somehow suppressed and tried  this inspector. And the training for a new profession on item 1.3 of traffic regulations is sick is similar that the chief of group of analysis spoke. Whether VD> was a magic call? Here in what a question. After all small not sickly itself substituted, when started to say lies under the oath. Allow to file the judge my video with its way and it could already most be condemned for lie under the oath. It there it is accurate . For certain there was a call, and, not from , and from the judicial heads. Any judge in Moscow is overloaded so that only it can be dismissed for the pass of periods at any moment, therefore them to control easier than it seems.  May, 2017 from the assistant to the world judge in .

21

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> the Judge refers to point 8 of the Decision of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from 10/24/2006 No 18 "About SOME QUESTIONS ARISING At COURTS AT APPLICATION of the ESPECIAL PART of the CODE of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION ABOUT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENCES". Here its text (pay attention that point 1.3 of traffic regulations in it is not present!) : Point it unless not your case? Turn should be carried out so that at departure from intersection of travelers of parts the vehicle did not appear on the oncoming traffic side (point 8.6 of traffic regulations). Driving on a two-way road in violation of requirements of traffic signs 5.15.7"Direction of driving on bands" when it is connected to departure on an oncoming traffic band, and (or) a road marking 1.1, 1.3, 1.11 (opposite directions dividing transport flows) also forms the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 4 articles 12.15 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. An explanation why 8.6 did not break - shows simply literacy of judges. And here equivalent roads? Brad any. P.S. Understood got a grasp, not the judge so considers it, and you considered it... I.e. you really wrote that 8.6 and equivalent roads are not compatible? Then it is Brad about a marking in accordance with GOST that there can not be is discontinuous-continuous at a crossroads This marking separates places where there is an intersection of travelers of parts from places where there is no intersection. Here is hardly more detailed about that for what deprive of the rights, in the last paragraph that is written, about as I speak - one wheel called in in this case and already there will be "", and 90 degrees here  - https://pddmaster.ru/interest/lishenie- … uacii.html

22

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> Here the main nuance that I turned at a crossroads. There is not present any . It is a separate part of road. On it there are only intersections of travelers of parts. If at a crossroads there is a marking it separates crossroads parts where really there is an intersection from places where the intersection of travelers of parts is not present. We admit in your case, would be double continuous and what its intersection from any side would not be departure on ? Where exactly the intersection of bands also is authorized driving - there there will be no such marking as solid lines. All that is in the case behind a marking 1.13 is not intersection of travelers of parts. Look on http://ruspdd.ru/journal/32-peresecheni … chastey/#6 and draw at the crossroads of a place where intersection and where is not present.

23

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, LaPerouse, you wrote: LP> At people who did not face representatives of this most ancient trade, extremely exaggerated representation about their favor. I faced repeatedly, and at me adequate representation. The good lawyer or  which in a subject spares to you of time at 10-40 time and allows not to make the children's errors caused by inexperience. However, it with any trade so.

24

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD>  Back the Author: VladD2 Date: 30.05 22:34 VD> photos of the decision containing a motivation part are More low resulted. VD> actually, as well as in last times I expect from you a wise advice. Last councils helped me much. Though and not all. As well as in last times, receiving a good advice I will take down subjects in AvtoMotoVelo, for now I use not auxiliary  to receive a wise advice at audience of the given forum as separate, legal at us while is not present. VD> you will laugh, but in the decision of the World judge there is a recognition of my innocence at violation of point 8.6 made to me inspector Ignatov! It is possible to be convinced of it looking at the fourth page (it is outlined red). But hardly more low - about aggravating circumstances. I did not understand, at you such violation already was? At me in the aggravating "numerous penalties" (already whole 3 - 2 for a speed +20-40 on a route and 1 for not fastened children) appear. Also it is possible to write safely in the complaint to the inspector - that he does not know traffic regulations and deliberately incorrectly treats violation.

25

Re: The decision of the world judge on NPA

Hello, VladD2, you wrote: VD> And the training for a new profession on item 1.3 of traffic regulations is sick is similar that the chief of group of analysis spoke. Generalization of all violations is faster. You and a sign ignored and through a continuous marking passed. As the result - left in a counter band. 8.6 nevertheless about turn, and in the given place the left turn is not provided not so. On the other hand you fulfilled turn. Because of badly registered laws ambiguity also turns out - 8.6 broke or 9.2? But 1.3 precisely broke twice.