Auckland street racer clampdown: Dozens fined, cars impounded
Photo:
Supplied / Police
Police issued dozens of fines, impounded vehicles, and breath-tested thousands of drivers during a large "antisocial road user event" in Auckland on Saturday night.
The coordinated crackdown - backed by the Eagle helicopter - targeted an estimated 200 vehicles involved in the illegal gathering, police said.
Officers fanned out across known meeting points across Tāmaki Makaurau, setting up checkpoints and making their presence felt early in the night.
More than 2500 drivers were stopped and tested for alcohol. Over 15 returned excess breath alcohol readings, while a further 70 infringements were issued for various offences.
Police also ordered 71 vehicles to undergo mechanical inspections, dishing out 33 green stickers for minor defects and six pink stickers for serious safety issues.
Five vehicles were impounded.
Despite the size of the convoy, police said the group caused little disruption to the wider public.
"Dozens of police units worked hard to disrupt the event," said Inspector Regan James.
"We saw some illegal behaviour - burnouts and other dangerous driving - but staff did well to stay on top of it and break up the convoys."
The operation now shifts into an investigation phase, with officers reviewing footage and other evidence to identify additional offenders.
"We'll be taking strong enforcement action wherever possible," James said.
"We've been very clear - there's zero tolerance for this kind of reckless behaviour on our roads."
Police are encouraging the public to report antisocial driving. If it's happening in real-time, call 111.
Reports can also be lodged via the non-emergency 105 line or anonymously through Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Lawyer censured for slapping one colleague's bottom, touching another's back
By Al Williams, Open Justice reporter of File photo. Photo: 123rf A lawyer who slapped a junior male colleague on the bottom and touched a female colleague's lower back during a social function has been censured. The lawyer, a partner at an unnamed firm, urged a New Zealand Law Society standards committee to consider his behaviour in context, stating that more freedom should be allowed for conduct at an out-of-office social function than during the usual working day. However, the committee found his conduct was disrespectful and discourteous towards the employees, who were both junior to him. According to a recently released decision, the behaviour occurred in the context of socialising by some staff members after a team function arranged by their firm. The partner generally accepted that some of his behaviour was inappropriate, that he had blurred professional boundaries, and had consumed excess alcohol that night. However, he did not see that as a breach of professional standards or an abuse of power towards either colleague. According to the standards committee's decision, the lawyer submitted that slapping the male employee on the bottom was "paying [him] respect" and "blokey", and that he was behaving as a friend rather than a partner in the firm. "The committee sees absolutely no circumstance in which physical contact of this type towards any colleague could be described as respectful behaviour. "The committee also considers this behaviour risks perpetuating a workplace culture that the profession is at pains to transform in relation to interactions between colleagues." The lawyer accepted that he placed his hand on the female employee's lower back as she passed through a door. In his view, doing so was "an innocuous courtesy", and he intended "nothing sexual or sinister" by it. The committee did not ascribe any sexual intent to the lawyer's actions, but found it was clear that the female employee was uncomfortable at the time and afterwards. The committee considered that physical touch on the lower back carried an element of intimacy and overfamiliarity that may reasonably have been interpreted as inappropriate by her or a reasonable observer. While there were some contexts in which this would be acceptable to both parties involved, it was likely to be perceived as flirtatious and inappropriate in others, the decision said. The lawyer's evidence was that she approached him to show him a team photograph on her phone, and he assumed her reason for doing so was for him to comment on it. Referring to the photo, the lawyer commented that the woman was "beautiful" and said that, in that context, it was not intended to be disrespectful or discourteous. The committee accepted that the woman was anticipating a comment on the group photo, but not that she was inviting a comment on her own appearance to the exclusion of others (when there was nothing to draw attention to her over any other team member in the photo). The lawyer's contention that his comment was respectful and courteous in the context was not accepted. The committee considered it was more likely than not that the lawyer's judgement about what was appropriate was impaired. "When coupled with his admitted blurring of professional boundaries, his consumption of alcohol meant he was not well placed to exercise the judgement required of him." While the committee did not identify a specific abuse of any power imbalance, it said that didn't mean an imbalance did not exist "by virtue of their roles as partner and junior members of staff". The committee considered that the team's social function, including ongoing socialising that occurred after the formal portion of the function, was a professional, collegial occasion. It found that the lawyer's conduct across the three incidents demonstrated conduct towards both employees that was disrespectful and discourteous. It was generally conduct "that would be regarded by lawyers of good standing as being unacceptable and unprofessional". Due to mitigating factors present in the case, the committee said it did not consider it necessary to impose any penalty. This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald.
1News
3 hours ago
- 1News
Artist says thieves likely stole huge sculpture thinking it was copper
An artist whose 5.5 metre steel sculpture was stolen from his West Auckland studio believes the thieves mistakenly thought it was made from copper. Chris Moore's sculpture, worth $50,000, was stolen from his studio in Oratia yesterday morning. His neighbour initially believed it was him when they heard noises around 6am, but "when he realised it wasn't, he turned the lights on, and I think that startled the people who were stealing it, and they took off up the road". His neighbour got in their car to follow the vehicle and watched as the artwork, which was not entirely on the trailer, got dragged up the road. However, he lost the thieves before he could get the plate number. Moore said the finisher used on his sculptures resembled bronze, and the only reason it would be stolen was if the thieves believed it was made of copper. ADVERTISEMENT "I don't think it would be worth the risk [otherwise] because it's so noticeable and so massive." Chris Moore. (Source: Although it was the first time anything had been stolen from his studio, Moore said that one of his public pieces displayed in Auckland Botanic Gardens had pieces cut off and taken before. Moore now hoped that the thieves realised that the material was not bronze and decided to dump it somewhere instead of destroying it for parts. "Because I think the scrap value if they cut it up, they'd get somewhere between $50 to $100, so it wouldn't even cover the petrol costs. "I don't think they'd be able to sell it [as it is]. I mean, even I've had trouble". Moore has been making sculptures full-time for three years, and this piece has been exhibited at Sculpture OnShore in Devonport. ADVERTISEMENT He said he has to invest all his time and money into creating pieces he's passionate about, and losing this piece would mean he would lose part of his annual income. "I've sold everything I've made, sometimes it takes a while, but eventually someone was gonna come and buy that." Moore had hope the sculpture could be found and said police had found tools left behind by the perpetrators, as well as security footage from a camera across the road, which happened to be pointed directly towards the incident. A police spokesperson said that enquiries into the theft are ongoing at this stage, and there are no updates. Anyone who has information can contact the Police via 105.
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Drug farmer built 'shanty' on Waikato swampland to harvest cannabis plots
By Belinda Feek, Open Justice reporter of Huntly men Jason Evans and Jayson Woods were charged after police discovered their cannabis growing operation on the shores of Lake Waahi in Huntly. Photo: Google Maps A drug farmer built a makeshift structure on the edge of a Waikato lake so he could row out and check on his cannabis plots, which he claims were at some point worth more than $200,000. In March 2021, Jason Edward Evans, 46, spent about eight weeks building the "shanty", which sat on the shores of Lake Waahi in Huntly. He and co-offender, champion New Zealand powerlifter Jayson George Woods, then used wooden pallets to get access around the cannabis plots on the swamplands surrounding the lake. Hamilton District Court recently heard that after building the structure, Evans lived in it for at least three weeks while he tended to his crop, harvesting the plants and setting up drying racks. Parts of the area were only accessible via boat. Then, in February 2022, police discovered about 1000 cannabis plants in six different spots in the lake area, describing the cultivation as a "large-scale commercial cannabis" operation. The discovery led police to Evans and Woods. When searching Evans' home in April that year, officers also found 15 x 500ml bottles of cannabis oil, $2480 cash, ammunition, 1kg of cannabis cabbage, 10 vials of steroids, and bottles of Jungle Juice and Rush. Jungle Juice and Rush are leather cleaning products but they can also be misused for other purposes. Evans told police he had harvested more than $200,000 worth of cannabis plants from his lakeside plots and that the cannabis oil and steroids were for his personal use. Aggravating Evans' situation, he was later busted with methamphetamine, cocaine, a firearm and prohibited firearm magazines this year, while on bail for the earlier offending. He was caught with those items when a firefighter was looking for a missing cat under a bed after a suspicious fire at Evans' Huntly property. The firefighter noticed a .22 rifle under the bed and reported it to police. The rifle was loaded with six rounds of ammunition, and, as it can hold 25 cartridges, is classified as a prohibited magazine. In a black bag, officers found 1.3g of cocaine, 172mg of meth, a meth pipe, Evans' passport, driver's licence, bank cards, medication and his phone. In his garage, they discovered a lathe surrounded by more ammunition, including a Ruger magazine, silencer and other firearms parts. After the earlier cannabis discovery, police also searched Woods' Huntly home and found 216 vials of prescription-only steroids and more than 300 unidentified pills. Officers also found a "small fully functional indoor cannabis grow room" in his garage, which had 18 seedlings, lights, power ballast, a timer and a mobile air con unit. A packet of unopened bullets and $4250 were also seized. Woods, 33, accepted there were "a couple of ounces of weed" at his house and said the steroids were his. According to court documents, he said he took them "because he is a New Zealand powerlifter". At Evans' recent sentencing, his counsel, Jasper Rhodes, said in explaining the 1000-plant discovery that it was grown in the wild and only about half of it would be "usable head". "It can only be harvested once a year because of the weather," he said, before stating that it was different from a hydroponic set-up in which all plants could be harvested. Judge Arthur Tompkins pointed out that, despite that, Evans had told police he had harvested more than $200,000 worth of cannabis. Rhodes said Evans was "primarily growing for personal use". He submitted that the operation was a "one-off, unsophisticated" situation with Evans "going in and out" to the hut by kayak. "This little hut [had] no glass, no windows, no walls, basically a shanty in the middle of the bush, compared with a person who is growing in hydroponic set-ups purely for personal gain with more plants." However, Rhodes accepted the drug offending Evans committed while on bail was an aggravating feature. He said Evans had the weapons and ammunition because he'd been the victim of attempted burglaries, break-ins and a violent home invasion in which he "almost died". As for the fire, that was investigated as arson, he said. "Without suggesting he was right to have a gun, he was right that he thought he was under threat," Rhodes said. "He had a reason, not a legitimate reason," the judge replied. Rhodes pushed for an end sentence of around 18 months, which would mean his client could walk out of prison, on time served, in about a month. But, on numerous charges, including cultivation of cannabis, possession of class A, B and C drugs, unlawful possession of firearms, prohibited magazines and ammunition, Judge Tompkins jailed Evans for two years and three months. Woods was sentenced earlier to 11 months' home detention on charges including cannabis cultivation for his involvement. * This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .
