liveontheedge: If you're willing to be the "guinea pig" and try to break new ground, go for it. However, be forewarned that the only case that allowed "bilingual defence" was R. v. Myers with the non-bilingual sign. I haven't seen anything where it has worked beyond that. It might be worthwhile calling the people who are actually responsible for administering and overseeing the French Language Services Act to get a better idea of its full scope. The Office of Francophone Affairs can be reached at 1-800-268-7507.

http://www.ofa.gov.on.ca/en/flsa.html

Also you can read through the French Language Services Act at your own leisure and reach your own conclusions:

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... 0f32_e.htm

EDIT: Post I replied to was edited 23 times.

Lawman: If you're willing to break new ground, then by all means, like I was telling liveontheedge, go for it. I prefer to use tactics and strategies that I've seen work. I'm all about verifying things and being able to go into a situation with overwhelming odds in my favour - my occupation demands it. But don't suggest anything unless you're willing to do it yourself.

Breaking new ground interests me, but it's very time consuming. No lower court will support a citzen or s. 172 would already be history. Getting to the Supreme Court takes up to 7 years!!

And the lower courts know it, which is why they walk all over us.

They know next to no one will fight that long.

All the other issues I raise, s. 172, RIDE program, short-term suspensions etc, I know I could win, but it's too time consuming to fight them all.

Lawman, there's no risk for you or me in this whole equation, but keep in mind who your audience is and their circumstances. A novel defence, while interesting, is often not the best option and may have catastrophic consequences. It's one thing to suggest using untried ideas and taking it to the Supreme Court of Canada, but how realistic is that for a 19-year-old student who has bills to pay? This is why most of us suggest proven, relatively simple tactics that we've used ourselves or observed others use successfully. The defendant gets a desired result and they don't have to be hanging on pins and needles for seven years or more.

kimbax0x, let us know if you have any other questions or want help trying to put your case together, if you're deciding to go the route of fighting the ticket instead of plea-bargaining.

Thanks for the warning RI, i am not trying to break new ground, justice is for the rich not for a poor guy like me. I simply just want to add one more line of defense into my arsenal.

If i am stopped for speeding charge with 3 points and $100 fine, I speak French to the cop just for the record (like Lawman said the JP can't go back and amend this service) and make the JP rule on FLSA applying to s128. If JP strikes it down i'll move on to other line of defense. The worst case i take 3 points and pay $100 fine, so i think why not give FLSA a try.

I want to thank you all for your help. I've decided to hire a paralegal and I've brought up some points frmo here to him, most of which were valid points against the police.

You've made an otherwise unfourtunate situation into a learning experience. In either case, all information was helpful, and should anyone be interested, I can keep you posted. My court date is Aug 7. My paralegal said he may even be able to not make it go to court. So until then, or hopefully sooner, thank you all!

Yes, please keep us posted. Good luck with it!

kimbax0x – in my opinion, you do not want you case heard until six months after the date you were issued the infraction. You were issued a ticket under Part I of the Provincial Offences Act. If your case is heard before the 6 month period, the court can agree with you that the text the cop added to the certificate and summons was to be in both languages. The court could disagree that the officer needed to speak both languages to you. Or the court could agree the officer was required to speak both languages but you waived the right by either not asking him to, or by signing the certificate when you were issued the ticket.

If any of this happens, the court can fix the certificate and summons by adding the French words to it, or they can simply re-issue you a new summons and lay a new charge for the same offence under Part III of the POA.

A ticket can be filed within 30 days under Part I of the POA and within 6 months under Part III.

After 6 month the cops are statute barred from proceeding.

Thus, you don’t want you case until after the 6 month period. Weekends and holidays do not apply when considering 30 days, but they do apply when considering the 6 month period.

The word “day” is defined at law, but the word “month” is not. A day does not include weekends and holidays, so 30 days really means 38 days if no holidays falls within the 30 day period. If a holiday falls within the 30 day period, then 30 days would really be 39 days.

Hiring a paralegal is going to end up costing you more then the ticket. I know you want to win the case, so do what you wish, but truthfully, if you're capable of filling out a job application or credit card ap, you're capable of filling out the required appeal court forms to win this case should you lose at trial.

I believe you're capable of going into court on your own and calmy and clearly explaining to the judge the law regarding the issues.

There are only 3 or so provisons of the HTA, 2 provisions of the FLSA, and 2 provisions of the POA that need to be expressed.

In any event, keep us posted and Good luck.

hey man how did the court go because i have the same case as your i was going 142 in a 90 zone........so 52 over the limit........and my court date is next month please tell me how the outcome was on your case...

Jacky or Kim, Any update on the outcome of your cases? I just got a similar summons. Was travelling 132 in a construction zone on the 401 near cornwall. I have my trial next month.

I've been driving for over 10 years and this my first speeding ticket ever.

In case anyone is interested, I hired a paralegal and had the charge reduced from 52km/hr to 49km/hr over the limit. The crown offered the deal and my only other option would have been to take it to trial and hope for a no show.

The reduction is supposed to be the difference between a major and a minor infraction in the eyes of insurance companies... so that's a good thing i guess.

Hope you've all had luck with your cases and happy holidays!

Kim I will tell you one thing don't go into court and say you knew you were speeding. Most JP's will take that as guilt and you are helping the officer build his tracking history. A tracking history is required before any citation can be given. Attack the officers notes on what speed he estimated you going before pointing the speed device at you. This is just a starter until I know more about your case. What kind of speed instrument was he/she using? There is a lot of way to tackle the instrument. So reply giving details of how you got caught, instrument used weather etc.

robmcla - this thread was started in JULY and the orignal poster of the thread advised the results from court...all done now

resurrecting a closed thread

_________________
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca

It's an update.........

_________________
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com