The paralegals will hate this, but the latest case law, which was reviewed in Ontario Court, to be published soon... If a police officer issues a speeding ticket, put the proper fine but omits the actual speeds on the ticket, you can and will be convicted as the speed noted itself is not required to convict you of speeding. The infraction of speeding you are guilty of a 1 km/h over the limit, the quantum merely goes to penalty. How does this benefit the motorist? No speeding amount on the ticket means the Ministry will not assign demerit points, you'd be crazy to fight it in court as the ticket can be amended according to the court at which point you'd get your points!! Officer less likely to go to court, paralegals get less of your money, motorist gets the fine but not the demerits which is what they want most times anyway. The case hasn't been published yet, the decision came down from Justice Mahaffy, but I can assure whatever counterpoints you have were considered as he took 3 weeks to rule on this rather unique approach to enforcement. Looks like a win, win for everyone but the ticket reps. D
The paralegals will hate this, but the latest case law, which was reviewed in Ontario Court, to be published soon...
If a police officer issues a speeding ticket, put the proper fine but omits the actual speeds on the ticket, you can and will be convicted as the speed noted itself is not required to convict you of speeding. The infraction of speeding you are guilty of a 1 km/h over the limit, the quantum merely goes to penalty.
How does this benefit the motorist? No speeding amount on the ticket means the Ministry will not assign demerit points, you'd be crazy to fight it in court as the ticket can be amended according to the court at which point you'd get your points!!
Officer less likely to go to court, paralegals get less of your money, motorist gets the fine but not the demerits which is what they want most times anyway.
The case hasn't been published yet, the decision came down from Justice Mahaffy, but I can assure whatever counterpoints you have were considered as he took 3 weeks to rule on this rather unique approach to enforcement.
Looks like a win, win for everyone but the ticket reps.
Blue elephants fly only on wedensdays like this thread, Bad spelling? Thanks for the info Cheers Viper1
FyreStorm wrote:
The paralegals will hate this, but the latest case law, which was reviewed in Ontario Court, to be published soon...
If a police officer issues a speeding ticket, put the proper fine but omits the actual speeds on the ticket, you can and will be convicted as the speed noted itself is not required to convict you of speeding. The infraction of speeding you are guilty of a 1 km/h over the limit, the quantum merely goes to penalty.
How does this benefit the motorist? No speeding amount on the ticket means the Ministry will not assign demerit points, you'd be crazy to fight it in court as the ticket can be amended according to the court at which point you'd get your points!!
Officer less likely to go to court, paralegals get less of your money, motorist gets the fine but not the demerits which is what they want most times anyway.
The case hasn't been published yet, the decision came down from Justice Mahaffy, but I can assure whatever counterpoints you have were considered as he took 3 weeks to rule on this rather unique approach to enforcement.
Looks like a win, win for everyone but the ticket reps.
D
Blue elephants fly only on wedensdays like this thread,
Bad spelling?
Thanks for the info
Cheers
Viper1
"hang onto your chair when reading my posts
use at your own risk"
It's a decision which originated in Sudbury but was upheld at the Ontario Court of Appeal, one of my co-workers laid the original charge and it's slim on details right now, our local prosecutor has asked us to hold off on laying charges this way until she gets the decision published and educates the JPs on it...I agree points aren't all the be all end all, but it's funny driver after river ask me "How many points is there with this?" When you reduce and tell them no points, they are appreciative.
It's a decision which originated in Sudbury but was upheld at the Ontario Court of Appeal, one of my co-workers laid the original charge and it's slim on details right now, our local prosecutor has asked us to hold off on laying charges this way until she gets the decision published and educates the JPs on it...I agree points aren't all the be all end all, but it's funny driver after river ask me "How many points is there with this?"
When you reduce and tell them no points, they are appreciative.
Thanks for the info FyreStorm. This is BAD not just for paralegals and so on, but this just proves how the courts are run like a business then a place for justice. Surprise I know. When you are accused in this country there should be a greater respect on the rule of law. If you violate the Law then that should be the focal point, to set proper precedent and properly demonstrate to the public why this person is being charged etc.. The dollar amount has become more important than the actual offence. Perhaps this "Justice Mahaffy" thought it would be a smart way to unclog the courts a bit and make more money for the province, seeing how this will encourage the accused to "not fight" the charge. What this is also doing is basically offering the same deal the prosecutor might offer you if you fight it without having to actually attend court. No POINTS, more people will just pay, will unclog the courts a make more money for the province (business move) I guess morality is starting to cost to much now? What is a little more disturbing to me is he has actually set a precedent that will PUNISH you if you decide to defend yourself. Nice mafia tactic. I guess we finally see now why they chose the word "CHARGE" when accusing you of breaking the law. Just pay up and we wont hurt you more then we just did. Supreme court, anybody?
FyreStorm wrote:
The paralegals will hate this, but the latest case law, which was reviewed in Ontario Court, to be published soon...
If a police officer issues a speeding ticket, put the proper fine but omits the actual speeds on the ticket, you can and will be convicted as the speed noted itself is not required to convict you of speeding. The infraction of speeding you are guilty of a 1 km/h over the limit, the quantum merely goes to penalty.
How does this benefit the motorist? No speeding amount on the ticket means the Ministry will not assign demerit points, you'd be crazy to fight it in court as the ticket can be amended according to the court at which point you'd get your points!!
Officer less likely to go to court, paralegals get less of your money, motorist gets the fine but not the demerits which is what they want most times anyway.
The case hasn't been published yet, the decision came down from Justice Mahaffy, but I can assure whatever counterpoints you have were considered as he took 3 weeks to rule on this rather unique approach to enforcement.
Looks like a win, win for everyone but the ticket reps.
D
Thanks for the info FyreStorm. This is BAD not just for paralegals and so on, but this just proves how the courts are run like a business then a place for justice. Surprise I know.
When you are accused in this country there should be a greater respect on the rule of law. If you violate the Law then that should be the focal point, to set proper precedent and properly demonstrate to the public why this person is being charged etc..
The dollar amount has become more important than the actual offence.
Perhaps this "Justice Mahaffy" thought it would be a smart way to unclog the courts a bit and make more money for the province, seeing how this will encourage the accused to "not fight" the charge. What this is also doing is basically offering the same deal the prosecutor might offer you if you fight it without having to actually attend court. No POINTS, more people will just pay, will unclog the courts a make more money for the province (business move) I guess morality is starting to cost to much now?
What is a little more disturbing to me is he has actually set a precedent that will PUNISH you if you decide to defend yourself. Nice mafia tactic.
I guess we finally see now why they chose the word "CHARGE" when accusing you of breaking the law. Just pay up and we wont hurt you more then we just did.
Supreme court, anybody?
"It's only a matter of time before you get pulled over for something"
pulled over leaving a survey in guelph. After arguing with the officer for about 10 minutes, he mentioned something being wrong with my truck. Told me to put on my emergency brake, and i did. Told me to put it in gear, and i did, truck did not move. Told me to hit the gas, and i did and the truck…
Got two very heavy tickets -- for failing to stop for a school bus, and for using a handheld device. Was running late in a morning rush traffic in Toronto and apparently passed a school bus on the opposite side w/o noticing its signal. A few meters after that I stopped behind the other cars waiting…
I recently received a ticket for proceeding contrary to sign at an intersection. While there are other issues with the offence (sign is not visible until 10ft from intersection, officer wrote wrong license plate number on ticket) my biggest question is about the sign itself.
I posted here a *while* back when I first got my speeding ticket, and I've been fighting it forever. Anyway, long story short - I went and had an appeal and both the prosecutor and the Judge agree that I have valid grounds to appeal on, but what we're arguing is whether the correct remedy is a…
My wife had an auto accident back in May. It is gradually being dealt with by our insurance company ( by the broker actually). My question is about the legal power of the insurance code OAP1. Evidently this set of rules is the Ten Commandments for the insurance companies and the adjustors seem to…
What is the requirement for stopping when a school bus is traveling down the roadway, initiates the flashing red lights while still moving but has not yet stopped? If a motorist is traveling through an intersection (through the free-flow approach, minor-street stop controlled) and an oncoming…
In 2005, the government passed legislation that enabled the introduction of variable speed limits at some point in the future. It didn't take effect right away, so it sat waiting for "proclamation by the Lieutenant Governor." Just by chance... I was reading the HTA earlier while browsing this…
I was on my way to work on a divided four lane highway. I was in the right hand lane following the flow of traffic. There was a slower car ahead of me and I wanted to change lanes and maintain my speed. When I looked in my left side mirror, I notice a red car going pretty fast in the passing…
So i got charged with Hand Held Device, just want to ask everyone if i could use this as my defence
It was midnight, I was dropping my fiance to pick up something on north bound Yonge st (near church) with my emergency lights on, Officer came and asked me to move along so i went up a few streets and…
