Radar Gun Error Code & Incomplete Disclosure

Hello,

I'm hoping somebody can point me in the right direction to track down various radar gun error codes.

Way back in March of this year I was stopped for speeding, 86kmh in a 60 Community Safety Zone, on Mayfield Rd., on the outskirts of Brampton. (Aloa school)

The cop was using hand held radar, standing off to the side of the road in a school parking lot. I was travelling westbound with another vehicle 1 maybe 2 car lengths behind me and almost into me when I braked, I was waved into the parking lot and asked "if I was aware they were using radar in the area?"

Err "no"

He then offered up the display of the radar gun and pressed a button, the unit displayed a letter 'E', he pressed it again, and again it displayed 'E', finally after a third press it displayed 86.

5 minutes later I had my speeding ticket. I was not impressed. I drove my vehicle about 50 yards or so to the exit of the parking lot, which is further west of where I'd entered, then I parked up in the exit driveway so I could see the radar trap in operation. There were 2 cops, each with a cruiser, they remained in their respective vehicles for the first 5 or 10 minutes I was parked. Then they resumed using the radar gun. My presence at the parking lot exit must have caused oncoming traffic to slow down, impacting their quota. After a further 5 minutes the cop Id received my ticket from approached my vehicle and inquired if I needed assistance, maybe he should call an ambulance? I assured him I was fine and I was going to remain where I was and watch them at work.

Both cops took turns using the radar gun, pointing it at east and westbound traffic, at multiple targets and even when traffic was travelling east and west in the same target area. They did eventually snare a couple more victims while I was there. After being there for 45 minutes I decided to go home and get a good camera with a zoom lense. I returned approximately 30 minutes later. When they saw me park up again they ceased their work and retired to their vehicles, leaving after about 15 minutes.

I filed for a trial and was given a date for December 15 – next month. I also requested disclosure on August 22, using the template found on the very informative Ticket Combat website. The only change I made to the template request was for the make and model of the radar gun used. On October 7 I went to the Prosecutors office to follow up my request. I was handed a photocopy of the officers notes which was stamped September 14. I remained next to the clerks counter and reviewed what I was given then informed the clerk my request was incomplete, she inquired what else I wanted and I indicated the other items on my request, in particular the typed version of hand written notes and the make & model of the radar gun, She highlighted those 2 items and marked the form "2nd request", I also got a copy of this 2nd request. Its now November 16.

Ive spent hours on the internet searching for radar gun error codes and found nothing that matches "E", its like looking for a needle in a haystack. I intend to argue that the radar beam would be too wide to distinguish a single target when presented with multiples, I need to know the make and model of the gun used.

Should I visit the Prosecutors office again to follow up on my second request for full disclosure?

Any hints, links or tips greatly appreciated,

Sean

Its difficult to state if the E was actually an error code or not, without knowing what type of device was being used, and if it actually was the letter E (many devices display weirdly shaped letters thanks to the limits of the display).

Just so youre aware, many types of radar can determine direction of travel, so the fact that vehicles were travelling both directions may not be relevant. Many can also display the speed of the fastest vehicle, so if your vehicle was obviously going faster than everyone else, they can still determine your speed even with other vehicles. Not saying you dont have a defence, but youll have to see what the notes say and what type of device was being used.

Can you not decipher anything in the handwritten notes at all?

Thanks for the reply.

From the research I have done so far I am aware that the direction of travel is indicated on the radar gun display while in use. When I was shown the reading the cop was standing next to my vehicle and I was viewing the display from a pretty close range and I do not recall seeing a direction indicator, Knowing the make and model would allow me to do more accurate searches and I hope an opportunity to view the operators manual.

Most error code information I have found so far implies the letter E would be followed by a number which would be listed in an error code table in the operators manual. For all I know the cop may have just "fat fingured" the buttons. However, whilst radar technology has improved over the years there has been sufficient evidence to indicate that it is at times, unreliable technology, especially when presented with multiple targets traveling in the same direction.

I was slowing for the school zone, it's a popular radar trap area, and has been for many years, unfortunately the vehicle following me was not slowing at the same rate, if I'd jammed my brakes on I expect I would have been rear-ended, wouldn't that have been nice, a speeding ticket and a visit to the bodyshop.

I can read about 90% of the hand written notes, and can guess about another 5%. I suppose, the truth is I'm just trying to be difficult with the prosecutors office. The 5% I can't read might be the information about the radar gun - I don't know.

Not that I'm clutching at straws yet, but, if I do not receive the radar gun info I hope to request a stay based on the fact that I needed this information to prepare my defense, which is why if I can find any information even vaguely similar for any radar gun error code "E" and I am not provided with the make & model I hope to argue they are the same.

Sean

If the car behind you was moving faster, then you will have to prove it. It is not hard to prove that you can get a radar reading from the second vehicle. As far as radar guns, you'll need the make and model used... you can find details online from there. Go for a second disclosure request, ask for typed/legible notes, if you don't get the details of the gun model, explain to the JP the details you are lacking on the day of trial. If he gives a continuance make sure the delay is charged to the crown, not you.

I don't know that I can prove the other vehicle was traveling faster, I am hoping to suggest that, and attempt to introduce doubt so that the reading could be attributed to either vehicle. Unless you know of a strategy to prove it?

I have already requested disclosure a 2nd time, on October 7, but as of today I haven't received it.

As I understand the process I have to wait 'til 15 or 16 days before the trial date then file paperwork requesting a Stay because of incomplete disclosure. Correct?

Sped wrote:

I don't know that I can prove the other vehicle was traveling faster, I am hoping to suggest that, and attempt to introduce doubt so that the reading could be attributed to either vehicle. Unless you know of a strategy to prove it?

I have already requested disclosure a 2nd time, on October 7, but as of today I haven't received it.

As I understand the process I have to wait 'til 15 or 16 days before the trial date then file paperwork requesting a Stay because of incomplete disclosure. Correct?

Unless the 2 vehicles are identical in size and measured head-on there will be 2 radar signals bounced back to the gun, that is straight physics. The question becomes which signal did the gun display. Prove that there was someone behind you, or get the officer to admit it and you're home free.

As far as I know, you can ask for the stay while at trial.... you are not a lawyer or paralegal so the court should give you some leeway. If anyone knows better please feel free to contradict me.

Reflections wrote:

Prove that there was someone behind you, or get the officer to admit it and you're home free. .

I think what Bear is trying to say, you're not quite home free just by showing a car was behind you.

It's a possible defence, but it would take some skillful articulation and questioning.

While I remained at the scene after the ticket it was obvious that anything that moved warranted a zap with the radar gun, whether there was one vehicle approaching or several together as well as traffic traveling both directions in the same zone. If I just come straight out and ask if there was a vehicle behind me I'm sure I'll get a "No" or a "I don't recall". That was the main reason I went home for the camera with a zoom lens, and probably one of the reasons they wrapped up the session when I returned. Strangely (or maybe not) there is no mention of me waiting at the scene after receiving my ticket, and the photocopied notes are not continuous, they are blanked out/covered in places, I would expect to protect other information related to other individuals charges, not that I am likely to find out.

Phrasing the questions will be all important. I will have to do more research, especially using terms like may, might, could, possibly????

Changing tact after more reading - I would be better off pursuing incomplete disclosure, at the trial, without any forewarning and request a Stay. But I have to continue to build my argument(s) in the event I am only granted an adjournment or even receive the requested information before the trial date. If I do get the make and model of the gun used (before my trial date) I will attempt to request the operators manual and calibration certificate at the same time.

hwybear wrote:

Reflections wrote:

Prove that there was someone behind you, or get the officer to admit it and you're home free. .

I believe I could get reasonable doubt......... unfortunately I can't do it for the OP here.

Reflections wrote:

I believe I could get reasonable doubt......... unfortunately I can't do it for the OP here.

Excuse my ignorance, but what does "OP" stand for?

OP == Other People

Thanks

joepenoso

Haha. OP = Original Poster

You sure?

OP==Other People?

OP is forum short form for original poster.

Thanks for the OP clarification. It doesn't make the whole answer much clearer however, unless you mean because you unable to represent me, not to worry.

Does the Prosecutors office have the various radar operating manuals on hand? or would I have to go to the Police to request a copy or at least be given the opportunity to read it on site?

Thanks again

Ok ....sorry

joepenoso

Sped wrote:

Thanks for the OP clarification. It doesn't make the whole answer much clearer however, unless you mean because you unable to represent me, not to worry.

Does the Prosecutors office have the various radar operating manuals on hand? or would I have to go to the Police to request a copy or at least be given the opportunity to read it on site?

Thanks again

You arrange to have the pertinant information forwarded to you through the Crown. I believe you will get the pages on testing and proper use of the device.

In the end it is the police that have the "user's" manual tough.

Any updates on this case would be great.

The update: It was a long and winding road.

Firstly, thanks to the information I gleaned from this site and Ticket Combat, I learned enough about the court system to fumble my way through this.

On April 6, 2011, I proceeded to the Ontario Court of Justice, at 5 Ray Lawson Blvd., Brampton, where I applied for a trial hearing and received a Notice Of Trial to appear at the Brampton Courthouse on December 15, 2011.

I applied for disclosure on August 22, 2011, and was told Id receive a phone call for pick up. I never received a phone call so returned to the Courthouse October 7. A disclosure package was waiting, date stamped September 14.

The disclosure package was incomplete. Sections of the Police Officers hand written notes were illegible and there was no information pertaining to the Radar Device used. I submitted a second request at this time, on October 7.

I returned to the Courthouse on November 22 and was told there was no disclosure package for me. I got into a "minor" altercation with the clerk and ended up dealing with her supervisor - I'd requested that she date stamp a copy of my disclosure request to prove I was attempting to obtain such, she refused stating "she hadn't provided any service (an understatement!) therefore couldn't stamp anything". Her supervisor wasn't much better but did indeed give me a stamp! I received a phone call at home later that same day to advise me there was now a disclosure package to pick up. I collected this disclosure package on November 24, it was date stamped November 18. Contained in this package were 2 pages photocopied from a Genesis Handheld Directional (GHD) Users Manual as well as 1 page photocopied from a Genesis VP Directional Users Manual. Also the cops notes all neatly typed up with more info on them than the original copies - interesting.

On this same day, November 24, I attempted to submit another disclosure request for a copy of the full Users Manual for the Radar Device used by the Police Officer but the attending clerk refused to accept my submission stating "We do not release copies of the user manuals". I was told I may view the manual at the counter, which I did. It contains approximately 40 pages.

In preparing my defense it became obvious I needed a copy of the Radar device user manual, as an exhibit and reference, if I intended to question settings, procedures and specifications, as well as target acquisition, false readings, multiple readings, tracking and targeting limitations, interference test procedures or any matter relating to interference contained in the manual, in an effort to make full answer and defense.

On December 5, I submitted another disclosure request for a copy of the full user manual. This time the request was accepted.

I received a phone call on December 8, to pick up my disclosure request. On December 9, I was given a disclosure package containing 2 photocopied pages from a Genesis II Select Directional. To date then, I had received 5 photocopied pages from 3 quite different Radar User Manuals.

On December 15, I attended court , and attempted to present a pre-trial motion requesting a Stay of the charge for incomplete disclosure. The Justice "humoured" me as I rambled on citing from Stinchcombe, Chaplin http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/199 ... ii126.html and Carosella http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/199 ... ii402.html The prosecution huffed and puffed that these were old cases, I countered they are as relevant today as they were then. The prosecution argued that the matter had not been properly brought before the court (i.e. in writing, 15 days beforehand, statements, affidavits, etc.) I cited Vellone http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj150.html which at the time was a valid argument, although under appeal, I believe it has since been overturned. Then the Crown argued it was only applicable to 11b's, I argued it was a procedural issue not limited to 11b's. The justice had to retire to his chamber for a while to consider the issues. While we're waiting the smarmy prosecutor starts suggesting resources I could subscribe to for more recent rulings - yeah okay thanks! Then when the Justice returns tells him how he's trying to help me!!! What a tool.

Anyway, all things considered I got an adjournment so I could make a proper application.

On March 1, 2012, I made a final disclosure request for a full copy of the Radar device user manual. I never received this disclosure.

I'd also spent many hours trawling through Canlii searches and radar gun sites trying to establish cross examination questions and arguments in case I had to go to trial. Reading the radar user manual opens up a lot of information and possibilities to question the cop - specifications, procedures, etc. I downloaded a Genesis VP Directional manual from one of the torrent sites, and read the one at the prosecutors office, and contrary to what others might suggest, they are virtually identical, the only differences I recall being metric and imperial units.

I submitted my "Notice of application for stay of proceedings" using the tried and tested runaround method. Attached submissions were once again Stinchcombe and a ruling against the Peel Police Services Board by the Information and Privacy Commissioner http://canlii.ca/en/on/onipc/doc/2008/2 ... i1829.html As an aside, when I attempted to get my statement sworn at the court house I was astounded to learn they had nobody on staff, available, to swear an oath for an 11b or any other such challenge I'm sure. It will be a test of your patience. You might have to get a paralegal or a City clerk to swear the oath.

I went to court on May 14, ready to make my constitutional challenge and I got as far as "state your name for the record" then the prosecution (a different prosecutor to my first court appearance) said the officer doesn't appear to be in court so I withdraw the charge. What a merry-go-round. I can't say I'm complaining as I got the result I wanted, but I'd done so much reading and preparing it was a bit of an anti-climax. I'll just file everything for the next time. There'll always be a next time, right?

The manuals dont get released....

"There will always be a next time"... not if you don't break the law, I'm just saying.

HollowPoint wrote:

The manuals dont get released....

Actually, they do.

The full manual doesn't have to be disclosed, but if relevant parts aren't given to the defendant, it is grounds for staying the charge.

good work bro.

Cheers

Stripe

Radar Identified wrote:

HollowPoint wrote:

The manuals dont get released....

Actually, they do.

The full manual doesn't have to be disclosed, but if relevant parts aren't given to the defendant, it is grounds for staying the charge.

I have yet to send a manual to anyone requesting disclosure. I have, however, had to photocopy 3 pages from the manual from time to time. To me, 3 pages does not equate to someone having the manual, but that's just my view.

Semantics.