I had my court case with the JP in Guelph and she ignored my testimony of what tests have to be performed on a Ultralyte LR100 LT1 20-20. I showed a court case and it proved that the zero velocity fixed distance test is required by the operator before it's use. I did not have the manual because the prosecutor stated in a letter to me they are under no obligation to provide it. The officer testified she did not take a velocity reading she only took the distance reading. I have since found the British version of the manual online but I need the copy from the prosecutor before my appeal. How do you sujest I get a copy from them.
I had my court case with the JP in Guelph and she ignored my testimony of what tests have to be performed on a Ultralyte LR100 LT1 20-20.
I showed a court case and it proved that the zero velocity fixed distance test is required by the operator before it's use.
I did not have the manual because the prosecutor stated in a letter to me they are under no obligation to provide it.
The officer testified she did not take a velocity reading she only took the distance reading.
I have since found the British version of the manual online but I need the copy from the prosecutor before my appeal.
Crown Prosecutors often say "we don't have to provide the manual." Nothing could be further from the truth. They DO need to provide it, if not, it's improper disclosure. Here's some case law. Thunder Bay v. Millar et al That particular case also quashed the oft-cited "it's copyright material" excuse that's used. R. v. Vanier R. v. Bourget And so on. If the device was to be used testimonially, then the manual needed to be disclosed to you. The best way of going about it is if you don't get the manual prior to your first trial, file to get the charge stayed based on improper disclosure... but the opportunity for that has gone by. For your appeal, file another disclosure request, indicating that the courts have ruled that the manual is required, particularly since the device was used testimonially. If they again fail to provide it, you can ask the Justice to order them to release the manual to you, or stay the charge, but you'll need to have an argument as to why you need specific parts of the manual. Keep pressuring them.
Crown Prosecutors often say "we don't have to provide the manual." Nothing could be further from the truth. They DO need to provide it, if not, it's improper disclosure. Here's some case law.
And so on. If the device was to be used testimonially, then the manual needed to be disclosed to you. The best way of going about it is if you don't get the manual prior to your first trial, file to get the charge stayed based on improper disclosure... but the opportunity for that has gone by. For your appeal, file another disclosure request, indicating that the courts have ruled that the manual is required, particularly since the device was used testimonially. If they again fail to provide it, you can ask the Justice to order them to release the manual to you, or stay the charge, but you'll need to have an argument as to why you need specific parts of the manual. Keep pressuring them.
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
Thank you for the information. So do I just send a registered letter to the prosecutor then or is there court forms. Also as you know the testing is required in order for the laser to standup in court as accurate. Also I am asking for all the citations this officer has written using this type of instrument because she testified this is her usual practice. The testing she completed does not comply with the user manual. Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun. What are you thoughts on this defence as well.
Radar Identified wrote:
Crown Prosecutors often say "we don't have to provide the manual." Nothing could be further from the truth. They DO need to provide it, if not, it's improper disclosure. Here's some case law.
And so on. If the device was to be used testimonially, then the manual needed to be disclosed to you. The best way of going about it is if you don't get the manual prior to your first trial, file to get the charge stayed based on improper disclosure... but the opportunity for that has gone by. For your appeal, file another disclosure request, indicating that the courts have ruled that the manual is required, particularly since the device was used testimonially. If they again fail to provide it, you can ask the Justice to order them to release the manual to you, or stay the charge, but you'll need to have an argument as to why you need specific parts of the manual. Keep pressuring them.
Thank you for the information. So do I just send a registered letter to the prosecutor then or is there court forms. Also as you know the testing is required in order for the laser to standup in court as accurate.
Also I am asking for all the citations this officer has written using this type of instrument because she testified this is her usual practice. The testing she completed does not comply with the user manual.
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun.
I'd send the registered mail. If the Prosecutor still doesn't budge, then there's the court forms (violating your rights under the Charter)... Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure. Unfortunately, that will go nowhere. That argument may work, but I wouldn't call it bulletproof. Most LIDAR devices have enough of a tolerance built into them that unless the car was coming down an absolutely ridiculous incline or the angle was WAY above the roadway, the reading will stand up as valid. Cosine angle works in favour of the defendant. Usually with court cases, the manual has to specifically say "it MUST be done this way" or "do NOT do this" for the usage to be considered improper enough that its evidence will be discounted. Extrapolating beyond what is specifically written in the manual is an uphill battle. That said... you might be interested in this case (some similarities to the angle argument)... R. v. Laarakker, 2008 Just to clarify, is this an appeal that you've filed, or is it a re-opening?
robmcla wrote:
So do I just send a registered letter to the prosecutor then or is there court forms.
I'd send the registered mail. If the Prosecutor still doesn't budge, then there's the court forms (violating your rights under the Charter)...
robmcla wrote:
Also as you know the testing is required in order for the laser to standup in court as accurate.
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure.
robmcla wrote:
Also I am asking for all the citations this officer has written using this type of instrument because she testified this is her usual practice.
Unfortunately, that will go nowhere.
robmcla wrote:
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used.
That argument may work, but I wouldn't call it bulletproof. Most LIDAR devices have enough of a tolerance built into them that unless the car was coming down an absolutely ridiculous incline or the angle was WAY above the roadway, the reading will stand up as valid. Cosine angle works in favour of the defendant. Usually with court cases, the manual has to specifically say "it MUST be done this way" or "do NOT do this" for the usage to be considered improper enough that its evidence will be discounted. Extrapolating beyond what is specifically written in the manual is an uphill battle. That said... you might be interested in this case (some similarities to the angle argument)...
Just to clarify, is this an appeal that you've filed, or is it a re-opening?
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
What manual are you reading? Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet. I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads... "A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour." The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles.... at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000 at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999 at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997 so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate) ....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at: 300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr 600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr. The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down.
robmcla wrote:
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun.
What are you thoughts on this defence as well.
What manual are you reading?
Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet.
I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads...
"A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour."
The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles....
at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000
at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999
at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997
so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate)
....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at:
300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr
600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr.
The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
What manual are you reading? Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet. I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads... "A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour." The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles.... at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000 at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999 at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997 so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate) ....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at: 300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr 600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr. The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down. I am trying to get the manual from the prosecutor as I am allowed to do by the cahrter. R. v. Laarakker, 2008 BCPC 146 is the case I am using for the angle. The problem an officer has with this is the cosine is not talked about in the verticle as being tested by the manufacturer. I am only including this as a secondary arguement. This is an appeal of the testimony of an officer doing testing that does not comply with the manufacturer test as laid out and excepted by the courts. I found the British version also and the test as I stipulated it was correct not the officer. I am only mentioning the verticle hill argue ment as well because I mentioned it in my case at the JP trial. Thank you for the information and I hope this case helps others in the future. I am trying to get all tickets the officer using this instrument just to set presidence. Yes I like to raise the bar when I have a point. LOL
hwybear wrote:
robmcla wrote:
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun.
What are you thoughts on this defence as well.
What manual are you reading?
Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet.
I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads...
"A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour."
The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles....
at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000
at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999
at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997
so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate)
....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at:
300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr
600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr.
The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down.
I am trying to get the manual from the prosecutor as I am allowed to do by the cahrter. R. v. Laarakker, 2008 BCPC 146 is the case I am using for the angle. The problem an officer has with this is the cosine is not talked about in the verticle as being tested by the manufacturer. I am only including this as a secondary arguement. This is an appeal of the testimony of an officer doing testing that does not comply with the manufacturer test as laid out and excepted by the courts. I found the British version also and the test as I stipulated it was correct not the officer. I am only mentioning the verticle hill argue ment as well because I mentioned it in my case at the JP trial. Thank you for the information and I hope this case helps others in the future. I am trying to get all tickets the officer using this instrument just to set presidence. Yes I like to raise the bar when I have a point. LOL
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure. No the officer testified she did only the fixed distance test. I asked her several times what the velocity reading was on the fixed didtance test. She stated she only read the distance. I asked her several time to the point the JP was getting mad at me. But I knew I needed this part to nail her in appeal. The transcript even shows this testimony.
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure.
No the officer testified she did only the fixed distance test. I asked her several times what the velocity reading was on the fixed didtance test. She stated she only read the distance. I asked her several time to the point the JP was getting mad at me. But I knew I needed this part to nail her in appeal. The transcript even shows this testimony.
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure.
No the officer testified she did only the fixed distance test. I asked her several times what the velocity reading was on the fixed didtance test. She stated she only read the distance. I asked her several time to the point the JP was getting mad at me. But I knew I needed this part to nail her in appeal. The transcript even shows this testimony.
2 words: Alignment Check.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Hi so I have a bizzare situation. Today I received a summons for "being the owner of a motor vehicle bearing Vehicle Identification Number ###, failed to submit the vehicle, equipment or drawn vehicle for inspection or tests as required by an officer" for a vehicle I previously owned. Apparently a violation of HTA 82(9).
The date of offense is June 15, the summons was issued on October 26th and I…
Hi, I need some help for the ticket of lmproper left turn.
When i drove my car from east to west, intending to make a left turn and stop in front of stop line. There was a car in front of me, which has turn on yellow light. The light was turning red and then I thought I cannot leave in the intersection and turned, an incoming car was runing the light and hit me. No one got hurt but both cars had…
Have a ticket in which the radar used was a Genesis VP Directional. I had downloaded the manual for a Genesis VP but I now realize that the unit is not the same so it is the wrong manual. My trial is very soon so I do not have time to ask for disclosure of the manual.
Does anyone have access to an electronic version of the manual for Genesis VP Directional?
I was pulled over today in the city of Oakville for going 75 in a 40 zone. However, I am 100 percent certain that I was going only 50 in the 40 zone. When I was pulled over, I was driving my Dad's car which I felt was the reason I was getting stopped since two teenagers driving a 2013 S Class. He asked does I know why I am being pulled over and I…
I really need help on fighting my 9 tickets i received from one police officer. Here is some background of what happened!
I was caught speeding 66km on a 40km (school zone) on January 29, 2010. I was driving my friend's car and turns out she didnt renew the validation on the vehicle and didnt leave the up to date insurance paper on the car.
Hey question that I think here's probably the best place to get the answer:
I was charged with a careless driving offence in oct, trail in early april, so as of right now my insurance record is 100% clean... except the officer did file an accident report at the scene where I was classified at fault due to it being PI (although very minor). The person I hit did not sue etc, so the insurance company…
Very much unintentionally passed a stopped bus, with sign and flashing lights. Didn't realize I had done it until I was at the end of the bus. I'll save you my sob story, but it was truly accidental. I'm generally very cautious and have a perfect driving record. Never been stopped.
While I realize if a cop had seen me that I would have gotten a ticket, there were none in sight. Though I may very…
I was recently pulled over for running a red and I wasnt able to find my wallet in the car at the time to hand over my license. I had a passport in the vehicle that he used. The wallet was in the vehicle, it just fell through the seats. (Tough to find a black leather wallet in a black/black leather truck at night).
The officer still wrote the tickets for both he signed the one ticket (failure to…
I was passing a vehicle that was going slow for me and there was an oncoming vehicle coming at me. I speed up to get around the person I was passing and the oncoming vehicle turns out to be a cop who turns around and tickets me for going 110km in a 80km zone. How does it work with passing a vehicle? Once I passed the vehicle I went back down to my original speed of just under 100. The officer…
I picked up a brand new (old stock) Fuzzbuster a while ago at auction (wopping $5!!) and I want to mount it on the dash of my old GTO as a cool accessory when I show it at car shows. But I'm not sure if it's legal or not.
Here's my thoughts:
- It is early 70's technology (x-band) so it won't detect modern police radar. That's assuming no police force uses the old x-band frequency.
Hi guys, I'm still a little in shock of getting my first traffic ticket...
On Monday afternoon, I was returning from Toronto to Ottawa on HW416, I was driving about 15 over 100 like always. Then a car came very close to me on the left lane and made me nervous, I speed up unintentionally to pass the car and change lane, but while doing that a police car pull out of the median. He was hiding in…
May i ask this question regarding transport trucks limited to 105 km/h. Moving road blocks or safety?
IMO it isnt speed that kills. I find transport trucks infact help keep the road going. With cars that choose to not move to the right and slow down the middle lane the trucks would try to pass in their passing lane therefore the slower traffic would move right.
Received a notice from the police that a motion is being put forward to adjourn upcoming trial date. Notice indicates that an officer has sworn an affidavit that the crucial witness cannot attend date trial is set for (we know there is a social engagement at 7:30 pm for the witness, trial time is 1:30 pm). This further delay is a big problem to my daughter's case. She is moving away to…
This is what happened. I was travelling west on a four lane city street that was very light with traffic. I was making a left hand turn into a wide driveway of a business. There was traffic lights about 100 yards past the driveway and were red for the east-west traffic. I was in the left lane with my signal on and there was no oncoming traffic due to the red light. I was slowed right down…
I was driving my families older car and got pulled over, and the police officer informed me my plate was dirty. He issued me a ticket of $110 for the 13(2) act and obstruct plate as the offense. He informed me that such a plate could be used to avoid red lights as well as 407 tolls, also that buying a new plate can help to lower the ticket if I fight the charge, and that he also took a picture…
I received a red light camera ticket. In the picture, you see an ambulance in front of me with flashing lights. I had moved to alleviate the traffic behind me for the emergency vehicles coming behind it.
Is this a possible defense, if so, does anyone know any good case law to justify this position?
what happens if they charge someone for driving at 151Km/hr in montreal and they put for trial, appear after some months and sadly lost the trial ?
In montreal its $300 fine and 5demerit points ...
I heard Ontario and Qubec share the information. So once the trial is over ( and when the file moved to ontario) will his car gets towed and licence get suspended for 7days (later to 30 days ) ? and he…
I got a notice in the mail that trial is set four weeks from today, so it's time to request disclosure. I have zero chance of getting an 11b since trial is less than two months after the offense date and the officer did not reduce the charge. I really want to try and create delays on the trial, to reduce the chance of the officer showing up on multiple occasions. Is there any known loop-holes…
This weekend my father was involved in an accident with a transit bus in Burlington, ON. After the police showed up he was charged with "Fail to obey stop sign" Sec. 136(1)(a). At this particular intersection there NO stop signs but there are traffic lights. There is construction going on there so one of the light posts is smaller.
Driving conditions were terribly wet and visibility was low.…
So my boyfriend and I recently started dating. I have a vehicle that was insured. Insurance cost too much and I found it was just as easy to walk to work due to how close it was. But I didn't want to get rid of my car just yet, plus I'm still making payments on it as well. When we moved into our appartment together, I had it towed to my parking spot out back.
I was making a left hand legal turn on a green light, a driver came through the lane I was supposed to be going into ran the red and hit me head on as I was turning into my lane. When the officer came he was telling me that I was racing and driving recklessly because apparently there was reports of street racing in the area. I was not charged on the scene for this but I'm scared i am going to be…
I got a ticket for failure to surrender insurance because I did not have my new insurance stubs with me, just a bunch of expired ones. My policy number has not changed, so I asked the officer to just run the policy number so I could prove that I was in fact insured. He said they don't have that ability, handed me the ticket and reminded me that my car could have been impounded.
So I'm in a bit of a pickle and would appreciate if someone could clarify something for me.
I'm less than a month away (test on April 6th) from getting my full G license, and got a speeding ticket recently. The ticket was for 49km/h over the posted limit of 100km/h on the 403 in Oakville/Halton region, but was reduced from the initial ~60km/h over.
