Careless driving because pedestrian claims my car hit her

Will do!.

If anyone else on this thread has any input, I would like to hear it. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

So my court date is in a week next Friday and just wanted to ask if my trial goes south and I lose the case, would I be able to appeal the final decision made by the Justice of the peace? Because I am really determined to see this thing through and make sure that lady does not win this case. Money is not even the issue at this point, it's more a matter of principle. I don't want to see scum bags like her commit insurance fraud and win.

You can always appeal any trial decision.

But remember that an appeal is NOT a new trial. For an appeal to succeed you need to convince the Judge that the Justice of the Peace or the Prosecutor made some kind of mistake at the original trial, and you can NOT introduce new evidence. Basically you make your points and the Judge reviews the transcript and decides whether there really was a mistake made or not.

jsherk wrote:

You can always appeal any trial decision.

But remember that an appeal is NOT a new trial. For an appeal to succeed you need to convince the Judge that the Justice of the Peace or the Prosecutor made some kind of mistake at the original trial, and you can NOT introduce new evidence. Basically you make your points and the Judge reviews the transcript and decides whether there really was a mistake made or not.

How does one appeal a trial decision? what are the first steps? cause like this case to me looks like a he said she said case and if I get convicted just because some *EDIT* simply says "he hit me" I don't think that should be sufficient evidence to convict someone and ruin the persons life all because some scammer uttered a few words

When the trial is over you go to the provincial offences office and ask for the form to file an appeal. You will need to pay the fine in full though first (gets reimbursed if you win the appeal), and you will have to pay to get three certified copies of the transcript from the trial (one copy for prosecutiorn, one for judge and one for you).

But listen to jsherk - you will be wasting your time and money if you appeal just because you don't agree with the judge's decision. There has to be an error in law for an appeal to be successful.

Is there any medical evidence of her injuries?

She claims to be hit by you, was there any bruising? Any photos? Any medical report of her visiting ER?

Who was the doctor that examined her?

Which hospital did she go to? Who took her?

Did the officer do any investigation to confirm validity of her story? Or did he take her word at face value?

If it's your word against hers, I don't see how the JP can convict you without any shred of evidence, at the end of the day, the burden of proof still is on the prosecution and since the officer was not the witness it is much dicier than a regular traffic court when the officer is a sworn law enforcement agent.

just playing devils advocate.

* She may not have bruising, but still could have soft tissue injury or internal, spinal, or skeletal issues

* They may not be obvious now, but could be an issue in the future,

* Yes she really should go to either an ER, or GP or other doc and get a report

* BUT if she was hit, regardless of apparent injury, she was hit.

Observer135 wrote:

Is there any medical evidence of her injuries?

She claims to be hit by you, was there any bruising? Any photos? Any medical report of her visiting ER?

Who was the doctor that examined her?

Which hospital did she go to? Who took her?

Did the officer do any investigation to confirm validity of her story? Or did he take her word at face value?

If it's your word against hers, I don't see how the JP can convict you without any shred of evidence, at the end of the day, the burden of proof still is on the prosecution and since the officer was not the witness it is much dicier than a regular traffic court when the officer is a sworn law enforcement agent.

Observer135 wrote:

Is there any medical evidence of her injuries?

She claims to be hit by you, was there any bruising? Any photos? Any medical report of her visiting ER?

Who was the doctor that examined her?

Which hospital did she go to? Who took her?

Did the officer do any investigation to confirm validity of her story? Or did he take her word at face value?

If it's your word against hers, I don't see how the JP can convict you without any shred of evidence, at the end of the day, the burden of proof still is on the prosecution and since the officer was not the witness it is much dicier than a regular traffic court when the officer is a sworn law enforcement agent.

In the police report it says that she stated, "she suffers from soft tissue injuries in her back, neck and hips". However it also states that "she was released from the hospital with no injuries". So far, I believe the detective just took her word at face value along with my statement which I mentioned that "as I was waiting for traffic to clear to safely make my right turn, there was a lady who was banging on my hood who seemed like she was frustrated from blocking her way from crossing". When the detective gave me the charges, I asked him, so you are giving me these charges based only on her word? he then replied "Yes that is correct" he did not even bother to check my vehicle to see if there was any damages on my car. That's why I want to know if I can appeal the Judges decision if I do get convicted. Because there really is not any evidence here. It's just her story she made to the police and my statement I made when I spoke with the detective. That is why I will do everything possible to make sure all charges get dropped, no Plea bargain. I absolutely will not plead guilty to anything I did not do. I say this because society always tends to favour the person who seems to be the victim and in a he said she said case, I feel like they will lean towards the alleged victims side

You need to make sure you understand CROSS-EXAMINATION ... do a google search and read some stuff on it.

You will need to cross examine both the officer and the victim. The points you bring up are good questions to ask "So officer, did you base the charges on her word only? Did you see any medical reports? Did you talk to doctors? Did you look for damage on my vehicle?"

jsherk wrote:

You need to make sure you understand CROSS-EXAMINATION ... do a google search and read some stuff on it.

You will need to cross examine both the officer and the victim. The points you bring up are good questions to ask "So officer, did you base the charges on her word only? Did you see any medical reports? Did you talk to doctors? Did you look for damage on my vehicle?"

Well my paralegal or someone my paralegal will send to represent me will be doing most of the talking. I will run by the points you mentioned here to him and hopefully he can work something out.

Make sure you instruct your paralegal that you will absolutely NOT take any kind of plea deal. Send it to them in writing, both by email and by regular mail.

Just my opinion, but I would suggest that in this case you DO need to go to court and testify your side of the story as well.

Dash Cam !!!!!!!!

reminder to self (must get one)

jsherk wrote:

Make sure you instruct your paralegal that you will absolutely NOT take any kind of plea deal. Send it to them in writing, both by email and by regular mail.

Just my opinion, but I would suggest that in this case you DO need to go to court and testify your side of the story as well.

Sounds good. And yes I will have to go to court and testify anyways I don't really have a choice. if I don't go I will just get convicted automatically

Hi Guys,

So I had my court date last Friday, and the lady still never showed up. So the prosecutor withdrew the charges. I literally just went up said my name in front of the judge and then the prosecutor stated that, "We will not proceed with the trial on the account that the witness has not shown up. This is the second trial now the witness was not present even though the officer has contacted her to appear on both occasions." The judge then just looked at both of us momentarily and was like ok so withdrawn with a very gloomy tone lol.

Does this mean I can finally put this behind me ? and I will never have to worry about them reopening this case at a later date?

Congratulations on getting three nasty charges withdrawn!

As far as the HTA is concerned you will not be re-charged so you can stop worrying about that. However I do believe you could be sued civilly by the pedestrian up to 2 years after the incident. That is the statute of limitations for property damage, not sure if it's longer for injury. The person couldn't even be bothered to show up to a witness summons so you probably have nothing to worry about though.

Perhaps she thought she was going to get an easy settlement from you. Who knows. If that was the case then well done for standing up to the allegation.

Thanks guys. Your support was very much appreciated. Now first thing I need to do is call up my insurance and let them now that the charges were withdrawn and tell them that this lady never showed up to testify. This way her civil suit will most likely also be thrown out. She probably thought I was going to simply go in and plead guilty, sucks for her i guess lol. I should sue her for wasting my time and money to deal with this headache. But it will just probably cause me more headaches than what it's worth.

For next time though, what should I say to a cop who calls me and tells me they got a report that my vehicle was involved in an accident?

Congratulations on the win. Yes it is all done now with nothing to worry about.

dude wrote:

This way her civil suit will most likely also be thrown out.

That's very good news that the charges were withdrawn. Although I wouldn't necessarily leap to a civil suit being thrown out. You were not found to be not guilty at the end of a trial that you can point to with a court transcript. Your charges were withdrawn without trial based (on the record) upon the the witness not being present.

OTD Legal wrote:

dude wrote:

This way her civil suit will most likely also be thrown out.

That's very good news that the charges were withdrawn. Although I wouldn't necessarily leap to a civil suit being thrown out. You were not found to be not guilty at the end of a trial that you can point to with a court transcript. Your charges were withdrawn without trial based (on the record) upon the the witness not being present.

Yes, spoke with my insurance who is handling the claim regarding these charges as well as the letter I received from her lawyer stating she wants to pursue personal injuries back in May when the cop issued the charges. He was asking if there were any documentation from the courts that you received to show that she never showed up to court and that your charges got withdrawn. I told him I got no sort of documentation what so ever, and he said that they have up to 2 years from the time of the "alleged accident" to submit to a personal injury claim and send you court documents to show up to court. So far I got nothing but they have until April 2018 I guess to summon me to court. He said if you get anything regarding this matter to let them know.

Is there any way I can get documentation from the court to show the charges were withdrawn and that the witness never showed up to court.

dude wrote:

OTD Legal wrote:

dude wrote:

This way her civil suit will most likely also be thrown out.

That's very good news that the charges were withdrawn. Although I wouldn't necessarily leap to a civil suit being thrown out. You were not found to be not guilty at the end of a trial that you can point to with a court transcript. Your charges were withdrawn without trial based (on the record) upon the the witness not being present.

Yes, spoke with my insurance who is handling the claim regarding these charges as well as the letter I received from her lawyer stating she wants to pursue personal injuries back in May when the cop issued the charges. He was asking if there were any documentation from the courts that you received to show that she never showed up to court and that your charges got withdrawn. I told him I got no sort of documentation what so ever, and he said that they have up to 2 years from the time of the "alleged accident" to submit to a personal injury claim and send you court documents to show up to court. So far I got nothing but they have until April 2018 I guess to summon me to court. He said if you get anything regarding this matter to let them know.

Is there any way I can get documentation from the court to show the charges were withdrawn and that the witness never showed up to court.

Yes, you can request a transcript of the hearing. The transcript will likely be short and not cost very much money.

OTD Legal wrote:

Yes, you can request a transcript of the hearing. The transcript will likely be short and not cost very much money.

Alternatively, you can request for a "minute" from the court in accordance with section 62 of the Provincial Offences Act:

"Minute of conviction

62. Where a court convicts a defendant or dismisses a charge, a minute of the dismissal or conviction and sentence shall be made by the court, and, upon request by the defendant or the prosecutor or by the Attorney General or his or her agent, the court shall cause a copy thereof certified by the clerk of the court to be delivered to the person making the request."

As far as I'm aware, this is free of charge.

I've attached an example of what this would look like - blacking out identifying information.

Whenaxis wrote:

OTD Legal wrote:

Yes, you can request a transcript of the hearing. The transcript will likely be short and not cost very much money.

Alternatively, you can request for a "minute" from the court in accordance with section 62 of the Provincial Offences Act:

"Minute of conviction

62. Where a court convicts a defendant or dismisses a charge, a minute of the dismissal or conviction and sentence shall be made by the court, and, upon request by the defendant or the prosecutor or by the Attorney General or his or her agent, the court shall cause a copy thereof certified by the clerk of the court to be delivered to the person making the request."

As far as I'm aware, this is free of charge.

I've attached an example of what this would look like - blacking out identifying information.

Interesting...How does one request a minute? and also what is the difference between dismissed, withdrawn, and quashed? To me it sounds like they are all the same thing

In the past, I've just sent in a letter (by mail or fax) to the courthouse - something along the lines of what I attached below.

Dismissed:

A justice can dismiss a charge if:

- the prosecution does not appear at trial

- the prosecution offers no evidence or insufficient evidence at trial

- the defendant is found not guilty at trial

Withdrawn:

A charge can be withdrawn:

- before the defendant enters a plea, the prosecutor has discretion to withdraw a charge for any reason

- after the defendant enters a plea, the prosecutor can request to withdraw a charge if the justice allows it

Quashed:

A charge can be quashed if:

- the defendant does not appear for trial, the justice finds that the ticket or subpoena is not complete and regular on its face

- the defendant does appear for trial, there is a defect apparent on the face of the ticket or subpoena and an amendment would not be in the interests of justice. Otherwise, the ticket or subpoena can be amended and corrected.

Whenaxis wrote:

In the past, I've just sent in a letter (by mail or fax) to the courthouse - something along the lines of what I attached below.

Dismissed:

A justice can dismiss a charge if:

- the prosecution does not appear at trial

- the prosecution offers no evidence or insufficient evidence at trial

- the defendant is found not guilty at trial

Withdrawn:

A charge can be withdrawn:

- before the defendant enters a plea, the prosecutor has discretion to withdraw a charge for any reason

- after the defendant enters a plea, the prosecutor can request to withdraw a charge if the justice allows it

Quashed:

A charge can be quashed if:

- the defendant does not appear for trial, the justice finds that the ticket or subpoena is not complete and regular on its face

- the defendant does appear for trial, there is a defect apparent on the face of the ticket or subpoena and an amendment would not be in the interests of justice. Otherwise, the ticket or subpoena can be amended and corrected.

Thanks man, this helps a lot. Essentially though, all 3 of those findings would result in the same thing though right? i.e your record clean and no one will ever harass you again.

I have learned soo much from this Forum. This is the best forum ever. Thank you to all the members on this thread that were soo informative. I will definitely be more prepared now the next time I am involved in a traffic incident.

dude wrote:

Thanks man, this helps a lot. Essentially though, all 3 of those findings would result in the same thing though right? i.e your record clean and no one will ever harass you again.

I have learned soo much from this Forum. This is the best forum ever. Thank you to all the members on this thread that were soo informative. I will definitely be more prepared now the next time I am involved in a traffic incident.

The three are different although the bottom line is that the original offence is not placed on the record as a conviction. Only in the case of a dismissal has the matter actually been adjudicated. A quashed or withdrawn offence can still be reserved within the appropriate period of reservice.

OTD Legal wrote:

A quashed or withdrawn offence can still be reserved within the appropriate period of reservice.

Yes, you can be served again with a summons up to 6 months after the date of the offence, which is the limitation period provided by the Provincial Offences Act.

But very unlikely... would have to be a very serious crime for them to try that.

Hi Everyone,

It's been a while since I have been active on this post. Hoped I would never have to deal with this case again but I just got served with papers because the lady wants to sue me for personal injuries. I already contacted my insurance and sent them the papers.

What I find weird is that the letter I got from her lawyer back when I was still fighting these charges are no longer representing her and a new law firm is now representing her case. Does that mean that her old one knew that her case was trash and they aren't going to get anything so they don't want to waste their time and so she went to a more desperate firm I suppose? I received a letter from her lawyer saying they want to sue like 2 weeks before the 2 year anniversary mark of the so called alleged accident

My insurance rep told me that I will have to go to something called discovery where both parties will be there with their lawyers and will explain their stories under oath. I hope my insurance does not pay her anything, cause i know she is trying to claim insurance fraud.

Any idea what are her chances of winning knowing she never showed up to court to convict me of my alleged traffic violations? I assume at this point that I don't have to worry much since my charges have already been withdrawn and she is really just after my insurance money.