Hi, I was charged with careless driving for a one-vehicle accident, and would like to know how to go about pleading not guilty. I was driving on a rural road at night in an 80 kmh zone. I was driving up a hill. At the top of the hill is a 90 degree turn sign (no stop sign, no kmh posted). I hit the brakes too late, and because the road goes downhill and there's a lot of gravel, skidded one or two hundred meters, missed the turn, and totalled the vehicle. It doesn't seem reasonable to be charged with this serious charge for what seems to me to be a no-fault accident. Anyway, the police said "they had to" give me the ticket and told me to fight it (?!). Anyway, how should I plead my case? Can I get it dismissed? Should I go and get pictures of the scene, skid marks, etc.? Thanks for your help. I'm glad to have gotten away unharmed. Good luck to anyone else in a similar situation.
Hi,
I was charged with careless driving for a one-vehicle accident, and would like to know how to go about pleading not guilty. I was driving on a rural road at night in an 80 kmh zone. I was driving up a hill. At the top of the hill is a 90 degree turn sign (no stop sign, no kmh posted). I hit the brakes too late, and because the road goes downhill and there's a lot of gravel, skidded one or two hundred meters, missed the turn, and totalled the vehicle. It doesn't seem reasonable to be charged with this serious charge for what seems to me to be a no-fault accident. Anyway, the police said "they had to" give me the ticket and told me to fight it (?!). Anyway, how should I plead my case? Can I get it dismissed? Should I go and get pictures of the scene, skid marks, etc.?
Thanks for your help. I'm glad to have gotten away unharmed. Good luck to anyone else in a similar situation.
They didn't HAVE to give you a ticket, they felt it was warranted in the situation and issued it. Read this: http://simonborys.wordpress.com/2011/02 ... -a-ticket/ That being said, this is a good scenario to hiring someone to assist you at a trial because there are some good questions to be asked about how they can prove that you were driving carelessly at the time of the collision without any witnesses. There is case law which says that mere fact of a collision is not prima facia evidence of careless driving.
That being said, this is a good scenario to hiring someone to assist you at a trial because there are some good questions to be asked about how they can prove that you were driving carelessly at the time of the collision without any witnesses. There is case law which says that mere fact of a collision is not prima facia evidence of careless driving.
Thanks for your response. OK, I understand why the police officers said that. About what to do now: I will go to the court house on Monday to arrange a trial date, and the yellow ticket says that I can meet a prosecutor in advance of the trial. Does that happen on Monday? I believe there are a number of mitigating circumstances: the poor signage, extremely sharp turn, layer of gravel/dirt on the paved road, hill, no ABS, and skid marks showing that I anticipated the turn hundreds of metres in advance. Should I get pictures of these facts and bring them with me on Monday or when I meet the prosecutor? Thanks, I appreciate the help.
Thanks for your response. OK, I understand why the police officers said that. About what to do now: I will go to the court house on Monday to arrange a trial date, and the yellow ticket says that I can meet a prosecutor in advance of the trial. Does that happen on Monday? I believe there are a number of mitigating circumstances: the poor signage, extremely sharp turn, layer of gravel/dirt on the paved road, hill, no ABS, and skid marks showing that I anticipated the turn hundreds of metres in advance. Should I get pictures of these facts and bring them with me on Monday or when I meet the prosecutor?
Also, I read on this site: http://www.defencelaw.com/careless-driving.html ##################################### More than a momentary lapse Several principles have emerged over the years from court rulings on careless driving: * The standard against which the defendant's driving must be measured is not one of perfection. The driving of the defendant must be measured against a reasonable standard or skill, what an ordinary person would do. * A momentary lapse or a simple error in judgment is insufficient to justify a conviction for careless driving. ... * Mere inadvertent negligence will not necessarily support a conviction for careless driving. More than a bare act of negligence must be proven. ###################################### Would I be wrong to argue that seeing a turn a fraction too late (especially under the circumstances) is not more than a momentary lapse?
Several principles have emerged over the years from court rulings on careless driving:
* The standard against which the defendant's driving must be measured is not one of perfection. The driving of the defendant must be measured against a reasonable standard or skill, what an ordinary person would do.
* A momentary lapse or a simple error in judgment is insufficient to justify a conviction for careless driving.
...
* Mere inadvertent negligence will not necessarily support a conviction for careless driving. More than a bare act of negligence must be proven.
######################################
Would I be wrong to argue that seeing a turn a fraction too late (especially under the circumstances) is not more than a momentary lapse?
To be honest many of the items you list as mitigating factors actually sound like evidence to support the careless charge. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but let me give you an idea of how a good Crown prosecutor would interpret your evidence. You admit you were driving on a road that you were unfamiliar with at night. The road was rural and the speed limit was 80 km/hr. The limit is the maximum speed under optimal conditions, not a minimum or recommended speed. Did you slow down at all due to your unfamiliarity with the road and time of day? You say there was gravel on the road surface. Is this uncommon in rural areas? You say you have no ABS. Were you not aware of this before the crash? Would this not be a reason to drive even slower under the circumstances if your vehicle is prone to skidding? You say you only observed the sign as you crested the hill. Could you see over crest of the hill as you approached it? Regardless of the sign, if you couldn't see over the hill on an unfamiliar road, why didn't you slow down as your crested the hill? How many other vehicles did you observe leaving the roadway due to the road conditions/signage? Careless is a hard charge to prove, so that is something in your favour. But based on what you've said, I think the Crown does have a reasonable prospect of conviction. The 100-200 meter skid is particularly significant in my opinion. That means even at the speed limit, assuming a constant speed of 80 km/hr, you were skidding for 5-10 seconds straight! I agree with Simon that you should probably get representation unless the Crown is willing to offer you a plea to a less serious offence. I'd strongly disagree it's a no fault accident (and your insurance company will as well). To say no fault implies there was nothing you could do to avoid it.
gwt wrote:
I believe there are a number of mitigating circumstances: the poor signage, extremely sharp turn, layer of gravel/dirt on the paved road, hill, no ABS, and skid marks showing that I anticipated the turn hundreds of metres in advance. Should I get pictures of these facts and bring them with me on Monday or when I meet the prosecutor?
To be honest many of the items you list as mitigating factors actually sound like evidence to support the careless charge. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but let me give you an idea of how a good Crown prosecutor would interpret your evidence.
You admit you were driving on a road that you were unfamiliar with at night. The road was rural and the speed limit was 80 km/hr. The limit is the maximum speed under optimal conditions, not a minimum or recommended speed. Did you slow down at all due to your unfamiliarity with the road and time of day? You say there was gravel on the road surface. Is this uncommon in rural areas? You say you have no ABS. Were you not aware of this before the crash? Would this not be a reason to drive even slower under the circumstances if your vehicle is prone to skidding? You say you only observed the sign as you crested the hill. Could you see over crest of the hill as you approached it? Regardless of the sign, if you couldn't see over the hill on an unfamiliar road, why didn't you slow down as your crested the hill? How many other vehicles did you observe leaving the roadway due to the road conditions/signage?
Careless is a hard charge to prove, so that is something in your favour. But based on what you've said, I think the Crown does have a reasonable prospect of conviction. The 100-200 meter skid is particularly significant in my opinion. That means even at the speed limit, assuming a constant speed of 80 km/hr, you were skidding for 5-10 seconds straight!
I agree with Simon that you should probably get representation unless the Crown is willing to offer you a plea to a less serious offence.
gwt wrote:
It doesn't seem reasonable to be charged with this serious charge for what seems to me to be a no-fault accident
I'd strongly disagree it's a no fault accident (and your insurance company will as well). To say no fault implies there was nothing you could do to avoid it.
Agree with Stanton - on everything. Get a traffic lawyer or paralegal.
Agree with Stanton - on everything.
Get a traffic lawyer or paralegal.
* 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
Yes, I agree. Those facts don't help you. What you will likely need to do at trial, if it goes that far, is have a good agent who can force the crown to prove the offence without any witnesses, without introducing any of your own evidence, because as we've just seen, it may not be of any assistance to you. Also, a meeting with the prosecutor won't happen when you file to fight your ticket. You can arrange a date for that later.
Yes, I agree. Those facts don't help you. What you will likely need to do at trial, if it goes that far, is have a good agent who can force the crown to prove the offence without any witnesses, without introducing any of your own evidence, because as we've just seen, it may not be of any assistance to you.
Also, a meeting with the prosecutor won't happen when you file to fight your ticket. You can arrange a date for that later.
From what you said I would say you are guilty. Did you need to go to hospital? Did you give this story to the cop? My guess is if you got bumped on the head anything you said may not be used? Get a lot of pictures and any doctor notes. Cheers Viper1
gwt wrote:
Hi,
I was charged with careless driving for a one-vehicle accident, and would like to know how to go about pleading not guilty. I was driving on a rural road at night in an 80 kmh zone. I was driving up a hill. At the top of the hill is a 90 degree turn sign (no stop sign, no kmh posted). I hit the brakes too late, and because the road goes downhill and there's a lot of gravel, skidded one or two hundred meters, missed the turn, and totalled the vehicle. It doesn't seem reasonable to be charged with this serious charge for what seems to me to be a no-fault accident. Anyway, the police said "they had to" give me the ticket and told me to fight it (?!). Anyway, how should I plead my case? Can I get it dismissed? Should I go and get pictures of the scene, skid marks, etc.?
Thanks for your help. I'm glad to have gotten away unharmed. Good luck to anyone else in a similar situation.
From what you said I would say you are guilty.
Did you need to go to hospital?
Did you give this story to the cop?
My guess is if you got bumped on the head anything you said may not be used?
Get a lot of pictures and any doctor notes.
Cheers
Viper1
"hang onto your chair when reading my posts
use at your own risk"
Thanks very much for your responses, certainly no offence taken. I listed these circumstances, because I thought they are things that are out of my control (with the exception of ABS and darkness, which I have foreknowledge of). And I'm familiar with the road, which probably led to complacency (I thought I knew what was coming). I shouldn't mention that either, I guess. But if the signage is poor, or if snow-clearing or construction trucks leave excessive gravel on the road, those are things not in my control and are mitigating factors, are they not? To put it differently: if a sign points left when the road goes right, and the driver gets confused and loses control, is that not a mitigating circumstance? If the sign at the top of the hill gives me less time to react, because the slope after the sign makes it more difficult to stop, is that a mitigating circumstance? It was at night, I saw the sign maybe half a second too late, slowed the car down somewhat, crested the hill, and then the momentum, gravel and slope caused me to slide (no rubber) down the hill going maybe 30 km/h through the turn and ditch. Sorry if I'm belabouring a point here; I understand that especially from the insurance conpany's point of view I am at fault. After I file, when I meet the prosecutor, should I just tell him I've never been in an accident in 20-odd years of driving and shut up about "mitigating circumstances" unless he asks? If it doesn't get dropped to "leaving the highway" or whatever the lesser charge is, then I can always go on to trial and hire a paralegal if necessary? No one addressed the "principles" listed on the website above: that "a momentary lapse or a simple error in judgment," or "mere inadvertent negligence" is insufficient to justify a conviction for careless driving; that "more than a bare act of negligence must be proven." I'm assuming I'd want to find specific cases where this is cited if it gets that far. No bumps on the head, physical examination by medics refused (I was fine). Missed a couple of trees and a pile of rocks on the way in, landed in a field (yes, very, very fortunate). I gave the police a short version, "didn't see the sign in time." Not counting on anything from insurance, since I don't have collision. Again, thanks for your comments. Really appreciated.
Thanks very much for your responses, certainly no offence taken. I listed these circumstances, because I thought they are things that are out of my control (with the exception of ABS and darkness, which I have foreknowledge of). And I'm familiar with the road, which probably led to complacency (I thought I knew what was coming). I shouldn't mention that either, I guess.
But if the signage is poor, or if snow-clearing or construction trucks leave excessive gravel on the road, those are things not in my control and are mitigating factors, are they not? To put it differently: if a sign points left when the road goes right, and the driver gets confused and loses control, is that not a mitigating circumstance? If the sign at the top of the hill gives me less time to react, because the slope after the sign makes it more difficult to stop, is that a mitigating circumstance?
It was at night, I saw the sign maybe half a second too late, slowed the car down somewhat, crested the hill, and then the momentum, gravel and slope caused me to slide (no rubber) down the hill going maybe 30 km/h through the turn and ditch.
Sorry if I'm belabouring a point here; I understand that especially from the insurance conpany's point of view I am at fault.
After I file, when I meet the prosecutor, should I just tell him I've never been in an accident in 20-odd years of driving and shut up about "mitigating circumstances" unless he asks? If it doesn't get dropped to "leaving the highway" or whatever the lesser charge is, then I can always go on to trial and hire a paralegal if necessary?
No one addressed the "principles" listed on the website above: that "a momentary lapse or a simple error in judgment," or "mere inadvertent negligence" is insufficient to justify a conviction for careless driving; that "more than a bare act of negligence must be proven." I'm assuming I'd want to find specific cases where this is cited if it gets that far.
No bumps on the head, physical examination by medics refused (I was fine). Missed a couple of trees and a pile of rocks on the way in, landed in a field (yes, very, very fortunate). I gave the police a short version, "didn't see the sign in time." Not counting on anything from insurance, since I don't have collision.
Again, thanks for your comments. Really appreciated.
With everything above spoke of above it is more than just a momentary lapse or simple error. It appears to be mulitple simple errors in judgement compounded. I lived on a gravel road for over 10 years. If it is fresh gravel (just put on road and graded) it is very recognizable by colour, feel of vehicle and sound (tires on it). Gravel roads on less predictable than paved, a pot hole can form during a day, the surface can change (all need is someone to spin a groove in road, ATV to do donuts, farm tractor to make a turn with heavy load, bulldozer to turn etc..). Hence need to "respect" the road at all times (day/night/rain/snow etc).
With everything above spoke of above it is more than just a momentary lapse or simple error. It appears to be mulitple simple errors in judgement compounded.
I lived on a gravel road for over 10 years. If it is fresh gravel (just put on road and graded) it is very recognizable by colour, feel of vehicle and sound (tires on it). Gravel roads on less predictable than paved, a pot hole can form during a day, the surface can change (all need is someone to spin a groove in road, ATV to do donuts, farm tractor to make a turn with heavy load, bulldozer to turn etc..). Hence need to "respect" the road at all times (day/night/rain/snow etc).
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Just re-read start of post and doesn't make sense > rural road ..up a hill...with 90 degree turn at top....and road goes downhill? Can you give us all the road name and municipality so we can google image this to see what you are talking about. thank you
gwt wrote:
I was driving on a rural road at night in an 80 kmh zone. I was driving up a hill. At the top of the hill is a 90 degree turn sign (no stop sign, no kmh posted). I hit the brakes too late, and because the road goes downhill and there's a lot of gravel, .
Just re-read start of post and doesn't make sense > rural road ..up a hill...with 90 degree turn at top....and road goes downhill?
Can you give us all the road name and municipality so we can google image this to see what you are talking about. thank you
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
There are cases which stand for those propositions, but putting them into play at a trail is a skill, which is why you may want to hire a paralegal or lawyer. You can't just stand up and say, "R v Johnson!" and sit down and expect that they'll acquit you. You have to explain what the case stands for and how it applies to the facts of your case. That's the skill lawyer's learn in law school (and I assume paralegals learn as well).
gwt wrote:
No one addressed the "principles" listed on the website above: that "a momentary lapse or a simple error in judgment," or "mere inadvertent negligence" is insufficient to justify a conviction for careless driving; that "more than a bare act of negligence must be proven." I'm assuming I'd want to find specific cases where this is cited if it gets that far.
There are cases which stand for those propositions, but putting them into play at a trail is a skill, which is why you may want to hire a paralegal or lawyer. You can't just stand up and say, "R v Johnson!" and sit down and expect that they'll acquit you. You have to explain what the case stands for and how it applies to the facts of your case. That's the skill lawyer's learn in law school (and I assume paralegals learn as well).
I'm not sure if it's a good idea to give particulars until after it's settled. I went back to take pictures: you can't see the turn or yellow/black checkerboard sign until you crest the hill, then it's a fairly steep grade and about 80m until the turn. I could see some rubber from one tire; the other one was in the sand in the middle of the road. It's marked 60 km/h from the other direction (the road winds up/down the hill), but not from the direction I was travelling (80 km/h road). There should be a stop sign warning or 20 km/h sign there imo. Anyway, I'll report back once it's settled. Yes, if it goes to trial, I will need some help for sure. It's good to hear some scepticism here since that will be the prosecutor's or justice's perspective too. Thanks!
I'm not sure if it's a good idea to give particulars until after it's settled. I went back to take pictures: you can't see the turn or yellow/black checkerboard sign until you crest the hill, then it's a fairly steep grade and about 80m until the turn. I could see some rubber from one tire; the other one was in the sand in the middle of the road. It's marked 60 km/h from the other direction (the road winds up/down the hill), but not from the direction I was travelling (80 km/h road). There should be a stop sign warning or 20 km/h sign there imo. Anyway, I'll report back once it's settled.
Yes, if it goes to trial, I will need some help for sure. It's good to hear some scepticism here since that will be the prosecutor's or justice's perspective too. Thanks!
Hi, just wanted to post a follow-up to this. I went to talk to the prosecutor, and he was ready to drop the charge to a lesser one almost immediately, but having prepared myself with photos, etc. I still wanted to explain the situation. :) He got a little defensive and basically used some of the reasoning others posted here (familiarity with road, speed limit being maximum, etc.). He did seem to take the arguments of poor signage and sand/gravel on the road as reasonable, and I found out that the police had gotten the posted speeds wrong in their report (60 km/h instead of 80 km/h). Anyway, he offered the 2-point leaving the highway charge and I accepted. Seems like talking to these guys is usually a good idea. Thanks again to all; good luck with your tickets!
Hi, just wanted to post a follow-up to this. I went to talk to the prosecutor, and he was ready to drop the charge to a lesser one almost immediately, but having prepared myself with photos, etc. I still wanted to explain the situation. He got a little defensive and basically used some of the reasoning others posted here (familiarity with road, speed limit being maximum, etc.). He did seem to take the arguments of poor signage and sand/gravel on the road as reasonable, and I found out that the police had gotten the posted speeds wrong in their report (60 km/h instead of 80 km/h). Anyway, he offered the 2-point leaving the highway charge and I accepted. Seems like talking to these guys is usually a good idea. Thanks again to all; good luck with your tickets!
I followed the procedures mentioned in the previous threads regarding the disclosure and received it today. My court date is November 5 2009 in Whitby. After going through the notes I realized 2 things:
1- the notes are horribly illegible and difficult to read
2- I have notes from two different officers.
Now I am not sure if this means that both the officers will be at court for the hearing or…
I hope I can paint the picture with the accuracy that the truth deserves. I have no intention of just beating a ticket.. but more like beating a really unfair ticket. You decide!
I had entered Canada after a short trip downsouth through Detroit on my way to Toronto. Not being equipped with a GPS unit I had to rely on the printable poorman's version from Mapquest. I followed Huron Church Rd.,…
Need an expert advice here. 10 days ago I got a speeding ticket. Ticket has a fatal error on its face-offense not known to law. It says speeding 75km/hr in posted 60km/hr zone. What is the best way to proceed?
1. Should I completely ignore this ticket and let the JP to quash it?
2. Should I go with option 3 - request a trial and force the fatal error by not showing up at court?
My name is Brian. I am in my late 20s and live in Toronto. I do not own a car but half a dozen times a year I rent one with my Visa. (To get out of the city and go to a beach or ski for example.)
I have never drunk and drive but I face a problem and Im wondering if anyone can tell me what to do. Several months ago I was at a weekend party and had quit a bit to consume. When I stopped…
I was travelling east bound on ellesmere road and approached markham road attempting to make a right turn. All signal lights were red and cars traveling down markham road south were given the green arrow. I slowed down and attempted to make the right turn. I got ticketed by a cop who was parked in a gas station facing the intersection in a (no parking zone). I…
Crested a hill, officer coming at me, pulled a u turn and pulled me over.
I will go back and look again but I thought I was in an 80 not a 70 and I am positive I wasn't doing more than 120. My speedo read 110-115. I have aftermarket tires and rims so I assume this would be the difference.
It was around 7pm, already dark, nobody on the road but myself,…
I am looking for the case law that is commonly used when the prosecution says they only need to disclose the testing pages of a radar manual or laser manual.
I am only interested in the binding decisions (appeals court or higher?), and not in the non-binding Justice of the Peace decisions.
I was pulled over two nights ago and charged with failing to stop a stop sign. On the ticket, it says 'disobey stop sign - foil to stop' and does not say 'fail' -- something I think may be a fatal flaw? I have been driving for 12 years with no tickets, yet I live in Brampton where insurance prices are high so I do not want to be convicted as my insurance rates will spike significantly and…
A friend of mine (who is from China and with no knowledge of English at all) asked me to interpret for him on court.
He got pulled over by a stealth patrol car last october, got 3 tickets (fail to show insurance card, using cell phones and fail to stop on right for emergency vehicle) , court date is next week. He told me his insurance expired for less than a month and other charges are false…
I understand the severity of my offences, and I can't stress how much I regret it. I know I endangered the lives of myself and more importantly others. I usually do not speed and I know running late for work is an unacceptable excuse. I will be a man and accept the consequences of my actions although I would appreciate any advice for my situation.
Guys back in january i got a speeding ticket on dvp, but i am 90% sure he did not caught me on radar, i asked for disclosure request and i just received today, I have asked for: a full copy of the police officers notes, a copy of both sides of the officers copy of the ticket, witness will say statements, speed gun manual, calibration record, repair history and officer's training certificate but…
I need some help here. So today I was on my way to get my tires changed from my winter tires to my regular summer staggered set of tires. I was driving in mississauga on my way to my destination, I got pulled over by an officer where I was given a ticket for having improper mudguards. For some context, I drive a stock 2013 C63 AMG with winter tires at the time. I was never…
I'd like to start this off by saying for the last two weeks I have been browsing the forums. I'm trying to prepare myself for an early resolution meeting with a prosecutor (in Brampton, if that matters). I have a clean record and as a teacher, I always do my best to follow rules (trying to practice what I preach!)
On December 4, 2014 I was preparing to turn right at a very busy intersection.…
I have question, today I was going to work in my normal route there is a triangle intersection with my side being the only one with a stop sign.
There's a car in front me who stopped at the stop sign, and the third-side there's a incoming car with their hazard-light flashing but they don't have stop sign, yet coming in at a slow speed.
Right after the car in front me went through the stop sign,…
On my way to work this morning I received a ticket for disobey sign. I was on Hwy 10 Mississauga in the right lane. The right lane leads to the 401 and there is a sign saying Right Lane Exits. I Tried to merge left before the on ramp as did 3 other people. We all got a ticket for doing that. Is there anything I can do? I did not realize I was breaking any law it was a dotted line where I tried to…
This is my first post, before I jump right in I would like to thank the forum, members, posters and moderators for all the information posted. I feel like I have been able to learn a lot from others experiences, so thank you all.
This will be a lengthy post. But if you are dealing with a Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) - No Straight Through Intersection you may find this extremely…
Let me start this with saying that this isn't in regards to a ticket, more a discussion surrounding front license plates and learning about the rules behind them. (Most of the quote stuff is using colloquial terms, mostly because I couldn't really find a better way to describe it; it's not meant to be offensive.)
I know Ontario law/HTA mandates having a front license plate unlike some States in…
Hi Guys! I've just had my trial day yesterday. I was not at fault but was convicted anyways.
It is such a travesty! There is no justice at the traffic court. It is just a no mercy machine to part someone with his money, no common sense applies and no reasonable argument being considered. Such a shame! The justice, the policeman and the prosecutor ganged up against me. The justice kept interrupting…
Well first of all ... glad to have found the forum - hoping to find answers to 'alot' of questions
I was unfortunate in July 2010 in that I ended up rolling my 2009 Ranger three times, through a fence and landing on the roof on a rained-out road that was/is in need of proper repair in Eastern Ontario.
I was assisted out of the vehicle by the driver who was behind me.
I was traveling down the 401, noticed a speed trap, and started flashing my lights -- in order to warn oncoming drivers.
Within a 30 seconds, a car slowed, crossed the grass, and approached me from behind. Lights appeared, and I then realised that this was an officer in an undercover car.
The officer pulled me over, and while he was polite, clearly his motivation was to…
Does anyone know the specific law, statute, Charter right to refer to when a prosecutor or justice attempts to change the charge on a ticket after a trial has begun? I assume I'd object immediately (without interrupting anyone, of course) but what would be the specific legal basis of my objection?
I was right behind a school bus that looked like it was pulling over to the side in order to turn down a side street, I saw no lights so decided to go around (wide street). Was still moving as I was passing, then as I did pass I heard horn and looked back and in fact it was pulling over to p/u school kids (was a block away from my son's school, so just assumed it wouldn't be picking up kids...it…
He got a little defensive and basically used some of the reasoning others posted here (familiarity with road, speed limit being maximum, etc.). He did seem to take the arguments of poor signage and sand/gravel on the road as reasonable, and I found out that the police had gotten the posted speeds wrong in their report (60 km/h instead of 80 km/h). Anyway, he offered the 2-point leaving the highway charge and I accepted. Seems like talking to these guys is usually a good idea. Thanks again to all; good luck with your tickets!
