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!
Hi, I am new to the forum. I have been trying to get information off of here and www.ticketcombat.com for my case.
I was given a ticket for going 122km/h in a posted 100km/h zone at Hwy 401 east at Thickson Rd in Whitby ON on April 10th, 2009.
I find this absolutely absurd, since I was in the left most lane of the 401 approximately(within 5km/h) following the speed of traffic in my lane. The guy in…
Hey this is my first ticket so as much information that people can provide will be appreciated. I was making the drive home going around 90kph(in a 80) behind what I knew was an undercover police car. The cop abruptly pulled to the side and pulled back in behind me to pull me over. Now I reduced my speed to below 80 when the cop pulled to the side but he claimed he had me clocked at 109kph and…
On Wednesday I attended court at 1530 Markham Road, courtroom E2, in order to fight my speeding ticket. My original plan was to plead not guilty, and to watch all the people who went before me, the process, the Prosecutor and the Justice Of The Peace so I could strategize and form the best plan for my defence at trial. I had done some research online and sort of knew I wanted to defend myself,…
About 5 months ago I was driving along a two-way road approaching an intersection. The road had a left/ straight turning lane and a right turning lane. There was an 18 wheel gravel truck occupying the left lane at a red light. I pulled behind the truck intending to drive straight. After not moving for about 1 second, I check my rear view mirror, signaled and changed lanes to the right…
I am currently working for an auto parts delivery company and they contracted me to work as a courier.
As I left my base to make my first delivery which was less than 300 meters away from the shop, I had my seat belt off because i was under the impression, according to Section 106 Exception #6 subsection (c) of the highway traffic act, that I would be exempted from the seat belt law. The rule…
Got a ticket yesterday for "Insecure Load" contrary to HTA Sec 111(2). $160. I was pulling a utility trailer in which I had loaded a steel and wood cabinet. Total length of cabinet is 57.5". 14.75" (1/4 of the cabinet) was sticking out over the side of the trailer at about a 45 degree angle, the rest (3/4) was inside the trailer. The trailer has sides 24" high. I didn't have a tie-down or bungee…
I've been researching for months for defence strategy and basic trial information regarding my speeding ticket. However, the information is so conflicting that I have no confidence whatsoever that I know what I'm doing.
I didn't get this info from a friend of a friend, it came from this website, court officials, case laws, and a consultation with a traffic ticket fighting company.
So I was driving east bound pulling an empty tandem trailer on a gravel highway. Eventually I caught up to a truck pulling a fifth wheel. The speed limit was 70km/h and I don't quite remember but I'm almost 100% that the guy in front of me was driving at 60km/h. After being behind him for a few kilometers and getting two cracks in my windshield from rocks off his tires, I decided to pass him. I…
I have been driving for over 10 years without any tickets and accidents what so ever. Unfortunately my luck ran out this past Friday; when the officer pulled me over doing 80 in a 50 zone in Mississauga, Ontario. Officer was very friendly and polite not to mention nice enough to reduce the charge to 15KM.
On the speeding ticket it now says doing 65km in a 50 zone. Never having a speeding…
hi everyone im just wondering if its right for a cop to have my car impounded and give me a traffic ticket for improper plates when my car didnt leave my property, yes i knew the plates werent to my car but on private property it dont matter aslong as it dosent go onto public property. am i right with this that i shouldnt have gotten the ticket or my car impounded?????????????
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
Hi guys, I got pulled over last night and was ticketed with HTA 172, I was going 157 on a 100 on 400N and was wondering what I should do. I was using cruise control but the guy in the lane to my left was driving into my lane irresponsibly to I sped up to get ahead of him and just my luck that's when an OPP cruiser pulled up behind me flashing his lights. My court date is at the end of the month…
If anyone can answer this I would greatly appreciate it.
Friday morning I checked my mail and received a letter from the MTO stating that under section 47(1) of the HTA the Registrar of Motor Vehicles has decided to suspend my driving privilege for medical reasons. This was due to a report submitted by a physician in compliance with section 203 of the HTA. Enclosed with that letter were forms to…
Ok so looking for some advice in regards to my wife's speeding ticket 120k in 100 (I was in vehicle so witnessed most - but was resting at initial clock.)
whats the likelihood of positive outcome of an 11b (or an officer no show, which I suspect doesn't really happen as much as web/Ads would have you believe) of 8months.
Wife REALLY doesn't want to go, and of course I'm the one doing all of the…
I know I shouldn't have driving but I slept at my buddies' place and I thought I was ok to drive in the morning.. needless to say I still drove and got pulled over.
Background details:
I was pulled over in the morning last week, apparently going 120 km/hr on 90km Northbound DVP. Two cop cars tailed me for a bit, saw them in my rearview mirror while on the left lane, slowed down to…
I got two tickets on Feb 20 2011. One for red light, and the other for Stop sign. I knew I had a good chance at getting off on the red light, because the officer couldn't actually see the light facing me. He was at an opposite angle, further up the street.
I set a court date for both tickets. On April 22 I moved to a new place. I went to the Service Ontario location and renewed my licence…
Winnipeg's police officers have been told to issue more traffic tickets, in part to increase revenue.
And a union representing cops says the move could hurt their efforts to curb the city's gang violence.
Police Chief Keith McCaskill said last night he -- and he alone, without input from Mayor Sam Katz -- recently made the call to patrolling officers and to those in specialized units to step up…
I'm wondering if anyone could enlighten me on what to do about the following scenario:
I was pulled over by a YRP constable because I only had one front head light working. Upon being pulled over, I also realized my insurance card was expired by one month and my car permit was not on me at all. (It doesn't matter now but my valid insurance card was sitting at home in an envelope…
I have a wicked prosecutor in my area, he is an evil man and will lie and cheat, whatever is necessary for him to win. I got a yellow light infraction ticket and the cop was a no show. I requested the charge dismissed and it went like this:
Me: I request the charge be dismissed because the officer is not here
Prosecutor: No, we are going to adjourn the trial so the officer can attend
Accident happened at a regular intersection with turning lanes and lights. I was turning left. The light turned yellow, and the car approaching sped up to make the light. I thought he was stopping, so i made the turn. At the time of the collision the light was red.
I understand that it is my fault. I'm just wondering what my best course of action is.
alright well to get started ive developed a passion for longboarding
for those of you who dont already know a longboard is a big skateboard too heavy for tricks and stuff but boy can they ever go fast
my hobbies include going up the escarpment here in hamilton and stoney creek and riding down the roads leading to the lower part of the city. just wondering here. what would happen if i was going down…
My court date is nearing at old city hall at appeals court.
iwhats going to happen and what do i do?
do I present my certificate of offence and point out to the judge the fine was incorrect, I did not appear and am now appealing on the grounds the Justice of the peace erred and failed to quash the ticket on the basis of the certificate not being properly examined and is not complete and regular on…
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!