After passing a person in "authority" on a country road four months later, the OPP served a notice to appear for careless driving.

Proving diligence and care should not be a problem. The only witness are two persons, each one I passed. No cars were approaching in the opposite direction....truthfully, I'm not sure what this power-trippers problem is. After I passed him, he aggressively chased me.

I'm looking for recent cases to advocate that passing is not against the law!

Thanks.

Passing in itself is not, however, speeding while passing may be illegal. How fast was the LEO going, what was the speed limit, and how fast were you going when you overtook him/her?

The person that I passed was going below the post speed limit. I wasn't speeding. Thank you for pointing that out.

bughead wrote:

After I passed him, he aggressively chased me.

Devils advocate here....if this person had to aggressively chase you, seems more than speed is a factor.

Yes, your correct. Once I receive disclosure and obtain the name of the witness who took this aggressive pursuit against me, I will formalize a complaint to the OPP for his own careless driving behaviour.

Also the person that I passed was not a police officer, but still someone in the community with power status.

That makes things very interesting, in a bad way. I had mistakenly believed by reading your initial post that you had passed a police officer (which wasn't the case). The good news is, careless driving is one of the hardest HTA charges to prove, so the Crown has an uphill battle. Just out of curiosity, how did you become aware of the fact that a person with "power" status was the one who made the complaint? Did the police tell you?

Also, did this person-of-status manage to positively identify you when the alleged incident happen, other than just note your licence plate? (I know... sounds stupid... but...) If he could not get a clear look at who was driving the vehicle and be able to identify you later, their chances of a conviction are almost nil. This is an offence where they must identify the driver. They will require this person to attend court for a conviction, at which point he'll get embarrassed on the witness stand. Getting a paralegal involved would be worth every penny, IMHO. The whole scenario reeks of abuse-of-power.

In the mean time, put together some concise notes on exactly what happened, the weather, road conditions, vehicles involved, scenario, etc. If this person "aggressively chased you," that is not so much "careless driving" on his part, but it falls rather nicely under section 172.

bughead wrote:

Yes, your correct. Once I receive disclosure and obtain the name of the witness who took this aggressive pursuit against me, I will formalize a complaint to the OPP for his own careless driving behaviour.

And how else would you suggest a police officer catch any vehicle without being aggressive?

What you might think is aggressive could be normal driving for police to catch a violator, which police have been trained to do.

Bear, we just got another piece of the story where the aggressive driver was not a police officer, just a "person of power". Policitian? Celebrity? BOOKM?!

hwybear wrote:

bughead wrote:

Yes, your correct. Once I receive disclosure and obtain the name of the witness who took this aggressive pursuit against me, I will formalize a complaint to the OPP for his own careless driving behaviour.

And how else would you suggest a police officer catch any vehicle without being aggressive?

What you might think is aggressive could be normal driving for police to catch a violator, which police have been trained to do.

I have seen these people work they are top notch.

Cheers

Viper1

Just out of curiosity, how did you become aware of the fact that a person with "power" status was the one who made the complaint? Did the police tell you?

Answer: The Federal police told me...the witness is the local fire chief.

They arrested me for impaired. After three hours in detention, three breath tests, which resulted in zero alcohol results after their threats to admit guilt or they would charge me with refusing to take the test, they finally let me go (my kids had the pleasure of watching me be arrested).

The Federal police charged me with careless driving. After my wife spoke with the arresting officer, telling him she would make him appear as a joke in court, two days later they called me and dropped the charge. Four months later, the OPP served me with the notice to appear. After contacting the Federal police officer, and on recorded tape, he said that the witness contacted him and inquired about the arrest. The officer said that the charges were dropped because it was not their jurisdiction. The police officer said that the witness contacted the OPP to pursue the charge....the policer officer also contradicted himself saying that their Head Office attorney traversed the file over to OPP.

The OPP served the notice to appear. I'm waiting on disclosure.

now I'm really confused....Federal Police? (RCMP,MP,CBSA)

A "notice to appear" (Appearance Notice) is criminal offence.

hwybear wrote:

Federal Police? (RCMP,MP,CBSA)

I was thinking the same thing... Where in Ontario did this offence occur? The only other thing I could think of as far as "federal police" would be the Park Wardens at Thousand Islands National Park or Point Pelee National Park, for example... or maybe Fisheries/Wildlife...

Considering all that's happened, get a lawyer ASAP, if you haven't already.

Military police

Standard questions

Were you alone in the car when the incident happened? If not, who else was there.

How fast were you going after you passed the fire chief?

What do you mean by "aggresively chasing me"? He can be charged under 172 for "Racing". See end of post.

Can you recall clearly what had happened that day? From "I started to overtake the vehicle in question" part.

As a side note: Do not just wait for disclosure. You have to ask for it!

ONTARIO REGULATION 455/07

Definition, "race" and "contest"

2. (1) For the purposes of section 172 of the Act, "race" and "contest" include any activity where one or more persons engage in any of the following driving behaviours:

1. Driving two or more motor vehicles at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed and in a manner that indicates the drivers of the motor vehicles are engaged in a competition.

2. Driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to chase another motor vehicle.

3. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,

i. driving a motor vehicle at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed,

ii. outdistancing or attempting to outdistance one or more other motor vehicles while driving at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed, or

iii. repeatedly changing lanes in close proximity to other vehicles so as to advance through the ordinary flow of traffic while driving at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 2 (1).

(2) In this section,

"marked departure from the lawful rate of speed" means a rate of speed that may limit the ability of a driver of a motor vehicle to prudently adjust to changing circumstances on the highway. O. Reg. 455/07, s. 2 (2).