Been charged with Careless Driving in a residential area. 1. The Officer has a Witness statement. If the Witness does not appear at Trail, can that statement be introduced at Trial by the Crown and used against me.? 2. The Address "Number" (the Street is correct) on the infraction does not remotely exist, is an empty field. Does this matter? Thank you.
Been charged with Careless Driving in a residential area.
1. The Officer has a Witness statement. If the Witness does not appear at Trail, can that statement be introduced at Trial by the Crown and used against me.?
2. The Address "Number" (the Street is correct) on the infraction does not remotely exist, is an empty field. Does this matter?
Address number being wrong does not matter. They can NOT introduce the witness statement without the witness being there. They might try, and some JP might allow it if you do not object. You simply need to object to it and say "I object because the witness is not here and I can not cross examine them." If witness is not there and they try to adjourn (set another trial date) to another court date, you should object as well and say "I object to an adjournment. This is the day scheduled for my trial and I took time off work to be here and if there witness was not going to be here they could have informed me ahead of time. I motion for you to drop the charges because they have no witness."
Address number being wrong does not matter.
They can NOT introduce the witness statement without the witness being there. They might try, and some JP might allow it if you do not object. You simply need to object to it and say "I object because the witness is not here and I can not cross examine them."
If witness is not there and they try to adjourn (set another trial date) to another court date, you should object as well and say "I object to an adjournment. This is the day scheduled for my trial and I took time off work to be here and if there witness was not going to be here they could have informed me ahead of time. I motion for you to drop the charges because they have no witness."
If the witness DOES show up, you might find it beneficial to have somebody else (who knows what they are doing) represent you. I highly recommend you check this thread http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7032.html and specifically the very first link in the very first post which will explain why. Since the officer did not witness the event, he can not testify that you were the driver. They may put him on the stand and he may testify that the other witness told him that XYZ was driving and that he talked to XYZ and got the drivers license from XYZ. But a good cross-examination question that would bring reasonable doubt to this testimony is "Officer, did you see XYZ driving carelessly?" The answer should be NO. Now the witness themselves will get on the stand, but if you are not there, how will the witness identify you? So regardless of what the witness says, a good cross examination question that would bring reasonable doubt to the witness testimony is "Can you identify XYZ in the courtroom today?" Answer is NO since you are not there. In closing arguments you say "The officer gave no evidence that XYZ was driving carelessly as he did not witness the event. The witness could not identify that XYZ was the driver. Therefore the charge should be dropped because there is reasonable doubt as to whether XYZ actually drove carelessly". And remember in all this you NEVER have to admit to anything, meaning you do NOT have to take the witness stand and do NOT have to testify and do NOT have to ever admit whether you did anything wrong or not. If you DO take the stand and testify then you will most likely get yourself in trouble, so sticking to finding reasonable doubt in everybody else's testimony is the better option. Read this as well: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7039.html
If the witness DOES show up, you might find it beneficial to have somebody else (who knows what they are doing) represent you. I highly recommend you check this thread http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7032.html and specifically the very first link in the very first post which will explain why.
Since the officer did not witness the event, he can not testify that you were the driver. They may put him on the stand and he may testify that the other witness told him that XYZ was driving and that he talked to XYZ and got the drivers license from XYZ. But a good cross-examination question that would bring reasonable doubt to this testimony is "Officer, did you see XYZ driving carelessly?" The answer should be NO.
Now the witness themselves will get on the stand, but if you are not there, how will the witness identify you? So regardless of what the witness says, a good cross examination question that would bring reasonable doubt to the witness testimony is "Can you identify XYZ in the courtroom today?" Answer is NO since you are not there.
In closing arguments you say "The officer gave no evidence that XYZ was driving carelessly as he did not witness the event. The witness could not identify that XYZ was the driver. Therefore the charge should be dropped because there is reasonable doubt as to whether XYZ actually drove carelessly".
And remember in all this you NEVER have to admit to anything, meaning you do NOT have to take the witness stand and do NOT have to testify and do NOT have to ever admit whether you did anything wrong or not. If you DO take the stand and testify then you will most likely get yourself in trouble, so sticking to finding reasonable doubt in everybody else's testimony is the better option. Read this as well:
from your last reply above, re: "Now the witness themselves will get on the stand, but if you are not there, how will the witness identify you?" Question: So "I" do not have to show up for my own Trial for the Careless charge? just my representative does? Updated. I am under 25, male. The Crown has recently offered me down from Careless charge to 148.5 fail to turn left to avoid collision. 2 points $110.00. Question. If I do not accept this and I go to Trial, is this trial for guilty or not guilty for the Careless charge only? they can't make it into 148.5 or anything else? thank you for your help.
from your last reply above, re: "Now the witness themselves will get on the stand, but if you are not there, how will the witness identify you?"
Question: So "I" do not have to show up for my own Trial for the Careless charge? just my representative does?
Updated. I am under 25, male. The Crown has recently offered me down from Careless charge to 148.5 fail to turn left to avoid collision. 2 points $110.00.
Question. If I do not accept this and I go to Trial, is this trial for guilty or not guilty for the Careless charge only? they can't make it into 148.5 or anything else?
Your trial will be for the actual offence you were charged with. If youre found guilty it will be for careless driving, not the lesser offence offered in the plea deal. While youre not required to be present at trial if you have representation, the identity issue suggest by Jsherk is unlikely to be of any benefit to you. Courts frequently rely on police testimony for identification of the accused. The other driver will not know you by name and may not even be able to identify you in Court even if you were present. Typically the Crown will walk the officer through their testimony regarding identification of the driver. Common questions will be who identified the driver (other motorist, self-admission), how the persons identity was confirmed (typically by way of photo licence) and ask if the officer was satisfied regarding the identification (answer should be yes). The other motorist can provide the testimony regarding the accuseds driving and the police officer will complete the case by providing the identification and any other supporting evidence. Weigh the Crowns case and your chances of winning carefully before you go to trial. A careless conviction is crippling in terms of insurance and not something you want to take a gamble on.
Your trial will be for the actual offence you were charged with. If youre found guilty it will be for careless driving, not the lesser offence offered in the plea deal.
While youre not required to be present at trial if you have representation, the identity issue suggest by Jsherk is unlikely to be of any benefit to you. Courts frequently rely on police testimony for identification of the accused. The other driver will not know you by name and may not even be able to identify you in Court even if you were present. Typically the Crown will walk the officer through their testimony regarding identification of the driver. Common questions will be who identified the driver (other motorist, self-admission), how the persons identity was confirmed (typically by way of photo licence) and ask if the officer was satisfied regarding the identification (answer should be yes). The other motorist can provide the testimony regarding the accuseds driving and the police officer will complete the case by providing the identification and any other supporting evidence.
Weigh the Crowns case and your chances of winning carefully before you go to trial. A careless conviction is crippling in terms of insurance and not something you want to take a gamble on.
Correct... you do not have to be at your trial, only your representative. If you do not accept the offer then yes it is for guilty/not guilty of original charge of careless. They will not lower the charge if you take it to trial.
Correct... you do not have to be at your trial, only your representative.
If you do not accept the offer then yes it is for guilty/not guilty of original charge of careless. They will not lower the charge if you take it to trial.
Again my suggestions are only my opinions and they may not be something a novice in court can use to their advantage. So it would definitely be worthwhile considering the plea offer.
Again my suggestions are only my opinions and they may not be something a novice in court can use to their advantage.
So it would definitely be worthwhile considering the plea offer.
pulled over leaving a survey in guelph. After arguing with the officer for about 10 minutes, he mentioned something being wrong with my truck. Told me to put on my emergency brake, and i did. Told me to put it in gear, and i did, truck did not move. Told me to hit the gas, and i did and the truck…
Got two very heavy tickets -- for failing to stop for a school bus, and for using a handheld device. Was running late in a morning rush traffic in Toronto and apparently passed a school bus on the opposite side w/o noticing its signal. A few meters after that I stopped behind the other cars waiting…
I recently received a ticket for proceeding contrary to sign at an intersection. While there are other issues with the offence (sign is not visible until 10ft from intersection, officer wrote wrong license plate number on ticket) my biggest question is about the sign itself.
I posted here a *while* back when I first got my speeding ticket, and I've been fighting it forever. Anyway, long story short - I went and had an appeal and both the prosecutor and the Judge agree that I have valid grounds to appeal on, but what we're arguing is whether the correct remedy is a…
My wife had an auto accident back in May. It is gradually being dealt with by our insurance company ( by the broker actually). My question is about the legal power of the insurance code OAP1. Evidently this set of rules is the Ten Commandments for the insurance companies and the adjustors seem to…
What is the requirement for stopping when a school bus is traveling down the roadway, initiates the flashing red lights while still moving but has not yet stopped? If a motorist is traveling through an intersection (through the free-flow approach, minor-street stop controlled) and an oncoming…
In 2005, the government passed legislation that enabled the introduction of variable speed limits at some point in the future. It didn't take effect right away, so it sat waiting for "proclamation by the Lieutenant Governor." Just by chance... I was reading the HTA earlier while browsing this…
I was on my way to work on a divided four lane highway. I was in the right hand lane following the flow of traffic. There was a slower car ahead of me and I wanted to change lanes and maintain my speed. When I looked in my left side mirror, I notice a red car going pretty fast in the passing…
So i got charged with Hand Held Device, just want to ask everyone if i could use this as my defence
It was midnight, I was dropping my fiance to pick up something on north bound Yonge st (near church) with my emergency lights on, Officer came and asked me to move along so i went up a few streets and…