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 me through all cross-examination dismissing my questions and legitimate arguments. When I presented a photograph they said there is no a time stamp on it and it was not filed properly and it is not relevant because the policeman was not exactly at the spot from where the photograph was taken. The justice did not want to have a look at it and did not allow me to cross-exam the officer using the picture. Whatever the officer said is taken as a indisputable truth. Here is an example of the argument: Defendant: What was the speed of the police cruiser? Policeman: 60 km/h Defendant: How far from the intersection was the police cruiser when you spotted the defendant's vehicle? Policeman: I was very close – around 30 meters from the intersection. Defendant: For how long did you observed the defendant's vehicle before it turned right at the intersection? Policeman: One to two seconds. Defendant: Doesn't it put you right into the intersection? Policeman: No, it does not. Defendant: Do the laws of physics apply on the roads in Ontario? Justice: Defendant! You are in the court, not at school! The officer has already told you he was not at the intersection! Do you have another line of questions? And so on and on... I would strongly suggest to anybody considering fighting his/her ticket in so called "court" - don't! If the officer appeared - except the prosecutor's deal. Otherwise you have no chance!
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 me through all cross-examination dismissing my questions and legitimate arguments. When I presented a photograph they said there is no a time stamp on it and it was not filed properly and it is not relevant because the policeman was not exactly at the spot from where the photograph was taken. The justice did not want to have a look at it and did not allow me to cross-exam the officer using the picture. Whatever the officer said is taken as a indisputable truth.
Here is an example of the argument:
Defendant: What was the speed of the police cruiser?
Policeman: 60 km/h
Defendant: How far from the intersection was the police cruiser when you spotted the defendant's vehicle?
Policeman: I was very close – around 30 meters from the intersection.
Defendant: For how long did you observed the defendant's vehicle before it turned right at the intersection?
Policeman: One to two seconds.
Defendant: Doesn't it put you right into the intersection?
Policeman: No, it does not.
Defendant: Do the laws of physics apply on the roads in Ontario?
Justice: Defendant! You are in the court, not at school! The officer has already told you he was not at the intersection! Do you have another line of questions?
And so on and on...
I would strongly suggest to anybody considering fighting his/her ticket in so called "court" - don't! If the officer appeared - except the prosecutor's deal. Otherwise you have no chance!
The reason you lost is simply because the testimony of the officer was more credible than any evidence you presented. If your testimony was as credible as the officers then by law you would have been found not guilty. Most of the time at trial you will not win, and the reason likely has something to do with the fact that you did it or were ill-prepared and the witness testimony is strong enough to support a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. But this being said it is by no means a rare occurrence where the defendant creates enough reasonable doubt that the crown cannot prove their case. Yes it is a hassle and the system may be stacked against you, but your best chance at a successful outcome is to be prepared and familiar with court procedure and etiquette, and case precedents.
The reason you lost is simply because the testimony of the officer was more credible than any evidence you presented. If your testimony was as credible as the officers then by law you would have been found not guilty.
Most of the time at trial you will not win, and the reason likely has something to do with the fact that you did it or were ill-prepared and the witness testimony is strong enough to support a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. But this being said it is by no means a rare occurrence where the defendant creates enough reasonable doubt that the crown cannot prove their case.
Yes it is a hassle and the system may be stacked against you, but your best chance at a successful outcome is to be prepared and familiar with court procedure and etiquette, and case precedents.
Ideally, it should be true. But in real life when the JP plays on the side of the prosecution and has no inclination to listen to the defendant's testimony you have no chance. I don't know - maybe if I was a lawyer JP would have more respectful attitude towards what I have to say but in my case my credible arguments were immediately dismissed. The fact is that officer's testimony in my case was not credible at all. But JP happily took it at the face value and did not allow me to challenge it. I brought the picture that clearly shows that because of the snow banks on the side of the road and lots of other obstacles including a car moving in the lane that obscures policeman's line of sight the policeman could not see what he was claiming he saw. The JP did not even have a look. He just stated that the police officer is trained to observe so he trust his 1 year old recollections more than the picture. JP clearly showed no interest to hear what I have to say. He stopped me when I tried to challenge officer based on math (distance = speed * time) - you are at the court not at school. He completely ignore what I said on the stand - and I said that I absolutely stopped at the stop line and after that proceeded with the right turn on red. You are alone against three of them ganged up together and one of them has to decide whether you are guilty or not. You have no chance! Just before my case that was another case with a woman who was charged for allegedly not stopping at the stop sign (and stop line). JP kind of excepted that she actually stopped but a few feet before the stop line. Guess what? She was convicted anyways because the law as prosecutor insisted and JP excepted "requires to stop right at the stop line" - not a few feet before that! Such a shame! It is all about money. Nothing but money. Justice and fairness are not welcome at this so called "court".
ynotp wrote:
The reason you lost is simply because the testimony of the officer was more credible than any evidence you presented. If your testimony was as credible as the officers then by law you would have been found not guilty.
Ideally, it should be true. But in real life when the JP plays on the side of the prosecution and has no inclination to listen to the defendant's testimony you have no chance. I don't know - maybe if I was a lawyer JP would have more respectful attitude towards what I have to say but in my case my credible arguments were immediately dismissed.
The fact is that officer's testimony in my case was not credible at all. But JP happily took it at the face value and did not allow me to challenge it. I brought the picture that clearly shows that because of the snow banks on the side of the road and lots of other obstacles including a car moving in the lane that obscures policeman's line of sight the policeman could not see what he was claiming he saw. The JP did not even have a look. He just stated that the police officer is trained to observe so he trust his 1 year old recollections more than the picture. JP clearly showed no interest to hear what I have to say. He stopped me when I tried to challenge officer based on math (distance = speed * time) - you are at the court not at school. He completely ignore what I said on the stand - and I said that I absolutely stopped at the stop line and after that proceeded with the right turn on red. You are alone against three of them ganged up together and one of them has to decide whether you are guilty or not. You have no chance!
Just before my case that was another case with a woman who was charged for allegedly not stopping at the stop sign (and stop line). JP kind of excepted that she actually stopped but a few feet before the stop line. Guess what? She was convicted anyways because the law as prosecutor insisted and JP excepted "requires to stop right at the stop line" - not a few feet before that! Such a shame!
It is all about money. Nothing but money. Justice and fairness are not welcome at this so called "court".
The JP is required to be fair and impartial. If you feel so strongly that he wasn't and you can prove it in the transcripts then I would file an appeal based on that. Appeals are heard by senior JPs who are more knowledgeable on such matters. Even if the system is corrupt for money as you claim you take comfort in the fact that your trial process likely cost 3 times whatever fine they are trying to collect from you.
The JP is required to be fair and impartial. If you feel so strongly that he wasn't and you can prove it in the transcripts then I would file an appeal based on that. Appeals are heard by senior JPs who are more knowledgeable on such matters. Even if the system is corrupt for money as you claim you take comfort in the fact that your trial process likely cost 3 times whatever fine they are trying to collect from you.
No comfort here. My ticket is $325.00. I doubt the process costs 3 times that amount. Anyway, the gang was already paid. Now they are just collecting some money back. The funny thing is as a taxpayer I am paying for their services...
No comfort here. My ticket is $325.00. I doubt the process costs 3 times that amount. Anyway, the gang was already paid. Now they are just collecting some money back. The funny thing is as a taxpayer I am paying for their services...
Guidelines for submitting photographs: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1765.html You should just invest in a cheap HD dashcam instead; if mounted correctly... it will show that you made a complete stop behind the white stop line. If you presented that to the prosecutor, charges would immediately get withdrawn. With a decent setup, you could even show the officer by the side of the road that you did in fact stop correctly... and don't even bother with the ticket.
You should just invest in a cheap HD dashcam instead; if mounted correctly... it will show that you made a complete stop behind the white stop line. If you presented that to the prosecutor, charges would immediately get withdrawn. With a decent setup, you could even show the officer by the side of the road that you did in fact stop correctly... and don't even bother with the ticket.
The dash camera might help though I am not sure how it can show that you actually stopped at the stop line. On another hand the JP can still reject to see the video the same way he rejected to have a look to my photograph which shows clearly that the officer could not see the stop line.
You should just invest in a cheap HD dashcam instead; if mounted correctly... it will show that you made a complete stop behind the white stop line. If you presented that to the prosecutor, charges would immediately get withdrawn. With a decent setup, you could even show the officer by the side of the road that you did in fact stop correctly... and don't even bother with the ticket.
The dash camera might help though I am not sure how it can show that you actually stopped at the stop line. On another hand the JP can still reject to see the video the same way he rejected to have a look to my photograph which shows clearly that the officer could not see the stop line.
Hopeless? That's odd. In 20 years of fighting tickets I have yet to lose a trial. Yes, the cops and the crown are ganging up on you because court is an adversarial process. They're not there to be your friends and share some sympathy tea over how much stress this causes you. And while the Judge has to be impartial it doesn't mean he has to be nice. They get tired of people not understanding that a courtroom isn't law school. They're concerned with points of law that you either know or you don't. If you don't have the chops to handle it yourself than hire someone who does. Hell, talk to some law students. That or plead guilty with an explanation and get a reduced fine. If you really feel their behavior is out of line than file complaints with the Police Services Board and the Upper Canada Law Society and they'll investigate. Go take some law classes and spend some real time learning procedural rules and how to argue. There's a ton of things you can do but if you believe it's hopeless than it is. Hopeless for you, not everyone else. Plenty of posts from plenty of people on these forums prove it's far from hopeless.
Hopeless? That's odd. In 20 years of fighting tickets I have yet to lose a trial. Yes, the cops and the crown are ganging up on you because court is an adversarial process. They're not there to be your friends and share some sympathy tea over how much stress this causes you. And while the Judge has to be impartial it doesn't mean he has to be nice. They get tired of people not understanding that a courtroom isn't law school. They're concerned with points of law that you either know or you don't. If you don't have the chops to handle it yourself than hire someone who does. Hell, talk to some law students. That or plead guilty with an explanation and get a reduced fine. If you really feel their behavior is out of line than file complaints with the Police Services Board and the Upper Canada Law Society and they'll investigate. Go take some law classes and spend some real time learning procedural rules and how to argue. There's a ton of things you can do but if you believe it's hopeless than it is. Hopeless for you, not everyone else. Plenty of posts from plenty of people on these forums prove it's far from hopeless.
^ Well said. The only time it's hopeless is when the crown has their witnesses and information put together properly, and you have to sit back and take the loss. The crown and police are not there to be your friends. Crown wants to win, police don't want to look bad either. Unless it's something minor like fail to produce proof of insurance where they won't win if you show proof, they won't give up the possible conviction even if it's a reduced charge. The actual court clerks and staff are the impartial ones. That being said, there have been times when the prosecutor won't cooperate, lies and bullies. For example, my red light ticket. "Sent a 2nd disclosure request for the dash camera video. Do you have it ready?" "We're not providing it. Sit down and wait to be called up." Didn't bother arguing with the prosecutor. They've made their mind. You can't change it or get what you want that second anyway. Prosecutor didn't speak that way to the Justice though. I explained a timely disclosure request was made for video evidence, case law regarding video evidence requires that if it can significantly change the outcome of the trial, and crown withdrew the charge immediately. On the other end of the spectrum is a prosecutor I encountered at Edward St. court for parking. Checked in, and he explained that if the officer is absent my charge will be withdrawn, and if the officer is present, if I'd be willing to accept a lesser fine of $10 for a guilty plea. I agreed and the officer was absent, charge withdrawn. He was one of the most polite and proper prosecutors I've met and have the utmost respect for his professionalism. Just be very brief and articulate in your statements. Nobody there is interested in hearing a sob story or smartass remarks. You get treated much better when you show that you're knowledgeable and understand procedure.
^ Well said. The only time it's hopeless is when the crown has their witnesses and information put together properly, and you have to sit back and take the loss.
The crown and police are not there to be your friends. Crown wants to win, police don't want to look bad either. Unless it's something minor like fail to produce proof of insurance where they won't win if you show proof, they won't give up the possible conviction even if it's a reduced charge. The actual court clerks and staff are the impartial ones.
That being said, there have been times when the prosecutor won't cooperate, lies and bullies. For example, my red light ticket.
"Sent a 2nd disclosure request for the dash camera video. Do you have it ready?"
"We're not providing it. Sit down and wait to be called up."
Didn't bother arguing with the prosecutor. They've made their mind. You can't change it or get what you want that second anyway. Prosecutor didn't speak that way to the Justice though. I explained a timely disclosure request was made for video evidence, case law regarding video evidence requires that if it can significantly change the outcome of the trial, and crown withdrew the charge immediately.
On the other end of the spectrum is a prosecutor I encountered at Edward St. court for parking. Checked in, and he explained that if the officer is absent my charge will be withdrawn, and if the officer is present, if I'd be willing to accept a lesser fine of $10 for a guilty plea. I agreed and the officer was absent, charge withdrawn. He was one of the most polite and proper prosecutors I've met and have the utmost respect for his professionalism.
Just be very brief and articulate in your statements. Nobody there is interested in hearing a sob story or smartass remarks. You get treated much better when you show that you're knowledgeable and understand procedure.
I have a problem and not sure what the hell to do about it. Few days ago I was stopped on a street going westbound against blinding afternoon sun following the flow of traffic. I drive a taxi for living in Toronto and have ACZ driver's license. I have a perfect record both for professional as well regular demerit points. I haven't been pulled over as a matter of fact in some 15 years for…
I have recently gone to court for a speeding ticket issued by an OPP officer. As it stood, the officer forgot to sign the ticket. So at my trial, before I made a plea, I pointed this out to the justice of the peace and asked that the ticket be quashed. I was asked to produce my copy of the ticket, which I gave and the JOP then agreed with me and dismissed the case. Before he did so, the…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
So here's my situation, any advice would be appreciated.
On June 26, 2013 I received a ticket for 25 over in a 60 zone
In early October I received my notice of trial (Feb 25, 2014)
In early January I sent in my request for disclosure
In late January I received a letter to pick up my disclosure, however when I picked up my disclosure it wasn't typed (I had requested it to be) and I needed…
Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?
Scenario
- 2 vehicle accident
- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage
- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible
- a police Accident Report was completed
In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of…
I will be representing my wife at her speeding trial next week. Mostly everything is pretty much run of the mill but since she wasn't speeding we will be having her take the stand. Since this opens up the opportunity for the prosecutor to cross examine, I am just wondering if anyone here knows what kind of questions we should expect from the prosecutor in order to best prepare.
i got pulled over by a cop this morning in my kids's school zone for failure to stop at a stop sign. i am thinking of fighting this ticket, but i noticed that on the ticket itself it only says "disobey stop sign - fail to stop" and there is no mention of the demerit points. a co-worker mentioned to me that a ticket should state how many demerit points i am being docked. i know the Highway Traffic…
Alright, so this happened back awhile ago on June and I haven't appeared in Court. However, I would like some inputs and advice before I get into this battle.
Back in June I got a Speeding Ticket claiming I was going 100km/h on Blackcreek going south towards Lawrence. The Speed Limit there is 70km/h.
At this point of time, it was roughly traffic hour around 4-5PM. Coming off of the Highway, and…
Ive already done searches, read the act as best i can but still haven't read a complete answer. Where in the HTA does it state that the front license plate must be attached to the front bumper? I have it on the passenger sun visor (if ppl remember the old temp permits that taped to the pass side of windshield) i figured that this spot would be the same. However now they have got rid of…
My son was returning from school and was just entering the driveway when another vehicle hit the rear end. Police writes a ticket "fail to yield from private drive" 139(i). He is going to fight this ticket and made an application for disclosure. The trial is next week and he still hasn't received the disclosure.
He checked with the court last month and they said that they will call when disclosure…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i moved into the middle lane ahead of him to pass the slower moving car. When I accelerated, i…
So I was returning from my honeymoon in Montreal, and was cruising down the 401 just inside the Ontario/Quebec border. I was passing one of the Onroute stations and saw an OPP cruiser. I checked my speed and I was doing 120. A few kilometers up the road the cruiser pulled me over and told me I was clocked doing 132 by the aircraft. I was a little surprised to see the ticket was for the full…
I made a right turn during prohibited hours (7am-6pm) in Toronto. I was ticketed by a COP who was specially watching for that trap.
After I've received the ticket HTA144(9), I discovered one of the seven digits of my license plate was incorrectly written on my ticket. I was thinking about to make a First Attendance at the court office to see the prosecutor for a reduced charge...any advice or…
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…
I am not sure if my case is really a case of " mis-use parking permit" and need some advises on whether i should fight the ticket. Here is what happened:
During the labor day long weekend, I took my parents to diner at a local shopping mall. (my father's hip was broken in 2016 and he's been on wheelchair since, the permit is in his name and I been using the permit to help him for doctor's…
I have a court date coming up where I need to subpoena one of the officers that was present when I got my ticket. The issuing officer didn't include the fact that the second one was present at the time in his report (disclosure) but did give me the second officers name and badge number after the judge told him to do it.
What I'm looking for help with is the process of me getting to…
I got pulled over on a 4 lane section fo Highway 7... Thank god I didn't get a stay at home ticket as well or my car impounded.
Officer clocked me at 156 km/h he decided not to impound my car and give me a 149 km/h since it was my first offence and he said I was polite and respectful. I would give this officer a 5/5 review if I could, very polite and respectful.
Long story short, I was driving from Toronto to Ottawa and around Napanee with my friend in two separated cars, the officer was parked on uturn. He followed us turn his light on and got between us and pulled us over, he told me that i was running at 152 km/h without showing me his LISAR. they suspended my and my friends license and impounded the two cars for 7 days. This was a Friday in January…
I'm unsure on what to do here. I was under the impression that I could request a stay on the day of trial because disclosure was not given to me in an adequate time. I requested disclosure 2x by fax, 5 months ago.
I read on ticketcombat that I had to file a motion 15 days prior to the trial to request a stay of proceedings.
Does anyone else get blinded by fog lights on rural roads? I don't seem to have a problem with them on lighted streets, but the badly aimed fog lights or ones with a poor cutoff really get to me when driving the Escort. I just came back from a 20-minute drive, and every single pickup truck had fog lights on, and forced me to focus on the bottom right of the road. My windshield is clean and…
It is hopeless to fight a ticket at Ontario Traffic court
