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 got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got a ticket, Disobey stop sign, sec 136.1.a on dec 6th
I made a left in an intersection and was pulled over by a police officer in an unmarked car who had been sitting down the road. A classic fishing hole situation. I was genuinely surprised when he stopped me and told me I went through a stop sign without even slowing down. I know to shut up and be polite and take the ticket. I…
Yesterday morning, I rear-ended someone. I was going the speed limit. The sun was directly in front of me and it blinded my windshield and my eyes. At the same time, the person in front of me stopped/slowed down (also due to the sun). I started to slow down but didn't stop and I hit them since I couldn't see anything. I was not driving too close initially. I…
I was driving in the county at night and hit a limousine stretched out side ways across the road. The limo had its lights on and had side lighting as well. The police officer charged me with careless driving because it was "fully lit up".
It took me to the next day to figure out what had happened - what I remember made no sense. What I had run across was a "false visual reference" illusion.
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster untill I got pulled over at 147 on an 80 km hwy.
I alreaddy lost 3 points and this time was just the…
Hello, got stopped today for rolling a stop sign. Ticket says failure to stop, but quotes hta 1361b.
Doesn't 1361b mean failure to yield?
Is this a fatal error? Or could it be amended at trial. How can I prepare a defence if I don't know if I'm defending the failure to stop or the failure to yield?
After he was providing me with a ticket for failure to obey to the stop sign (I am pretty sure I stopped but less than 3 seconds recommended by my driver ed. instructor), I know everybody say that..as an excuse.
Then he stopped me again to return the documents.
Any advice and feed back would be really appreciated.
Can you get evidence for whether someone had an advanced green at an intersection? My dad was making a right turn on a red (after stopping) into a plaza parking lot. He got hit by someone making a left turn from the opposite lane. The driver told the officer called to the collision that he had an advance green. My dad said he came out of nowhere which makes me…
So i was driving on Eglinton Avenue East near Rosemount Ave.
The school bus was on the the curb on the opposite side of the road while i was travelling on the middle lane of the three-laned Eglinton Avenue East (five lanes apart plus a raised median island seperating the traffic)
I could not see the school bus as my view of the bus was being obstructed by the cars in front of me and on my left hand…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
This morning I had an exam for university. I was studying the entire night and i wanted to catch like maybe 1-2 hours of sleep before the exam so i went to sleep. I woke up like 5 hrs after and realize that I was about to miss my exam. I still could have made it so I asked my dad for his car since I was in a huge rush and he gave it to me.
I went on the highway and I was going at 135 km/h but…
the police officer was in in the opesite oncumming lane he was fallowing another car so close that i was not even able to see his cruser till he was buy he said that i was going 111 in a 80 he said he hade me on radar he only asked for me drivers licencs and never asked for my insurence so on the ticket there no insurence dose enyone think i can beat this i wana take it to cort becuse he was…
Hi I have a couple questions so I'll explain my situation and any advice would be appreciated.
Can't remember exact date so lets call it some time in 2008 I got a fine for $5000.00 for driving without in insurance. I never paid the fine and in 2012 I was pulled over and the officer asked to see my license. Although I had it on me I figured it would be under suspension for the unpaid fine from…
Alright, so I did something really stupid the other day, I was driving down a country road and wanted to hit the curves so I passed 3 cars at once, inadvertently making it up to very much past 50 over (80 limit)... Much to my chagrin there was a cop coming in the opposite direction who immediately skidded on the gravel shoulder and who I thought was 100% going to turn around and pull me over,…
Anyone know how backed this courthouse is? I submitted my ticket for trial at the end of August, and still no letter. Im scared it got lost in the mail, can i call the courthouse and find out my courtdate? Or would i have to go in personally?
I recently received a ticket for failure to use low beams - while following - Ticket was issued Sec 168 (
- it was on the 401 and no one was within 500 meters of me, I was warning a oncoming vehicle that there was an officer hiding (which is not illegal or I could not find a law against it) it was a police vehicle travelling at very high rate of speed in the opposite direction with no lights on…
I received a warning letter from MTO for a 2pts ticket.What happened is that the police officer issued a "unsafe left turn" and then changed the ticket to "failed to signal" at the scene, but she submitted both tickets!!! And I !!!ONLY!!! received the latter ticket from her(I requested trial for "failed to signal"). I recently received notice from MTO that I'm convicted for "unsafe left turn".
Hello everyone! I was given a ticket for using a hand-held communication device while driving. It was 3 am, I was at a stop light and the cop saw me with the my phone in my hand. I told him i was just checking the time on it. I received the notes a few weeks ago ill copy them down below. Any help is appreciated although i believe there's no hope for me. The cop recorded me saying what phone i…
I got pulled over about 15 or so days ago the court till this date has not received the summons what is the legal time period that the court has to follow to accept the summons from the office court says its 15 days is the legal timeframe the officer has to serve it on the court
I requested for disclosure of information two months ago.
I received the radar manual after one month, but not others (including maintenance/calibration record of the radar, certificate of police training). On further pursuit, the prosecutor told me that he did not have them and he did not see why I needed these documents. He said he did not know where to get them when I asked.
Last Friday I was pulled over by an OPP motorcycle cop who informed me I was going 134. I was on the SB 404, I did see him parked under a bridge and when I passed him he was not on his bike.
I'm hoping to get some insight for a defense in this case.
I was in lane 1 and I had a car in front of me, and a car behind me, also there was a car speeding down Lane 3 passing everyone and moved quickly into…
It is hopeless to fight a ticket at Ontario Traffic court
