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 lane, so I slowed down and waited. Once the speeder had passed my car the passing lane was clear. I changed lanes, accelerated a bit, and started to overtake the slower car. I was just about to go back in the right hand lane when the speeder (still in the passing lane) put on its brakes, so I put on my brakes. The speeder put on its brakes again, so I put on my brakes again. At that point I figured there must be an accident or something, but I couldnt see anything in front of me, except a speeder trying to slow down. For a split second, I was thinking of going back in the right hand lane, but after putting on the brakes twice, I had lost track to the slower car in the right hand lane. So, I stayed in the passing lane behind the speeder and we both went slower and slower. We were crawling along in the passing lane when I noticed a police cruiser parked on the left. I figured the officer nabbed the speeder, and I was going to go along my marry way. The speeder stopped on the left side of the road and then the officer signalled me to stop as well, so I did. He claimed he clocked me doing 127 kph in a 100 zone. Im pretty sure he had the speeder clocked at 130 kph, and Im sure I wasnt going that fast. Could the officer have made a mistake, given the speeder was in front of me from the point I changed lanes?
I have used night vision to see the beam, very neat. However, we are not trained/ qualified to align a scope. That must be done by the repair facility. What we do is ensure the unit is sighting properly, if the lidar fails the test, we place it out of service and send it for repair on the next Purolator truck.
Reflections wrote:
Lidar used by officers is invisible to the naked eye. You can however use nightvision to see them. I wonder why officers are not using nightvision to align the scopes???
I have used night vision to see the beam, very neat.
However, we are not trained/ qualified to align a scope. That must be done by the repair facility. What we do is ensure the unit is sighting properly, if the lidar fails the test, we place it out of service and send it for repair on the next Purolator truck.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
To my use, I start observing vehicles about 1km away (through scope) monitor, then hit the vehicle with lidar around 700m. Then again around 550m. Then my final hit is around 500m-100m. This allows a visual observation, confirmed targetting history. The lidar beam is very concentrated being this close and any smog would be less than minimal affect. The addition of moisture in the air reduces the effective range of the lidar. ie light rain might reduce my first reading from 700m down to 500m. Snow is just horrible and a waste of my time using a lidar. It is not affecting the accuracy of the readings, just how far away a vehicle can be targetted.
Reflections wrote:
One thing though. I know that light travels at a constant speed in a vacuum. The atmosphere is not a vacuum. Dirt, smog.....all those airbourne particles can effect light. How would this be compensated for....? I know you're coming back to this 'bear so..... The further away a target is from the gun the more the "light" is going to slow down, simple physics. Is there a setting you have for "smoggy" days??? I know there are foul weather modes on different models. You cannot compensate for the unknown.
To my use, I start observing vehicles about 1km away (through scope) monitor, then hit the vehicle with lidar around 700m. Then again around 550m. Then my final hit is around 500m-100m. This allows a visual observation, confirmed targetting history. The lidar beam is very concentrated being this close and any smog would be less than minimal affect.
The addition of moisture in the air reduces the effective range of the lidar. ie light rain might reduce my first reading from 700m down to 500m. Snow is just horrible and a waste of my time using a lidar. It is not affecting the accuracy of the readings, just how far away a vehicle can be targetted.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
And at the end of the day, I would rather use lidar. At 100m Lidar = 30cm beam width Radar = 20 metres There is absolutely never any doubt with lidar which vehicle is travelling what speed. although......my best is at night, obtain a speed via radar/lidar, catch the vehicle and then pace it....then pull up beside and READ the drivers speedometer. (even more icing on the cake when the speedometer is digital :shock: )
And at the end of the day, I would rather use lidar.
At 100m
Lidar = 30cm beam width
Radar = 20 metres
There is absolutely never any doubt with lidar which vehicle is travelling what speed.
although......my best is at night, obtain a speed via radar/lidar, catch the vehicle and then pace it....then pull up beside and READ the drivers speedometer. (even more icing on the cake when the speedometer is digital )
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
New civic's are very nice for you...... Your style is very thorough. Next time you have the oppertunity on a smoggy day, light someone up from 1 km and keep the gun on them. If the speed decreases the closer they get closer then there is some effect. I know you'll say they let they're foot off the gas but this would help prove the theory.
New civic's are very nice for you......
Your style is very thorough. Next time you have the oppertunity on a smoggy day, light someone up from 1 km and keep the gun on them. If the speed decreases the closer they get closer then there is some effect.
I know you'll say they let they're foot off the gas but this would help prove the theory.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Your style is very thorough. Next time you have the oppertunity on a smoggy day, light someone up from 1 km and keep the gun on them. If the speed decreases the closer they get closer then there is some effect.
I know you'll say they let they're foot off the gas but this would help prove the theory.
I'll give that a shot....pardon the pun!!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The best way is to store your pictures on any free file storing website. www.Photobucket.com is free and provides 1 GB of free space. Once you have uploaded your picture you can simply post your picture/image on this forum using bbcode: Code: Select all [img]http://your-image-link-goes-here.com/image.jpg[/img]
Imax wrote:
Is there a way of uploading pics on this forum? I have a few NURBS pics.
The best way is to store your pictures on any free file storing website.
thanks admin. It's working :lol: NURBS setup. Two cars, one at 500m and one at 570m. Laser offset, 10m. The laser beam is a cone, 600m long and 1.8m at the base. A perspecive: Close up view: When looking at the close up, its not too bad. Any beam hitting the side of car one wont be received by a lidar. But my NURBS model for car 1 and 2 arent realistic. They are two blocks, one on top of the other. Ive missed on important aspect, side view mirrors.
thanks admin. It's working
NURBS setup. Two cars, one at 500m and one at 570m. Laser offset, 10m. The laser beam is a cone, 600m long and 1.8m at the base.
A perspecive:
Close up view:
When looking at the close up, its not too bad. Any beam hitting the side of car one wont be received by a lidar. But my NURBS model for car 1 and 2 arent realistic. They are two blocks, one on top of the other. Ive missed on important aspect, side view mirrors.
Good shots and they explain a lot. As much as they are not "perfect" they do demonstrate the problems facing officers. The third one's the best.....good job.
Good shots and they explain a lot. As much as they are not "perfect" they do demonstrate the problems facing officers. The third one's the best.....good job.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
maybe a mod can spilt this over to the law enforcement tools area... somewhere above this.... ************************************* seeing that a lane is 3.75m wide a typical car is 2.6m wide.......beam width is still less than the width of the car. At 500m beam is 1.5m wide. One at 570m...round it to even 1.8m for simplicity sake. Your "blocks" are realistic for Jeeps and Hummers :)
maybe a mod can spilt this over to the law enforcement tools area... somewhere above this....
*************************************
seeing that a lane is 3.75m wide a typical car is 2.6m wide.......beam width is still less than the width of the car.
At 500m beam is 1.5m wide. One at 570m...round it to even 1.8m for simplicity sake.
Your "blocks" are realistic for Jeeps and Hummers
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
You can still see that it is difficult to target the plate..... And like you said you can't see the beam even under alignment checks. The officer still does not know "exactly" where the beam is.......at a distance of 500 meters 1 degree is a lot, even 0.5 degrees of misalignment will cause this situation.
You can still see that it is difficult to target the plate..... And like you said you can't see the beam even under alignment checks. The officer still does not know "exactly" where the beam is.......at a distance of 500 meters 1 degree is a lot, even 0.5 degrees of misalignment will cause this situation.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
You are right, this thread is too long and discussion of lidars hijacked the thread. I shall have admin make me a mod for this section too and split it off.
hwybear wrote:
maybe a mod can spilt this over to the law enforcement tools area... somewhere above this....
*************************************
seeing that a lane is 3.75m wide a typical car is 2.6m wide.......beam width is still less than the width of the car.
At 500m beam is 1.5m wide. One at 570m...round it to even 1.8m for simplicity sake.
Your "blocks" are realistic for Jeeps and Hummers
You are right, this thread is too long and discussion of lidars hijacked the thread. I shall have admin make me a mod for this section too and split it off.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
I still do not see it when the beam is not relative to the distance. Nor are the size of vehicles. It to one perspective is construed, something like stats are! :D
Reflections wrote:
You can still see that it is difficult to target the plate..... And like you said you can't see the beam even under alignment checks. The officer still does not know "exactly" where the beam is.......at a distance of 500 meters 1 degree is a lot, even 0.5 degrees of misalignment will cause this situation.
I still do not see it when the beam is not relative to the distance. Nor are the size of vehicles. It to one perspective is construed, something like stats are!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
OK try this one: The ideallogy of the designer is that the plate is the target. Ideally it is the first thing hit, being at the front of the car. What happens when the plate is not the first thing to be hit??????????? That info is locked up in the designers head and won't be released due to the fact that it can be used by the other companies.
OK try this one: The ideallogy of the designer is that the plate is the target. Ideally it is the first thing hit, being at the front of the car. What happens when the plate is not the first thing to be hit??????????? That info is locked up in the designers head and won't be released due to the fact that it can be used by the other companies.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
The diagram still does not relate properly. I must be missing something in the description....all of a sudden we go from vehicles to a plate? If it is to mean two targets at the same time....the lidar will not compute that and gives the operator an error.
The diagram still does not relate properly. I must be missing something in the description....all of a sudden we go from vehicles to a plate?
If it is to mean two targets at the same time....the lidar will not compute that and gives the operator an error.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Hi Bear: Thats what Im wondering about. A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
Hi Bear:
Thats what Im wondering about. A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise.
Imax wrote:
A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise. When the beam is sent it hits the entire car. The gun will recieve the reflections from every point that is facing the gun. Thus, the amount of filtering done by the gun is extremely large. Now, when you target just the front plate, you are hitting the entire front end of the car. There are 3 good targets on the front of a vehicle, the plate and the 2 headlights. What you are saying about multiple targets doesn't add up.
hwybear wrote:
Imax wrote:
A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise.
When the beam is sent it hits the entire car. The gun will recieve the reflections from every point that is facing the gun. Thus, the amount of filtering done by the gun is extremely large. Now, when you target just the front plate, you are hitting the entire front end of the car. There are 3 good targets on the front of a vehicle, the plate and the 2 headlights. What you are saying about multiple targets doesn't add up.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
I dont doubt that if two vehicles are in the same beam, experience says that a lidar will reject both and display an error message and no speed reading. I have no problems in seeing a lidar being able to get the speed of car1, but the angles for car2 are really tight. Im guessing the lidar for car2 would need to be moved from whats in the NURBS pics, possibly aiming at the closest headlight. Given the tight angle and beam divergence, I can only see two possibilities. The lidar is reading car1 speed or its reading an error message.
I dont doubt that if two vehicles are in the same beam, experience says that a lidar will reject both and display an error message and no speed reading. I have no problems in seeing a lidar being able to get the speed of car1, but the angles for car2 are really tight. Im guessing the lidar for car2 would need to be moved from whats in the NURBS pics, possibly aiming at the closest headlight. Given the tight angle and beam divergence, I can only see two possibilities. The lidar is reading car1 speed or its reading an error message.
That is a better explanation of what I have been saying.......that IF the pictures were to scale (ie vehicles should be 2.6m wide) then there might be less chance a lidar could get #2. Veh 1 width of 2.6m, 500m the beam is 1.5m wide...therefore the whole beam can be placed on the car... Veh 2 width is 2.6m, 570m the beam width is 1.71m wide...therfore the whole beam can be placed on the car. Now what we have is the angle from the lidar to the vehicles, on a angle, can it target the 2nd vehicle? There is also sideways movement within the lane (as it is 3.75m wide) that also is not taken into account. Which each vehicle could move 1.15m left or right. This could add up to another 2.30m of lateral difference.
Imax wrote:
I have no problems in seeing a lidar being able to get the speed of car1, but the angles for car2 are really tight.
That is a better explanation of what I have been saying.......that IF the pictures were to scale (ie vehicles should be 2.6m wide) then there might be less chance a lidar could get #2.
Veh 1 width of 2.6m, 500m the beam is 1.5m wide...therefore the whole beam can be placed on the car...
Veh 2 width is 2.6m, 570m the beam width is 1.71m wide...therfore the whole beam can be placed on the car.
Now what we have is the angle from the lidar to the vehicles, on a angle, can it target the 2nd vehicle? There is also sideways movement within the lane (as it is 3.75m wide) that also is not taken into account. Which each vehicle could move 1.15m left or right. This could add up to another 2.30m of lateral difference.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Another "angle".........If you, the officer, can't get a reading off the plate of a vehicle then you are told to aim at the headlight. Would an officer try to get the second vehicle with only the headlight, drivers side, and mistakenly sample the first car?
Another "angle".........If you, the officer, can't get a reading off the plate of a vehicle then you are told to aim at the headlight. Would an officer try to get the second vehicle with only the headlight, drivers side, and mistakenly sample the first car?
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
In the training I have received.....we have always been told to target the front licence plate, if no plate, front centre between headlights OR on occassion the rear plate.....NEVER anywhere else and NEVER a partial corner (ie corner headlight) that is just stupid and not being used properly. I am not that hard up for tickets to start corner jabbing vehicles. There will be another vehicle come along if I wait long enough. I won't lose sleep over it as the vehicles are still travelling even when I'm home.
In the training I have received.....we have always been told to target the front licence plate, if no plate, front centre between headlights OR on occassion the rear plate.....NEVER anywhere else and NEVER a partial corner (ie corner headlight) that is just stupid and not being used properly.
I am not that hard up for tickets to start corner jabbing vehicles. There will be another vehicle come along if I wait long enough. I won't lose sleep over it as the vehicles are still travelling even when I'm home.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Hi Bear: I like your new avatar. Must check donut specifications - diameter, glazing thickness, and, most important, freshness. :) Ive never used a lidar. :oops: I look at health products and products that can have an impact on health. I cant see how a lidar can measure the speed of car2. The angles are too tight.
Hi Bear:
I like your new avatar. Must check donut specifications - diameter, glazing thickness, and, most important, freshness.
Ive never used a lidar.
I look at health products and products that can have an impact on health. I cant see how a lidar can measure the speed of car2. The angles are too tight.
Simply, if it's in too close to V1 then it can not be targeted. Now having said that, has the officer watched these 2 vehicles over time and neither appear to be gaining or pulling away from the other....then going relatively the same speed(within 5km/hr of each other). Could stop the 2nd one for speeding OR even follow too close.
Imax wrote:
I cant see how a lidar can measure the speed of car2. The angles are too tight.
Simply, if it's in too close to V1 then it can not be targeted.
Now having said that, has the officer watched these 2 vehicles over time and neither appear to be gaining or pulling away from the other....then going relatively the same speed(within 5km/hr of each other). Could stop the 2nd one for speeding OR even follow too close.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Hi Bear: As possibly the only one with lidar experience on this board, have you ever clocked two cars, one at 500 m and the other directly behind at 570m, and then managed to stop both cars by yourself ? (without causing an accident :) )
Hi Bear:
As possibly the only one with lidar experience on this board, have you ever clocked two cars, one at 500 m and the other directly behind at 570m, and then managed to stop both cars by yourself ? (without causing an accident )
I can only remember one of those types of stops about 3yrs ago. I have clocked 2 vehicles before (in the 150-155km/hr range) and successfully stopped both. This was about 3yrs ago (pre 172 era) I still remember the one vehicle (unusual vehicle travelling that speed) but don't remember the distances. The most I have stopped at once is 9 vehicles. Great big line of vehicles, so I took out the lead vehicle and the 8 others stopped :shock: ....all related and travelling together!! That was before the car-pool era!
Imax wrote:
Hi Bear:
As possibly the only one with lidar experience on this board, have you ever clocked two cars, one at 500 m and the other directly behind at 570m, and then managed to stop both cars by yourself ? (without causing an accident )
I can only remember one of those types of stops about 3yrs ago. I have clocked 2 vehicles before (in the 150-155km/hr range) and successfully stopped both. This was about 3yrs ago (pre 172 era) I still remember the one vehicle (unusual vehicle travelling that speed) but don't remember the distances.
The most I have stopped at once is 9 vehicles. Great big line of vehicles, so I took out the lead vehicle and the 8 others stopped ....all related and travelling together!! That was before the car-pool era!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I have received a $450 ticket for parking in a handicap loading zone. I did not see the sign and the pavement was not marked. I have lived in Toronto for 15 years and this is the first ticket of any kind I have received. My last ticket, in a different city, was over 20 years ago. I am always very careful about parking and traffic regulations.
I cannot afford to pay $450. I do not make a lot of…
Petition to change HTA 136 (1)(A)Failure to Stop at Stop Sign
Hello, it does not seem right that not coming to a complete stop, that your wheels do not stop turning or rolling stop carries the same penalty as not stopping at all at a stop sign . I think it's time this laws challenged and quashed. I wondered how to go both that? Can we start a website that we can sign a petition to have this law…
My 78 year old Mother got a ticket at 8am on March 31/09 as the morning sun was in her eyes and she (as well, many others), didnt see the sign ahead-"No straight throughway (between 7-9am Mon to Fri". (All english Sign might I add) at Dundas & Shaw. (**Proceed Contrary Sign Intersection -HTA-144(9).
4 months prior to her court date in November, I requested disclosure 3 times prior to her…
Reference is made in the HTA to Stop Signs at Railway Crossings (passive crossings):
HTA, 163 (2)
O Reg 615 (7)
However I cannot find specific regulation detailing how a railway crossing controlled by a stop sign must be configured.
The Ontario Traffic Manual, Book 11 - Markings and Delineation under section "3.9 Reserved Facility Markings - Railways" (p99) speaks to the needs for marking, but is…
I got a parking ticket on Halloween around 9pm for parking in front of a cross walk in a residential street. There's no sign or anything that says you can't park there.
You know the crosswalk/walkways in residential streets that are fenced on both sides and that simply lead you to another street on the other side is what I'm talking about.
The parking ticket officer must have seen me walk in…
So I was on my way home, going a solid 120 as usual in the fast lane. Someone decides to cut me off going less than 100. I do a quick double lane change and speed up unknowingly hitting apparently 150. After speeding for a mere 20 seconds, I am pulled over. Cop says he reduced the ticket to 49 over, I was charged $359 for that. Of course, my insurance isn't in my car... I had to take it out…
Hi, new at this and could use all the help and guidance..
My brother just got in an accident where he swerved to avoid hitting a squirrel and got in an accident. Luckily, no one was hurt as he did not hit another party so it was just our car (old car and it will be a write off). The cop issued a careless driving ticket - notice of appearance. I read a similiar thread about this but not sure if it…
There is some construction going on for the last three months and hence, the northbound right lane on airport road at queen street which exits is closed due to construction and they have put barriers. they have put the right turn sign on the adjacent lane in the black background. Also the right lane north of Queen Street at Airport road is closed and they have an arrow sign there which indicates…
I keep being told that if you are found to be driving with bare feet, you could be fined etc... but nowhere can I find the actual rule anyway. Does anyone know if this is truly illegal - or perhaps used to be? In summer, sandals being what they are, its much safer, in my opinion to kick them off and drive with bare feet.... but then I hate anything on my feet in hot weather!
I got pulled over yesterday on the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway in Ottawa for going 106 km/h in a 60 zone. It was around noon, the weather was good and I was the only car on the road. He was hiding around a corner and was just stopped in the right lane (there are no shoulders on this road). I was alone in my car and neither of us said much, he didnt reduce my fine and gave me a ticket of a set…
I recently received a ticket from a military policeman on a military base in Ontario. Therefore, I was charged under the "Government Property Traffic Regulations" (GPTR), section 9. I know that some may say, why are you posting on a website for the HTA? Well, in Ontario, the military uses the Provincial Offences Act/Ontario Court of Justice for traffic tickets issued on a military base, i.e.…
For my first ever post, I'm going to ask for your own story dealing with a s.172 charge.
There is a lot of teeth grinding online about the street racing laws but few hands-on accounts from people who have been there and done that. I saw many posts from people seeking advice but few mention the actual outcome.
With about 1/3 conviction rate, there should be many success stories around. Even if you we…
... two cars pulled over, we (my wife and 7 month old boy) were passing a truck in the passing lane, first car passed me and I pulled out behind him. Crested a hill while on a curve, pass the truck and move back into the driving lane. Police officer shows up behind and pulls us both over. Gave me a ticket saying I was following the car in front doing 124km/hr.
We all know that numerous police agencies around Ontario (and world for that matter) set up speed traps in inconspicuous locations to catch motorists who are speeding.
If you know of any speed traps that are in regular use please post them here for all to know and avoid speeding fines.
Format: Town, Location, Direction, known days of operation (if known).
Sorry if this has been covered, but I searched and didn't find anything.
Just thought I'd share my recent experience.
Last Friday I was driving myself and my wife home from a nice dinner date in Markham/Richmond Hill north of T-DOT, and I had two (what looked like) ETF officers "tail" me home and park on my driveway.
I had been driving southbound and reached a red light stopped in the right…
I have my trial date coming up next week. I got a ticket in North Bay, ON for driving 139km/h on a 90km/h. He was using a Genesis II directional radar. Tested it before and after the stop according to the notes. In his notes, he mentions the speeds that were displayed on the radar which were 140, 141, and 139. In his notes, he also mentions that the color of my car was blue when it is…
I paid my fines for 2 tickets; fail to provide ownership and fail to provide insurence. I now know i should have checked not guilty and mailed them in.
(the papers were in the car. I was looking for them but was distracted by a badgering 2nd officer who was attempting to identify my passenger. I found them when i stopped for coffee later.)
Now that you actually opened this topic and I have your attention
Please read all items below 1 to 8
1) If YOU start a THREAD/DISCUSSION for an incident - KEEP on ONE THREAD, even for no activity for several months or even just to keep updates for court steps, stay on one thread
HOW DO I FIND MY POST? >> TOP right of page is the following: view unread posts / view new posts / view…
I plan to request disclosure through registered mail or fax. I've tried requesting in person but got rejected because they told me I did not provide sufficient information on my Disclosure Request letter.
My question is, do they really need the officer's name and division when I provided them with the Offence Number, Offence Date, Charge, Court Date, and Location? Also they said they do…
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?
Is there a requirement for commercial vehicles to be maintained only by licensed mechanics (e.g., oil changes, tire rotations)? I'm working with Habitat for Humanity and we are looking into a cargo van for the ReStore; I'm more than capable of doing maintenance but I'm not sure if it is legal because I am not a licensed mechanic.
)
which I had not search.