- Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
tonygambini wrote:So the court date was today:
The prosecution called me up right away, they asked for an adjournment of the trial (one month) so they can get together my "larger than normal request for disclosure".
The JP asked if I had anything to day: I didn't know that they were going to do this so I was kind of baffled. I just asked for the case to be quashed because the prosecution had not disclosed evidence. To which the JP says: "Well that's not going to happen" Oh I forgot to mention: the police officer was there!
So as it stands now I wait for the disclosure from the prosecutor. Although they did give me the copy of the ticket an the officers printed notes.
Here is something I found that may be important:
My ticket was issues at 1300hrs, the laser gun was tested at 1530hrs. Anyone know if the fact that the gun was tested after my ticket was issued matters?
Thanks!
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj266.html http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj217.html
Try those.....hefty reading though.......You might be better off attacking the alignment of the gun......is there a make and model?
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:25 pm
- Location: OTTAWA AREA
Yes there is a make/model.
It says he was using 2 types (but only nailed me on one)
Rader (not used for me): Stalker
Laser: Ultralite LRB LTI 20-20
[/u]
- Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
tonygambini wrote:Yes there is a make/model.
It says he was using 2 types (but only nailed me on one)
Rader (not used for me): Stalker
Laser: Ultralite LRB LTI 20-20
[/u]
Is there anything in his notes about an alignment check?
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:25 pm
- Location: OTTAWA AREA
No his notes simply state:
"Test Time: 0724/0708 1530HRS Working Properly"
I assume the first two numbers mean the radar/laser test times. It was then re-checked at 1530
- Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
0724/0708
Those are probably serial numbers on the units. Is there a distance?
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:25 pm
- Location: OTTAWA AREA
I should have included the entire message so there is no confusion. This is what what written above his typed notes:
Radar Type: STALKER DSR/ULTRALITE LRB LTI 20-20
Radar Serial Number: KC018958/UX014699
Test Time: 0724/0708 1530HRS WORKING PROPERLY
This leads me to believe that the "0724/0708" were the test times of the unit(s) and at 1530 they were working properly?
There was a distance given: 88kph @ 71.5m -I also find this weird because the ticket was a R87 ticket.
Thanks!
- Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
I think there was a recent decision that said as long as the tests were completed and found no errors then the court shall accept the readings.
And 71 m is pretty close and the beam is small so an arguement of outside influence wouldn't fly.
As far as
the officer rounded his reading down because the guns are only accurate to plus/minus 2 KMH.I also find this weird because the ticket was a R87 ticket.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:25 pm
- Location: OTTAWA AREA
- Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
tonygambini wrote:Well that sucks!
Not too sure what I have to go on anymore....
any ideas?
You could still poke around the testing times.....other then that???????? Was it wet at the time?
Reflections wrote:down because the guns are only accurate to plus/minus 2 KMH.
not all lidar/radar are the same....FYI
- Reflections
- Moderator
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
- Location: somewhere in traffic
hwybear wrote:Reflections wrote:down because the guns are only accurate to plus/minus 2 KMH.
not all lidar/radar are the same....FYI
The LTI guns have the same accuracy........
http://www.lasertech.com/content/pdfs/U ... R_Spec.pdf
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:25 pm
- Location: OTTAWA AREA
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:25 pm
- Location: OTTAWA AREA
Final update:
I appeared for my second court date today. After reviewing the evidence against me I felt there was nothing for me to go on. I decided to change my plea to guilty with an explanation. The JP showed no mercy, declared that the ticket was reduced to 80 from 87 in a 60 zone, no further reduction is necessary. I have 3 months to pay.
95 bucks
3 demerit points
higher insurance
I left the courthouse with a pretty defeated feeling about myself. Oh well, what can you do eh?
-
- Similar Topics
-
-
New post 159 km/h in a 100km/h zone (G2)
by pruzhinkin in Stunt DrivingLast post by dedeoaraujo Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:00 pm
-
-
-
New post 152 Km/H In A 150 Km/H Zone (On The 401) And I'm A Quebec Resident.
by HelpBobby in Stunt DrivingLast post by CoolRunnings Sat Dec 19, 2020 9:38 am
-
-
-
New post 150 km/hr in a posted 100 km/hr zone on highway 401
by micky202 in General TalkLast post by highwaystar Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:31 pm
-
-
-
New post 70 in a 50 zone - reduced from 86 km/hr (Disclosure Included)
Last post by highwaystar Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:43 pm
-
-
-
New post Reduced 119 kph in a posted 80 kph - construction zone
Last post by firsttimeuser111 Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:12 pm
-
-
-
New post Stunt Driving low 150s in 100 km/hour zone; not sure what to do
by matt49683 in Stunt DrivingLast post by bend Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:10 pm
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
Help us, Help You!
Hello, we notice you may be using an adblocker...
Please support free websites by turning off your Ad blocker.
Thank you!