My Details: 24 years old. Driving for 8 years. 1st speeding ticket. Never convicted of anything. Ticket Details: September 2009 89 in a 60 = 29 over. Ticket was not reduced. Trial date: First week of August. Situation: To my suprise disclosure is incredibly detailed. The officer has 2 seperate notes of calibrating the radar at the start and end of his shift. The first note is mich more detailed than the second. The second simply states that the unit was functioning properly. He has another note that specified where he was standing while he radared. The exact direction. He describes the road..... the weather.... visibility. He even describes the exact distance that the speed limit sign was posted in front and behind him. On another note, he speciifies my vehicle, make, model, color and that there was 2 vehicles in site. he raraded my vehicle by trageting the front license plate. Clocked me at 29 over. The Lidar Radar Manual was also included. To this day, I don't believe I was going 29 over. I'm not a speeder. I want to argue that the cop radared the wrong vehicle but I don't know if I even have a chance. Considering how detailed his notes are, I can tell this officer goes by the book and will most likely be there at the trial. This is what I plan on doing on trial day: Ask the prosecuter if the officer will be attending my trial. If not, plead not guilty in the hopes of it being thrown out. If the cop is there, plead Guilty for 15 over - no points. 15 over means my insurance will still get a hike... which is really my main issue. But I think these are my only options. Am I going about this right? I've read the entire Ticket Combat site like 10 times. Scanned for flaws in the ticket and disclosure and can't find anything.
My Details:
24 years old.
Driving for 8 years.
1st speeding ticket.
Never convicted of anything.
Ticket Details:
September 2009
89 in a 60 = 29 over.
Ticket was not reduced.
Trial date: First week of August.
Situation:
To my suprise disclosure is incredibly detailed.
The officer has 2 seperate notes of calibrating the radar at the start and end of his shift. The first note is mich more detailed than the second. The second simply states that the unit was functioning properly.
He has another note that specified where he was standing while he radared. The exact direction. He describes the road..... the weather.... visibility. He even describes the exact distance that the speed limit sign was posted in front and behind him.
On another note, he speciifies my vehicle, make, model, color and that there was 2 vehicles in site. he raraded my vehicle by trageting the front license plate. Clocked me at 29 over.
The Lidar Radar Manual was also included.
To this day, I don't believe I was going 29 over. I'm not a speeder. I want to argue that the cop radared the wrong vehicle but I don't know if I even have a chance. Considering how detailed his notes are, I can tell this officer goes by the book and will most likely be there at the trial.
This is what I plan on doing on trial day:
Ask the prosecuter if the officer will be attending my trial. If not, plead not guilty in the hopes of it being thrown out. If the cop is there, plead Guilty for 15 over - no points.
15 over means my insurance will still get a hike... which is really my main issue. But I think these are my only options. Am I going about this right?
I've read the entire Ticket Combat site like 10 times. Scanned for flaws in the ticket and disclosure and can't find anything.
Last edited by woodensoldier on Sat Jul 24, 2010 8:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
You have mentioned both radar and lidar in your post so I'm not sure which one it was, but I'm guessing lidar because you said he targeted your vehicle specifically on the front plate. You can only do this with a lidar because it has a scope with a crosshair. If this is the case, I don't see how you're going to successfully argue that he targeted the wrong vehicle. Pleading to 15 over seems like a pretty good choice, it will certainly be less of an insurance hike than 29 over.
You have mentioned both radar and lidar in your post so I'm not sure which one it was, but I'm guessing lidar because you said he targeted your vehicle specifically on the front plate. You can only do this with a lidar because it has a scope with a crosshair. If this is the case, I don't see how you're going to successfully argue that he targeted the wrong vehicle.
Pleading to 15 over seems like a pretty good choice, it will certainly be less of an insurance hike than 29 over.
Your strategy seems like a good one, given the circumstances. The officer had some extremely detailed notes, the Crown fulfilled their disclosure obligation... I'd say what you're planning to do is your best bet. Let us know what the outcome is, though!
Your strategy seems like a good one, given the circumstances. The officer had some extremely detailed notes, the Crown fulfilled their disclosure obligation... I'd say what you're planning to do is your best bet. Let us know what the outcome is, though!
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
Lets say that the prosector is not willing to lower the speed to 15 before trial. Would it be best for me to go to trial, and plead to the JP for a lower sentencing in hopes that they would lower it to 15?
Lets say that the prosector is not willing to lower the speed to 15 before trial. Would it be best for me to go to trial, and plead to the JP for a lower sentencing in hopes that they would lower it to 15?
The JP won't hear your plea for a reduced charge. All they will hear is your guilty plea to the offence you are charged with, which you are able to make submissions as to penalty to. You can ask for a reduction in the dollar amount of the fine, but the speed will be what is on the ticket and the points are non negotiable and are for the amount on the ticket.
The JP won't hear your plea for a reduced charge. All they will hear is your guilty plea to the offence you are charged with, which you are able to make submissions as to penalty to. You can ask for a reduction in the dollar amount of the fine, but the speed will be what is on the ticket and the points are non negotiable and are for the amount on the ticket.
Wow, didn't know that. I thought I could work with the JP during the sentencing part. I could care less about the fine amount. Im more concerned with the noted speed. So I pretty much have to take whatever the prosecutor offers then... correct?
Wow, didn't know that. I thought I could work with the JP during the sentencing part. I could care less about the fine amount. Im more concerned with the noted speed.
So I pretty much have to take whatever the prosecutor offers then... correct?
Hi guys, my court date was actually on Thursday. Got the dates mixed up but regardless, I was still prepared. This is what happened. 1. Went to court, name was on a list. 2. Waited outside the court room until we were allowed in. 3. Walked up to the prosecuter and made a deal with him. Reduced to 15 over. He actually made the deal. I didn't do anything. He asked me what my name was in a matter of 2 seconds said he would reduce it to 15. 4. The cop still hadn't arrived. The prosecuter said that cases where the cop doesn't show up are automatically thrown out. So you don't even have to enter a plea or not guilty or guilty. 5. The cop eventually arrived. Turns out that they schedule trials based on one officer. That way the cop has to show up. So all the trials that day involve that officer. Makes sense. Therefore, I think people should really abandon the thought of an officer not showing up to court. Unless he is sick or on vacation is the only way you will get lucky. 6. The judge called me up to the stand. I plead guilty and told him I can pay the fine today. 7. My trial was at 9 AM, I was out of the court by 9:30. So for everyone who is stressed out over a speeding ticket. Don't be.
Hi guys, my court date was actually on Thursday. Got the dates mixed up but regardless, I was still prepared. This is what happened.
1. Went to court, name was on a list.
2. Waited outside the court room until we were allowed in.
3. Walked up to the prosecuter and made a deal with him. Reduced to 15 over. He actually made the deal. I didn't do anything. He asked me what my name was in a matter of 2 seconds said he would reduce it to 15.
4. The cop still hadn't arrived. The prosecuter said that cases where the cop doesn't show up are automatically thrown out. So you don't even have to enter a plea or not guilty or guilty.
5. The cop eventually arrived. Turns out that they schedule trials based on one officer. That way the cop has to show up. So all the trials that day involve that officer. Makes sense. Therefore, I think people should really abandon the thought of an officer not showing up to court. Unless he is sick or on vacation is the only way you will get lucky.
6. The judge called me up to the stand. I plead guilty and told him I can pay the fine today.
7. My trial was at 9 AM, I was out of the court by 9:30.
So for everyone who is stressed out over a speeding ticket. Don't be.
^^ Thanks for the update! Yes, this seems to be what happens on a regular basis...what I have yet to see is a recollection of a case that actually "went to trial" without a "deal" and was stayed/not guilty.
^^ Thanks for the update!
Yes, this seems to be what happens on a regular basis...what I have yet to see is a recollection of a case that actually "went to trial" without a "deal" and was stayed/not guilty.
Hey, thanks for a detailed overview! I just got myself into the same situation and was just curious to see by how much your insurance premiums went up?
woodensoldier wrote:
Hi guys, my court date was actually on Thursday. Got the dates mixed up but regardless, I was still prepared. This is what happened.
1. Went to court, name was on a list.
2. Waited outside the court room until we were allowed in.
3. Walked up to the prosecuter and made a deal with him. Reduced to 15 over. He actually made the deal. I didn't do anything. He asked me what my name was in a matter of 2 seconds said he would reduce it to 15.
4. The cop still hadn't arrived. The prosecuter said that cases where the cop doesn't show up are automatically thrown out. So you don't even have to enter a plea or not guilty or guilty.
5. The cop eventually arrived. Turns out that they schedule trials based on one officer. That way the cop has to show up. So all the trials that day involve that officer. Makes sense. Therefore, I think people should really abandon the thought of an officer not showing up to court. Unless he is sick or on vacation is the only way you will get lucky.
6. The judge called me up to the stand. I plead guilty and told him I can pay the fine today.
7. My trial was at 9 AM, I was out of the court by 9:30.
So for everyone who is stressed out over a speeding ticket. Don't be.
Hey, thanks for a detailed overview! I just got myself into the same situation and was just curious to see by how much your insurance premiums went up?
I'll give you one of those (not to hijack the thread). Defendant was over and ticketed at 30-ish over. No reduction on the ticket. (this was about a year and 8 months ago probably). Officer's notes were accurate and detailed, very standard. Went to trial, defendant was not offered a deal due to driving record. Upon trial, officer neglected to establish concrete that a motor vehicle was involved, neglected to mention license plate, colour and type of vehicle... basically skipped that whole section of his notes. The officer did focus very carefully on how his radar was tested and re-tested and the specifics of visually estimating the speed and verifying it with radar, etc. etc. Upon cross-exam, no questions were asked about the vehicle, disallowing the officer to correct his mistake. Instead cross-exam was focused on "how the radar works" and "when it was last calibrated". Motion made for non-suit based on fact that the crown failed to establish more than simply circumstantial evidence of a motor vehicle being involved, which is a key component in establishing guilt. Motion sustained. Charges withdrawn. Looks of utter surprise from the Crown, JP and Officer. In this example, the officer made a simple mistake, which all of us are prone to do at some point or other. There was no worthwhile deal offered, so the worst that could happen was that the defendant would end up with what they were ticketed for. Might as well go see what happens, and keep an eye on what's being said and what isn't being said on examination-in-chief. Sometimes you get lucky.
Flyview wrote:
^^ Thanks for the update!
Yes, this seems to be what happens on a regular basis...what I have yet to see is a recollection of a case that actually "went to trial" without a "deal" and was stayed/not guilty.
I'll give you one of those (not to hijack the thread).
Defendant was over and ticketed at 30-ish over. No reduction on the ticket. (this was about a year and 8 months ago probably).
Officer's notes were accurate and detailed, very standard. Went to trial, defendant was not offered a deal due to driving record. Upon trial, officer neglected to establish concrete that a motor vehicle was involved, neglected to mention license plate, colour and type of vehicle... basically skipped that whole section of his notes.
The officer did focus very carefully on how his radar was tested and re-tested and the specifics of visually estimating the speed and verifying it with radar, etc. etc.
Upon cross-exam, no questions were asked about the vehicle, disallowing the officer to correct his mistake. Instead cross-exam was focused on "how the radar works" and "when it was last calibrated".
Motion made for non-suit based on fact that the crown failed to establish more than simply circumstantial evidence of a motor vehicle being involved, which is a key component in establishing guilt.
Motion sustained. Charges withdrawn. Looks of utter surprise from the Crown, JP and Officer.
In this example, the officer made a simple mistake, which all of us are prone to do at some point or other. There was no worthwhile deal offered, so the worst that could happen was that the defendant would end up with what they were ticketed for. Might as well go see what happens, and keep an eye on what's being said and what isn't being said on examination-in-chief. Sometimes you get lucky.
SLYK
-------------
"Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny." - Edmund Burke"
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal" - MLK Jr.
I'll give you one of those (not to hijack the thread). Defendant was over and ticketed at 30-ish over. No reduction on the ticket. (this was about a year and 8 months ago probably). Officer's notes were accurate and detailed, very standard. Went to trial, defendant was not offered a deal due to driving record. Upon trial, officer neglected to establish concrete that a motor vehicle was involved, neglected to mention license plate, colour and type of vehicle... basically skipped that whole section of his notes. The officer did focus very carefully on how his radar was tested and re-tested and the specifics of visually estimating the speed and verifying it with radar, etc. etc. Upon cross-exam, no questions were asked about the vehicle, disallowing the officer to correct his mistake. Instead cross-exam was focused on "how the radar works" and "when it was last calibrated". Motion made for non-suit based on fact that the crown failed to establish more than simply circumstantial evidence of a motor vehicle being involved, which is a key component in establishing guilt. Motion sustained. Charges withdrawn. Looks of utter surprise from the Crown, JP and Officer. In this example, the officer made a simple mistake, which all of us are prone to do at some point or other. There was no worthwhile deal offered, so the worst that could happen was that the defendant would end up with what they were ticketed for. Might as well go see what happens, and keep an eye on what's being said and what isn't being said on examination-in-chief. Sometimes you get lucky. Cool, but why would the JP be surprised? Isn't the JP the one making that decision?
Slyk wrote:
Flyview wrote:
^^ Thanks for the update!
Yes, this seems to be what happens on a regular basis...what I have yet to see is a recollection of a case that actually "went to trial" without a "deal" and was stayed/not guilty.
I'll give you one of those (not to hijack the thread).
Defendant was over and ticketed at 30-ish over. No reduction on the ticket. (this was about a year and 8 months ago probably).
Officer's notes were accurate and detailed, very standard. Went to trial, defendant was not offered a deal due to driving record. Upon trial, officer neglected to establish concrete that a motor vehicle was involved, neglected to mention license plate, colour and type of vehicle... basically skipped that whole section of his notes.
The officer did focus very carefully on how his radar was tested and re-tested and the specifics of visually estimating the speed and verifying it with radar, etc. etc.
Upon cross-exam, no questions were asked about the vehicle, disallowing the officer to correct his mistake. Instead cross-exam was focused on "how the radar works" and "when it was last calibrated".
Motion made for non-suit based on fact that the crown failed to establish more than simply circumstantial evidence of a motor vehicle being involved, which is a key component in establishing guilt.
Motion sustained. Charges withdrawn. Looks of utter surprise from the Crown, JP and Officer.
In this example, the officer made a simple mistake, which all of us are prone to do at some point or other. There was no worthwhile deal offered, so the worst that could happen was that the defendant would end up with what they were ticketed for. Might as well go see what happens, and keep an eye on what's being said and what isn't being said on examination-in-chief. Sometimes you get lucky.
Cool, but why would the JP be surprised? Isn't the JP the one making that decision?
Sure, but they're not really used to seeing people successfully defending themselves... The same way the officer doesn't realize he's missed something, the JP and crown often don't realize it either until someone points it out. I'm pretty sure in this case the JP was ready to find against the accused, until he brought the court's attention to that issue.
Sure, but they're not really used to seeing people successfully defending themselves... The same way the officer doesn't realize he's missed something, the JP and crown often don't realize it either until someone points it out. I'm pretty sure in this case the JP was ready to find against the accused, until he brought the court's attention to that issue.
SLYK
-------------
"Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny." - Edmund Burke"
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal" - MLK Jr.
Speeding Ticket trials are won on the legal technicalities. Like the above post, the officer has to prove that the offense was committed with a "Motor Vehicle". If you don't know the legal technicalities then you miss many opportunities to win your case. Here are a few of the legal technicalities to win speeding tickets Has the case taken too long to come to court? - 11b Argument Is the ticket correct on its face? - Motion to Quash Was the radar "properly tested"? - There are rules that the officer has to follow Is the officer properly qualified? - Motion for non-suit Has the ticket been properly filed at the court? - Motion to Quash
Speeding Ticket trials are won on the legal technicalities.
Like the above post, the officer has to prove that the offense was committed with a "Motor Vehicle".
If you don't know the legal technicalities then you miss many opportunities to win your case.
Here are a few of the legal technicalities to win speeding tickets
Has the case taken too long to come to court? - 11b Argument
Is the ticket correct on its face? - Motion to Quash
Was the radar "properly tested"? - There are rules that the officer has to follow
Is the officer properly qualified? - Motion for non-suit
Has the ticket been properly filed at the court? - Motion to Quash
Chris Conway
Retired Toronto Traffic Officer, Hit & Run Squad Detective,
Breathalyzer Tech, Radar/Highway Patrol
Licenced Paralegal
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…
