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
Am really confused about this one, this morning i got a reduced speeding ticket (80km speed in 60 zone), and in the ticket the cop wrote 10km over the speeding limit.. and it has the 'R' code in it.. and the cop said i need to pay this and it doesn't have any points on it..
im fine with paying the ticket which is only 40 dollars but my biggest concern, will it show in my record ? or only tickets…
I got a ticket for driving with handheld device in Oct 2015 and I had requested for a trial. Yesterday I received the notice of trial (notice is dated 26-Jan-2017, court of trial is Newmarket, ON) and trial date is Mar 8, 2017. Today, I have sent in a registered request for disclosure (i.e on 29-Jan-2017).
Need some help here for the 1st time speeding ticket?
Sunday morning 12:10am when I was going home from work I was doing bit speeding on Gardiner. I was going with about 130km/h. I know its fast. I always take the same way and I know where the cops hide. They always hide entrance of the highways. If I will do speeding I always look my back and did look this time too. I took gardiner…
I just have a question in regards to the summons Under Part 1 I received for an rear end accident:
I was driving on the 2 lane road, and the car in front of me suddenly stopped, I had seen the car, and so I started to brake, however I heard noise from the back and looked int o the rear view mirror and saw a huge "truck" so I decided to go right, took the feet out of brakes but couldnt…
I have searched and I know the general rule is no, barring criminal charges or tresspassing. So let me use 2 specific issues I have.
1) I have some business in some area malls after hours. Once I have pulled into the mall lot on the way to the closest door I rarely stop at stop signs unless there is a car or person nearby. (i do not carelessly speed, i do show caution, just do not fully stop) Can…
In June at 401 London and Wellington I got hit twice, speeding which I didn't realize I was doing and cell phone. The Officer made me open my purse and show him my phone. I was going to meet a Rep of my Company in Kitchener, he called I answered. WRONG! The Officer wasn't even nice. My record was clean and he slapped me twice. I sat in the car and sobbed for 20 minutes as I was scared out of…
I wanted to "reply" elsewhere...but the more appropriate areas were "locked" to replies....so, here are a couple of questions...from a newbie to this site:
1. Who ARE you? (I'm a little edgy about conversing on a forum whose ownership is not stated anywhere on an "About" page") No offense intended whatsoever. Just like to know who I'm talking with/in front of.......your honor!
You are coming off of a highway exit and there are 3 lanes: right hand lane for right hand turn; middle lane for left AND right turn (but no straight thru since it is only a three-way intersection); and left lane for left hand turn. You are first in the middle lane, signalling to make a right.
CAN YOU make a right hand turn from the middle lane on a red if the traffic is clear?
Hey everyone first off I'd like to say great website, I have been reading and it is very useful
I'm posting today as I'd like to get some feedback on my situation and have a couple of questions. Please excuse the vagueness in some areas - I don't want my case to be identifiable given the small town.
So I was driving up north and was pulled over by an OPP SUV for doing 31 over. Cop drove past me,…
Hello! I'm under 16 currently and really want to drive. I know that section 37(1) says you have to be 16, but I've read that the HTA does not apply when you are in private property, so does that mean I can drive in a parking lot if I wanted to?
I was heading northbound on my bike downtown on friday. After the east/westbound lights went red and after a long pause I decided to get a head start and proceed before the light changed to green. About a block north of me an officer stepped out of an unmarked cruiser and pulled me over and gave me a $180 ticket. Now I see on this site that I should have been given points for it..but…
Got a ticket Saturday for insecure load. The officer was a real jerk and unfair. I had nothing hanging out the sides and the load wasn't that high. Just taking some junk to the dump. I was doing 40 on Ashley St in Foxboro, 4 ways on taking my time and nothing was going to fall out. I'm thinking about fighting it. Anyone experienced this before?
So I got convicted of a dui.. I have been riding my bike in the snow and taking the bus. I am a driving enthusiast and I will be going to the race track all summer but I NEED to drive something right now!
I have done lots of research and even an electric assisted bike that a 16 year old can drive legally on the road is not an option to someone with a dui suspension.
Hey this is my first ticket so as much information that people can provide will be appreciated. I was making the drive home going around 90kph(in a 80) behind what I knew was an undercover police car. The cop abruptly pulled to the side and pulled back in behind me to pull me over. Now I reduced my speed to below 80 when the cop pulled to the side but he claimed he had me clocked at 109kph and…
So I was heading home to today and I was in the left lane of the off ramp, some lady cut across her lane of traffic and across the off ramp median and hit the back side of my car! After a few meters of bumping (I was dazed and confused) I stopped the car.
I call 911 and was told to move the car to the shoulder.
Cop comes, interviews both of us, and lets the lady go! The cop proceeds to give…
An undercover cop, well not sure if he was even a cop to be honest, maybe a constable pulled me over after I passed him shortly after a construction zone. He asked me if I was in a rush and said that he was going 105 and I was going 120. It seems mostly from our conversation that he was pissed off that I passed him, because he never told me that I was speeding. None the less the ticket says…
I got this ticket last year in toronto and received court date recently.
Basically I parket on a street where there are marked spots for car parking but they were all faded with only the white edges showing. I assumed I was in the correct spot when I got out. I never noticed the fire hydrant in the bushes.
When I returned I saw the ticket and then noticed the fire hydrant and when I to the…
I would like to know if anybody could tell me what "V" stands for on the Code section of the Form 4. I think that it will be useful to understand what information is on this form in order to make a decision on what option we should chose.
I recently received a ticket for red light fail to stop under section 144 (18) of the Highway Traffic Act at the intersection of Dupont St. and Dufferin St. in Toronto with a set fine of $150 and total payable of $190. I think I entered the intersection on a yellow, however that is not the way the officer saw it. During the traffic stop the officer was polite bordering on friendly…
Got my first ticket last Thursday and I have a couple of questions. I was driving westbound on Moore St. (west of Bayview) and made a left onto a residential street at a 4-way stop sign. It was my first time driving through that area - was driving my girlfriend to a wisdom tooth surgery.
The police were set up to catch people, as that intersection had a no left turn sign from 7-9 am (buses…
