I had my court case with the JP in Guelph and she ignored my testimony of what tests have to be performed on a Ultralyte LR100 LT1 20-20. I showed a court case and it proved that the zero velocity fixed distance test is required by the operator before it's use. I did not have the manual because the prosecutor stated in a letter to me they are under no obligation to provide it. The officer testified she did not take a velocity reading she only took the distance reading. I have since found the British version of the manual online but I need the copy from the prosecutor before my appeal. How do you sujest I get a copy from them.
I had my court case with the JP in Guelph and she ignored my testimony of what tests have to be performed on a Ultralyte LR100 LT1 20-20.
I showed a court case and it proved that the zero velocity fixed distance test is required by the operator before it's use.
I did not have the manual because the prosecutor stated in a letter to me they are under no obligation to provide it.
The officer testified she did not take a velocity reading she only took the distance reading.
I have since found the British version of the manual online but I need the copy from the prosecutor before my appeal.
Crown Prosecutors often say "we don't have to provide the manual." Nothing could be further from the truth. They DO need to provide it, if not, it's improper disclosure. Here's some case law. Thunder Bay v. Millar et al That particular case also quashed the oft-cited "it's copyright material" excuse that's used. R. v. Vanier R. v. Bourget And so on. If the device was to be used testimonially, then the manual needed to be disclosed to you. The best way of going about it is if you don't get the manual prior to your first trial, file to get the charge stayed based on improper disclosure... but the opportunity for that has gone by. For your appeal, file another disclosure request, indicating that the courts have ruled that the manual is required, particularly since the device was used testimonially. If they again fail to provide it, you can ask the Justice to order them to release the manual to you, or stay the charge, but you'll need to have an argument as to why you need specific parts of the manual. Keep pressuring them.
Crown Prosecutors often say "we don't have to provide the manual." Nothing could be further from the truth. They DO need to provide it, if not, it's improper disclosure. Here's some case law.
And so on. If the device was to be used testimonially, then the manual needed to be disclosed to you. The best way of going about it is if you don't get the manual prior to your first trial, file to get the charge stayed based on improper disclosure... but the opportunity for that has gone by. For your appeal, file another disclosure request, indicating that the courts have ruled that the manual is required, particularly since the device was used testimonially. If they again fail to provide it, you can ask the Justice to order them to release the manual to you, or stay the charge, but you'll need to have an argument as to why you need specific parts of the manual. Keep pressuring them.
* 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
Thank you for the information. So do I just send a registered letter to the prosecutor then or is there court forms. Also as you know the testing is required in order for the laser to standup in court as accurate. Also I am asking for all the citations this officer has written using this type of instrument because she testified this is her usual practice. The testing she completed does not comply with the user manual. Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun. What are you thoughts on this defence as well.
Radar Identified wrote:
Crown Prosecutors often say "we don't have to provide the manual." Nothing could be further from the truth. They DO need to provide it, if not, it's improper disclosure. Here's some case law.
And so on. If the device was to be used testimonially, then the manual needed to be disclosed to you. The best way of going about it is if you don't get the manual prior to your first trial, file to get the charge stayed based on improper disclosure... but the opportunity for that has gone by. For your appeal, file another disclosure request, indicating that the courts have ruled that the manual is required, particularly since the device was used testimonially. If they again fail to provide it, you can ask the Justice to order them to release the manual to you, or stay the charge, but you'll need to have an argument as to why you need specific parts of the manual. Keep pressuring them.
Thank you for the information. So do I just send a registered letter to the prosecutor then or is there court forms. Also as you know the testing is required in order for the laser to standup in court as accurate.
Also I am asking for all the citations this officer has written using this type of instrument because she testified this is her usual practice. The testing she completed does not comply with the user manual.
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun.
I'd send the registered mail. If the Prosecutor still doesn't budge, then there's the court forms (violating your rights under the Charter)... Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure. Unfortunately, that will go nowhere. That argument may work, but I wouldn't call it bulletproof. Most LIDAR devices have enough of a tolerance built into them that unless the car was coming down an absolutely ridiculous incline or the angle was WAY above the roadway, the reading will stand up as valid. Cosine angle works in favour of the defendant. Usually with court cases, the manual has to specifically say "it MUST be done this way" or "do NOT do this" for the usage to be considered improper enough that its evidence will be discounted. Extrapolating beyond what is specifically written in the manual is an uphill battle. That said... you might be interested in this case (some similarities to the angle argument)... R. v. Laarakker, 2008 Just to clarify, is this an appeal that you've filed, or is it a re-opening?
robmcla wrote:
So do I just send a registered letter to the prosecutor then or is there court forms.
I'd send the registered mail. If the Prosecutor still doesn't budge, then there's the court forms (violating your rights under the Charter)...
robmcla wrote:
Also as you know the testing is required in order for the laser to standup in court as accurate.
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure.
robmcla wrote:
Also I am asking for all the citations this officer has written using this type of instrument because she testified this is her usual practice.
Unfortunately, that will go nowhere.
robmcla wrote:
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used.
That argument may work, but I wouldn't call it bulletproof. Most LIDAR devices have enough of a tolerance built into them that unless the car was coming down an absolutely ridiculous incline or the angle was WAY above the roadway, the reading will stand up as valid. Cosine angle works in favour of the defendant. Usually with court cases, the manual has to specifically say "it MUST be done this way" or "do NOT do this" for the usage to be considered improper enough that its evidence will be discounted. Extrapolating beyond what is specifically written in the manual is an uphill battle. That said... you might be interested in this case (some similarities to the angle argument)...
Just to clarify, is this an appeal that you've filed, or is it a re-opening?
* 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
What manual are you reading? Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet. I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads... "A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour." The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles.... at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000 at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999 at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997 so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate) ....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at: 300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr 600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr. The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down.
robmcla wrote:
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun.
What are you thoughts on this defence as well.
What manual are you reading?
Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet.
I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads...
"A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour."
The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles....
at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000
at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999
at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997
so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate)
....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at:
300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr
600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr.
The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
What manual are you reading? Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet. I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads... "A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour." The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles.... at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000 at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999 at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997 so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate) ....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at: 300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr 600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr. The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down. I am trying to get the manual from the prosecutor as I am allowed to do by the cahrter. R. v. Laarakker, 2008 BCPC 146 is the case I am using for the angle. The problem an officer has with this is the cosine is not talked about in the verticle as being tested by the manufacturer. I am only including this as a secondary arguement. This is an appeal of the testimony of an officer doing testing that does not comply with the manufacturer test as laid out and excepted by the courts. I found the British version also and the test as I stipulated it was correct not the officer. I am only mentioning the verticle hill argue ment as well because I mentioned it in my case at the JP trial. Thank you for the information and I hope this case helps others in the future. I am trying to get all tickets the officer using this instrument just to set presidence. Yes I like to raise the bar when I have a point. LOL
hwybear wrote:
robmcla wrote:
Also the use is also not correct because she used it from a flat surface catching cars moving down the hill not directly towards the gun as it is meant to be used. This violates the manual as stating the cosine angle should never be more than 15 feet from the road edge. My arguement is that a vehicle more the 15 feet above the instrument is the same. Also when shooting in this method the cosine angle has never been tested by the manufacturer. This is just more information for site users to think about when they get nabbed using a laser gun.
What are you thoughts on this defence as well.
What manual are you reading?
Canada has not used imperial for speed since 1977. The manuals we have are not in MPH or even feet.
I also found a British/UK version of the manual for the mentioned unit.....and it reads...
"A good rule of thumb is not to exceed 1 metre off the road for every 10 metres shooting down range to the targets. If you want to target vehicles 150 metres down the road, for example, setup no more than 15 metres off the road. Remember that the cosine effect is always in the drivers favour."
The manual does have the cosine testing in it, with the actual affects on speeds at various angles....
at 3 metres away from road, 300m is .9999, 600m is 1.000
at 10metres away from road, 300m is .9997, 600m is .9999
at 15metres away from road, 300m is .9987, 600m is .9997
so how does this affect things....a vehicle travelling 80km/hr (if one could stand directly in front of car, and ensure lidar is level with licence plate)
....even if the lidar operator is 15m (49.21ft) away from road the speed at:
300m would be 79.896km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr
600m would be 79.976km/hr and shown on lidar at 79km/hr.
The driver therefore gets 2 reductions in speed, one by the cosine itself and the second in the unit rounding down.
I am trying to get the manual from the prosecutor as I am allowed to do by the cahrter. R. v. Laarakker, 2008 BCPC 146 is the case I am using for the angle. The problem an officer has with this is the cosine is not talked about in the verticle as being tested by the manufacturer. I am only including this as a secondary arguement. This is an appeal of the testimony of an officer doing testing that does not comply with the manufacturer test as laid out and excepted by the courts. I found the British version also and the test as I stipulated it was correct not the officer. I am only mentioning the verticle hill argue ment as well because I mentioned it in my case at the JP trial. Thank you for the information and I hope this case helps others in the future. I am trying to get all tickets the officer using this instrument just to set presidence. Yes I like to raise the bar when I have a point. LOL
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure. No the officer testified she did only the fixed distance test. I asked her several times what the velocity reading was on the fixed didtance test. She stated she only read the distance. I asked her several time to the point the JP was getting mad at me. But I knew I needed this part to nail her in appeal. The transcript even shows this testimony.
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure.
No the officer testified she did only the fixed distance test. I asked her several times what the velocity reading was on the fixed didtance test. She stated she only read the distance. I asked her several time to the point the JP was getting mad at me. But I knew I needed this part to nail her in appeal. The transcript even shows this testimony.
Yep. I don't claim to know anything about the device or the manual, so if the procedure she used is different, the evidence from the device should be excluded. However... if I were to take a guess... a zero-velocity fixed distance test seems to be what the officer did do... but I don't know for sure.
No the officer testified she did only the fixed distance test. I asked her several times what the velocity reading was on the fixed didtance test. She stated she only read the distance. I asked her several time to the point the JP was getting mad at me. But I knew I needed this part to nail her in appeal. The transcript even shows this testimony.
2 words: Alignment Check.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
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…
