I'm a newbie so go easy on me. I found this forum and did some reading yesterday and found it pretty interesting. My question/query is this... I am old enough to remember when aircraft were used "back in the day" all the way along the 401 and they went away for many years until recently. I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN (although I can't site the case) that aircraft went away because the law was essentially struck down. This is because the judge ruled that... I'm going to paraphrase... that since the aircraft was timing a car between two fixed points, they could not pinpoint any exact speed at any given point in time. Further that the "average speed" was not sufficient to sustain the charge and therefore that "average speed" was essentially not viable. I.E. You could be going 140k in the first 200m and 90k for the next 300m (or whatever). I was shocked when McGuinty and his goat herders brought the law back... I was sure that it was struck down years ago. I AM CERTAIN it's out there!! Early 80's late 70's maybe. Anybody know the case law? Any place I can research it? Rico.
I'm a newbie so go easy on me. I found this forum and did some reading yesterday and found it pretty interesting.
My question/query is this... I am old enough to remember when aircraft were used "back in the day" all the way along the 401 and they went away for many years until recently. I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN (although I can't site the case) that aircraft went away because the law was essentially struck down.
This is because the judge ruled that... I'm going to paraphrase... that since the aircraft was timing a car between two fixed points, they could not pinpoint any exact speed at any given point in time. Further that the "average speed" was not sufficient to sustain the charge and therefore that "average speed" was essentially not viable.
I.E. You could be going 140k in the first 200m and 90k for the next 300m (or whatever).
I was shocked when McGuinty and his goat herders brought the law back... I was sure that it was struck down years ago. I AM CERTAIN it's out there!! Early 80's late 70's maybe.
I do not recall those days of aircraft, maybe it was based on fixed points such as bridges or something with inconsistent distances, where today the markings on the highway are pinpointed on the highway at exact spacing? CANLII is site for case law.
ricosuave wrote:
This is because the judge ruled that... I'm going to paraphrase... that since the aircraft was timing a car between two fixed points, they could not pinpoint any exact speed at any given point in time. Further that the "average speed" was not sufficient to sustain the charge and therefore that "average speed" was essentially not viable..
I do not recall those days of aircraft, maybe it was based on fixed points such as bridges or something with inconsistent distances, where today the markings on the highway are pinpointed on the highway at exact spacing?
CANLII is site for case law.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I don't really see a problem with that, because if your average speed was over the limit on a stretch as a whole, then it must have been over the speed limit at at least one point of time. Given that the stretch is 100 m, then at 120 km/h it will take you less than 3 seconds to traverse the 100 m stretch. In your own example, you would have been let off really easy, as the average speed would have been 106 km/hr, instead of 140 where you would face some serious fines. Wasn't enough to convict one of the OPP officers (Tapp? I can't remember) who allegedly did 180 the whole way from A to B though...
I don't really see a problem with that, because if your average speed was over the limit on a stretch as a whole, then it must have been over the speed limit at at least one point of time. Given that the stretch is 100 m, then at 120 km/h it will take you less than 3 seconds to traverse the 100 m stretch. In your own example, you would have been let off really easy, as the average speed would have been 106 km/hr, instead of 140 where you would face some serious fines.
Wasn't enough to convict one of the OPP officers (Tapp? I can't remember) who allegedly did 180 the whole way from A to B though...
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
I totally understand the logic of the average speed argument... I'm just saying that I'm absolutely sure it was struck down 20+ years ago becuase the judge decided that it was not sufficient to sustain the charge. That's when all the airplanes went away until recently. Do you guys know of a site I can do research at?
I totally understand the logic of the average speed argument... I'm just saying that I'm absolutely sure it was struck down 20+ years ago becuase the judge decided that it was not sufficient to sustain the charge.
That's when all the airplanes went away until recently.
I totally understand the logic of the average speed argument... I'm just saying that I'm absolutely sure it was struck down 20+ years ago becuase the judge decided that it was not sufficient to sustain the charge.
That's when all the airplanes went away until recently.
I remember the air surveillance but I thought it was the cost that did it in. The signs seemed to stay much longer than the program. You may wish to go to the library and look at microfiche of older newspapers (there's an index) to see when the program closing was announced. You could also try writing the news media under a "hey whatever happened to..." or the "question of the day". Finally, you can also try writing to the Attorney General with your question. I would avoid talking about the case law, they won't do legal research for you. Position it more like a general inquiry about a past program. That might get a response. Good luck and please tell us what you find out!
I remember the air surveillance but I thought it was the cost that did it in. The signs seemed to stay much longer than the program. You may wish to go to the library and look at microfiche of older newspapers (there's an index) to see when the program closing was announced.
You could also try writing the news media under a "hey whatever happened to..." or the "question of the day".
Finally, you can also try writing to the Attorney General with your question. I would avoid talking about the case law, they won't do legal research for you. Position it more like a general inquiry about a past program. That might get a response.
Ok... so I was having a cocktail yesterday and I remember that it was out of Ontario that the law got struck down... Quebec I think because they had aerial surveillance for years. Thats when Ontario took it out. I have been on CanLII but the Quebec ruling are obviously in French. I will get a girl I know in Montreal to check it out for me… I still need to go to the library and check it out there… Im sure its out there somewhere!! Ill keep you posted.
Ok... so I was having a cocktail yesterday and I remember that it was out of Ontario that the law got struck down... Quebec I think because they had aerial surveillance for years.
Thats when Ontario took it out. I have been on CanLII but the Quebec ruling are obviously in French. I will get a girl I know in Montreal to check it out for me… I still need to go to the library and check it out there… Im sure its out there somewhere!!
I was actually ticket last year for this very offense by an aircraft patrol. A couple things confused me about it one being that it was the 401 and I was keeping pace with the rest of the cars in my lane at approximately 120km/h. There were definetly guys to the left passing at higher speeds (I was in the middle lane). Why would they specifically go after someone in the middle lane traveling at traffic speed? The other problem that came to mind was that I have a very common car in a common colour, how can they possibly prove that it was my car and that I was the one driving? I guess I'm wondering what exactly the process is that the aircraft patrol uses to tag someone and signal their buddy on the ground to go pull him over, can anyone shed light on it?
I was actually ticket last year for this very offense by an aircraft patrol. A couple things confused me about it one being that it was the 401 and I was keeping pace with the rest of the cars in my lane at approximately 120km/h. There were definetly guys to the left passing at higher speeds (I was in the middle lane). Why would they specifically go after someone in the middle lane traveling at traffic speed?
The other problem that came to mind was that I have a very common car in a common colour, how can they possibly prove that it was my car and that I was the one driving?
I guess I'm wondering what exactly the process is that the aircraft patrol uses to tag someone and signal their buddy on the ground to go pull him over, can anyone shed light on it?
You won't find it, ricosuave: the aircraft technique wasn't struck down, but merely abandoned in Ontario because of the cost. That, and the fact that it doesn't work in bad weather or when the aircraft is u/s (can't generate revenue sitting in the hangar). I'm not even sure that the job can be done from an aircraft at night, either. Some details of how the air/ground process works are here: http://www.parrysound.com/press/1218640116/ And some background about the previous program (1965 to 1981) is here: http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/246448 Both sources explicitly link this initiative to 172.
ricosuave wrote:
I remember that it was out of Ontario that the law got struck down... I still need to go to the library and check it out there… Im sure its out there somewhere!!
You won't find it, ricosuave: the aircraft technique wasn't struck down, but merely abandoned in Ontario because of the cost. That, and the fact that it doesn't work in bad weather or when the aircraft is u/s (can't generate revenue sitting in the hangar). I'm not even sure that the job can be done from an aircraft at night, either.
Some details of how the air/ground process works are here:
Simply the aircraft obtains a speed on a target vehicle, relays information (speed, time, description) to a ground unit, maintains sight on target vehicle until ground unit confirms visual on same target, ground unit stops target and identifies the driver.
morpheus wrote:
I was actually ticket last year for this very offense by an aircraft patrol. A couple things confused me about it one being that it was the 401 and I was keeping pace with the rest of the cars in my lane at approximately 120km/h. There were definetly guys to the left passing at higher speeds (I was in the middle lane). Why would they specifically go after someone in the middle lane traveling at traffic speed?
The other problem that came to mind was that I have a very common car in a common colour, how can they possibly prove that it was my car and that I was the one driving?
I guess I'm wondering what exactly the process is that the aircraft patrol uses to tag someone and signal their buddy on the ground to go pull him over, can anyone shed light on it?
Simply the aircraft obtains a speed on a target vehicle, relays information (speed, time, description) to a ground unit, maintains sight on target vehicle until ground unit confirms visual on same target, ground unit stops target and identifies the driver.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
As long as the vehicle is in constant motion from time of pilot visual contact to point of ground traffic stop. What if the vehicle had stopped in between. Potential for change of driver?
hwybear wrote:
...ground unit stops target and identifies the driver.
As long as the vehicle is in constant motion from time of pilot visual contact to point of ground traffic stop. What if the vehicle had stopped in between. Potential for change of driver?
As long as the vehicle is in constant motion from time of pilot visual contact to point of ground traffic stop. What if the vehicle had stopped in between. Potential for change of driver? Yeah, and what IF they stopped under the overpass, just prior to the ground units sitting on the "get-on-ramp" then what? Or what if the vehicle was on "cruise control" and person was sitting in the back :shock: :shock: then what? :lol: :lol:
Bookm wrote:
hwybear wrote:
...ground unit stops target and identifies the driver.
As long as the vehicle is in constant motion from time of pilot visual contact to point of ground traffic stop. What if the vehicle had stopped in between. Potential for change of driver?
Yeah, and what IF they stopped under the overpass, just prior to the ground units sitting on the "get-on-ramp" then what?
Or what if the vehicle was on "cruise control" and person was sitting in the back then what?
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Might have forgot, driving a motor vehicle, while not in the drivers seat?? But the driver jumped out....now rolling on the pavement back there.....didn't want the speeding ticket from that dem dar arrowplane. :lol:
Squishy wrote:
Not according to the province.
Maybe if you set it on cruise then crawled into the trunk.
Might have forgot, driving a motor vehicle, while not in the drivers seat??
But the driver jumped out....now rolling on the pavement back there.....didn't want the speeding ticket from that dem dar arrowplane.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The legislature will debate on it until the end of parliamentary session, then on the next session they will decide that it is not safe enough (just like electric cars), despite data from elsewhere. Someone then will bring up the issue again, when Guvernment Motors will make that car, and the legality of such cars will be approved, along with a $5000 rebate.
FiReSTaRT wrote:
On that tangent, what will happen to the law when self-driven vehicles based on dGPS technology come out?
The legislature will debate on it until the end of parliamentary session, then on the next session they will decide that it is not safe enough (just like electric cars), despite data from elsewhere. Someone then will bring up the issue again, when Guvernment Motors will make that car, and the legality of such cars will be approved, along with a $5000 rebate.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Hi so I have a bizzare situation. Today I received a summons for "being the owner of a motor vehicle bearing Vehicle Identification Number ###, failed to submit the vehicle, equipment or drawn vehicle for inspection or tests as required by an officer" for a vehicle I previously owned. Apparently a violation of HTA 82(9).
The date of offense is June 15, the summons was issued on October 26th and I…
Hi, I need some help for the ticket of lmproper left turn.
When i drove my car from east to west, intending to make a left turn and stop in front of stop line. There was a car in front of me, which has turn on yellow light. The light was turning red and then I thought I cannot leave in the intersection and turned, an incoming car was runing the light and hit me. No one got hurt but both cars had…
Have a ticket in which the radar used was a Genesis VP Directional. I had downloaded the manual for a Genesis VP but I now realize that the unit is not the same so it is the wrong manual. My trial is very soon so I do not have time to ask for disclosure of the manual.
Does anyone have access to an electronic version of the manual for Genesis VP Directional?
I was pulled over today in the city of Oakville for going 75 in a 40 zone. However, I am 100 percent certain that I was going only 50 in the 40 zone. When I was pulled over, I was driving my Dad's car which I felt was the reason I was getting stopped since two teenagers driving a 2013 S Class. He asked does I know why I am being pulled over and I…
I really need help on fighting my 9 tickets i received from one police officer. Here is some background of what happened!
I was caught speeding 66km on a 40km (school zone) on January 29, 2010. I was driving my friend's car and turns out she didnt renew the validation on the vehicle and didnt leave the up to date insurance paper on the car.
Hey question that I think here's probably the best place to get the answer:
I was charged with a careless driving offence in oct, trail in early april, so as of right now my insurance record is 100% clean... except the officer did file an accident report at the scene where I was classified at fault due to it being PI (although very minor). The person I hit did not sue etc, so the insurance company…
Very much unintentionally passed a stopped bus, with sign and flashing lights. Didn't realize I had done it until I was at the end of the bus. I'll save you my sob story, but it was truly accidental. I'm generally very cautious and have a perfect driving record. Never been stopped.
While I realize if a cop had seen me that I would have gotten a ticket, there were none in sight. Though I may very…
I was recently pulled over for running a red and I wasnt able to find my wallet in the car at the time to hand over my license. I had a passport in the vehicle that he used. The wallet was in the vehicle, it just fell through the seats. (Tough to find a black leather wallet in a black/black leather truck at night).
The officer still wrote the tickets for both he signed the one ticket (failure to…
I was passing a vehicle that was going slow for me and there was an oncoming vehicle coming at me. I speed up to get around the person I was passing and the oncoming vehicle turns out to be a cop who turns around and tickets me for going 110km in a 80km zone. How does it work with passing a vehicle? Once I passed the vehicle I went back down to my original speed of just under 100. The officer…
I picked up a brand new (old stock) Fuzzbuster a while ago at auction (wopping $5!!) and I want to mount it on the dash of my old GTO as a cool accessory when I show it at car shows. But I'm not sure if it's legal or not.
Here's my thoughts:
- It is early 70's technology (x-band) so it won't detect modern police radar. That's assuming no police force uses the old x-band frequency.
Hi guys, I'm still a little in shock of getting my first traffic ticket...
On Monday afternoon, I was returning from Toronto to Ottawa on HW416, I was driving about 15 over 100 like always. Then a car came very close to me on the left lane and made me nervous, I speed up unintentionally to pass the car and change lane, but while doing that a police car pull out of the median. He was hiding in…
May i ask this question regarding transport trucks limited to 105 km/h. Moving road blocks or safety?
IMO it isnt speed that kills. I find transport trucks infact help keep the road going. With cars that choose to not move to the right and slow down the middle lane the trucks would try to pass in their passing lane therefore the slower traffic would move right.
Received a notice from the police that a motion is being put forward to adjourn upcoming trial date. Notice indicates that an officer has sworn an affidavit that the crucial witness cannot attend date trial is set for (we know there is a social engagement at 7:30 pm for the witness, trial time is 1:30 pm). This further delay is a big problem to my daughter's case. She is moving away to…
This is what happened. I was travelling west on a four lane city street that was very light with traffic. I was making a left hand turn into a wide driveway of a business. There was traffic lights about 100 yards past the driveway and were red for the east-west traffic. I was in the left lane with my signal on and there was no oncoming traffic due to the red light. I was slowed right down…
I was driving my families older car and got pulled over, and the police officer informed me my plate was dirty. He issued me a ticket of $110 for the 13(2) act and obstruct plate as the offense. He informed me that such a plate could be used to avoid red lights as well as 407 tolls, also that buying a new plate can help to lower the ticket if I fight the charge, and that he also took a picture…
I received a red light camera ticket. In the picture, you see an ambulance in front of me with flashing lights. I had moved to alleviate the traffic behind me for the emergency vehicles coming behind it.
Is this a possible defense, if so, does anyone know any good case law to justify this position?
what happens if they charge someone for driving at 151Km/hr in montreal and they put for trial, appear after some months and sadly lost the trial ?
In montreal its $300 fine and 5demerit points ...
I heard Ontario and Qubec share the information. So once the trial is over ( and when the file moved to ontario) will his car gets towed and licence get suspended for 7days (later to 30 days ) ? and he…
I got a notice in the mail that trial is set four weeks from today, so it's time to request disclosure. I have zero chance of getting an 11b since trial is less than two months after the offense date and the officer did not reduce the charge. I really want to try and create delays on the trial, to reduce the chance of the officer showing up on multiple occasions. Is there any known loop-holes…
This weekend my father was involved in an accident with a transit bus in Burlington, ON. After the police showed up he was charged with "Fail to obey stop sign" Sec. 136(1)(a). At this particular intersection there NO stop signs but there are traffic lights. There is construction going on there so one of the light posts is smaller.
Driving conditions were terribly wet and visibility was low.…
So my boyfriend and I recently started dating. I have a vehicle that was insured. Insurance cost too much and I found it was just as easy to walk to work due to how close it was. But I didn't want to get rid of my car just yet, plus I'm still making payments on it as well. When we moved into our appartment together, I had it towed to my parking spot out back.
I was making a left hand legal turn on a green light, a driver came through the lane I was supposed to be going into ran the red and hit me head on as I was turning into my lane. When the officer came he was telling me that I was racing and driving recklessly because apparently there was reports of street racing in the area. I was not charged on the scene for this but I'm scared i am going to be…
I got a ticket for failure to surrender insurance because I did not have my new insurance stubs with me, just a bunch of expired ones. My policy number has not changed, so I asked the officer to just run the policy number so I could prove that I was in fact insured. He said they don't have that ability, handed me the ticket and reminded me that my car could have been impounded.
So I'm in a bit of a pickle and would appreciate if someone could clarify something for me.
I'm less than a month away (test on April 6th) from getting my full G license, and got a speeding ticket recently. The ticket was for 49km/h over the posted limit of 100km/h on the 403 in Oakville/Halton region, but was reduced from the initial ~60km/h over.
