Hi all I am new to this forum, and have a couple of questions. I have noticed in speeding trials that police officers always testify that they visually observed the vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed (sometimes they state what their estimate was) and then they turned on the radar and confirmed this high rate of speed...(funny, its almost always the same as the radar speed - but I digresss) So my first question is: Why do they have to testify that they "observed" the vehicle first....before they activated the radar. Can't they have the radar on all the time? Or is this tantamount to an illegal search by operating it all the time without reasonable or probable grounds??? My second question is: Can an officer really testify that while driving in the opposite direction of a vehicle with closing speeds of equal to or greater than 160km/h that they can visually pick out a "speeding" vehicle? Thanks for your thoughts. Paul
Hi all
I am new to this forum, and have a couple of questions.
I have noticed in speeding trials that police officers always testify that they visually observed the vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed (sometimes they state what their estimate was) and then they turned on the radar and confirmed this high rate of speed...(funny, its almost always the same as the radar speed - but I digresss)
So my first question is: Why do they have to testify that they "observed" the vehicle first....before they activated the radar. Can't they have the radar on all the time? Or is this tantamount to an illegal search by operating it all the time without reasonable or probable grounds???
My second question is: Can an officer really testify that while driving in the opposite direction of a vehicle with closing speeds of equal to or greater than 160km/h that they can visually pick out a "speeding" vehicle?
Nothing magical there PaulinCanada. Courts have recognized that when you do this daily over the course of years you get good at estimating and really anybody can develop the skill... After 2-3 months on the job I was almost always bang on...I'd estimate 100 km/h and activate the radar 103km/h. The reason courts prefer officers make their observations before activating the radar is so that the observation is considered independent, the radar merely confirms the speeding and gives the accurate reading. The observation you've made re: How can they do this with car speeds differentials being 160km/h...simply put, they do it 100 times a day, it's a skill you could develop if you had a radar to confirm your estimates, eventually you'd get better at it...in fact after 22 years I am usually on with 1 or 2 kilometres...
Nothing magical there PaulinCanada.
Courts have recognized that when you do this daily over the course of years you get good at estimating and really anybody can develop the skill...
After 2-3 months on the job I was almost always bang on...I'd estimate 100 km/h and activate the radar 103km/h.
The reason courts prefer officers make their observations before activating the radar is so that the observation is considered independent, the radar merely confirms the speeding and gives the accurate reading.
The observation you've made re: How can they do this with car speeds differentials being 160km/h...simply put, they do it 100 times a day, it's a skill you could develop if you had a radar to confirm your estimates, eventually you'd get better at it...in fact after 22 years I am usually on with 1 or 2 kilometres...
Actually if they were to solely rely on the radar it would not carry much weight. Simply because a machine can be WRONG. They have the officer state that he 'believed' that the vehicle was going at a high speed to have an actual witness to the alleged 'crime'. Only a man or woman can bring a complaint into court, A piece of radar equipment is unable to speak or calculate and can only relay as much as it is programmed to relay. Therefore it is not without premeditated thought that they approached the alleged 'crime' of speeding this way.
Actually if they were to solely rely on the radar it would not carry much weight. Simply because a machine can be WRONG. They have the officer state that he 'believed' that the vehicle was going at a high speed to have an actual witness to the alleged 'crime'. Only a man or woman can bring a complaint into court, A piece of radar equipment is unable to speak or calculate and can only relay as much as it is programmed to relay.
Therefore it is not without premeditated thought that they approached the alleged 'crime' of speeding this way.
- the "machine" you speak of is not wrong - speeding is NOT part of the Criminal Code - radar does make calculations
siriusone wrote:
Actually if they were to solely rely on the radar it would not carry much weight. Simply because a machine can be WRONG. They have the officer state that he 'believed' that the vehicle was going at a high speed to have an actual witness to the alleged 'crime'. Only a man or woman can bring a complaint into court, A piece of radar equipment is unable to speak or calculate and can only relay as much as it is programmed to relay. .
- the "machine" you speak of is not wrong
- speeding is NOT part of the Criminal Code
- radar does make calculations
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
- the "machine" you speak of is not wrong - speeding is NOT part of the Criminal Code - radar does make calculations You cannot guarantee that radar is infallible ! Commercial courts ie traffic courts are quasi courts apparently. This would mean that they are either quasi civil or quasi criminal as there are no other types of case. Civil courts are based on contracts and Criminal courts are based on harm loss injury. Therefore which quasi court do you think speeding falls into? FYI Quasi means 'almost' Radar may show its readings of speed but courts are there for people not radar machines, as I said earlier a radar machine cannot bring a claim to court it is an inanimate object.
hwybear wrote:
siriusone wrote:
Actually if they were to solely rely on the radar it would not carry much weight. Simply because a machine can be WRONG. They have the officer state that he 'believed' that the vehicle was going at a high speed to have an actual witness to the alleged 'crime'. Only a man or woman can bring a complaint into court, A piece of radar equipment is unable to speak or calculate and can only relay as much as it is programmed to relay. .
- the "machine" you speak of is not wrong
- speeding is NOT part of the Criminal Code
- radar does make calculations
You cannot guarantee that radar is infallible !
Commercial courts ie traffic courts are quasi courts apparently. This would mean that they are either quasi civil or quasi criminal as there are no other types of case. Civil courts are based on contracts and Criminal courts are based on harm loss injury. Therefore which quasi court do you think speeding falls into?
FYI Quasi means 'almost'
Radar may show its readings of speed but courts are there for people not radar machines, as I said earlier a radar machine cannot bring a claim to court it is an inanimate object.
Of the readings I've had on the radar unit 200 a day, 200 shifts a year, 22 years on the road...I've never once had a single reading that didn't match my observations. If a radar fails, it doesn't operate, it doesn't register a reading or shows error. It's like if your hearing starts to fails, you don't start hearing in another language, you just stop hearing...read up on the theory of the radar, it's very educational.
Of the readings I've had on the radar unit 200 a day, 200 shifts a year, 22 years on the road...I've never once had a single reading that didn't match my observations.
If a radar fails, it doesn't operate, it doesn't register a reading or shows error.
It's like if your hearing starts to fails, you don't start hearing in another language, you just stop hearing...read up on the theory of the radar, it's very educational.
There are cases where stationary objects, bridges come to mind, that will register a speed on radar equipment. I'll see if I can dig that up.... I think what the OP is suggesting is that radar theory is sound but the situation may fool the officer. I.E. multiple vehicles, multiple readings....etc.
There are cases where stationary objects, bridges come to mind, that will register a speed on radar equipment. I'll see if I can dig that up....
I think what the OP is suggesting is that radar theory is sound but the situation may fool the officer. I.E. multiple vehicles, multiple readings....etc.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
No need to dig anything up Reflections, you obviously know the difference. Those that want to question, should learn what they are talking about, prior to grasping at straws.
No need to dig anything up Reflections, you obviously know the difference. Those that want to question, should learn what they are talking about, prior to grasping at straws.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Maybe a swinging bridge over a canal, with the wind causing too much wake on the water? Now would we catch that one with a vessel or cruiser...hmmm :lol:
FyreStorm wrote:
I've never seen a speeding bridge, but if I do, it's getting a ticket!
Maybe a swinging bridge over a canal, with the wind causing too much wake on the water? Now would we catch that one with a vessel or cruiser...hmmm
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I use some fairly sophisticated radar equipment and I've never seen it fail or produce erroneous readings. I've seen plenty of people misread it or not use the controls properly, but the radar doesn't lie. This business of traffic courts and traffic being "commerce" and "contracts" is completely fictitious and it does not apply in real life. I've seen people try these sorts of stunts in court (or even trying to "ignore" the court), just like FyreStorm has seen, and they lose every time. Many of them are currently in jail, because they lost, then got their licence suspended, then got caught driving with a suspended licence, etc., and insisted the courts don't have jurisdiction or that they didn't have to get a licence because of some legal argument they made up... then they found out the hard way that the world doesn't work the way they'd believed it did.
I use some fairly sophisticated radar equipment and I've never seen it fail or produce erroneous readings. I've seen plenty of people misread it or not use the controls properly, but the radar doesn't lie.
siriusone wrote:
Commercial courts ie traffic courts are quasi courts apparently. This would mean that they are either quasi civil or quasi criminal as there are no other types of case. Civil courts are based on contracts and Criminal courts are based on harm loss injury. Therefore which quasi court do you think speeding falls into?
This business of traffic courts and traffic being "commerce" and "contracts" is completely fictitious and it does not apply in real life. I've seen people try these sorts of stunts in court (or even trying to "ignore" the court), just like FyreStorm has seen, and they lose every time. Many of them are currently in jail, because they lost, then got their licence suspended, then got caught driving with a suspended licence, etc., and insisted the courts don't have jurisdiction or that they didn't have to get a licence because of some legal argument they made up... then they found out the hard way that the world doesn't work the way they'd believed it did.
* 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
I have a problem and not sure what the hell to do about it. Few days ago I was stopped on a street going westbound against blinding afternoon sun following the flow of traffic. I drive a taxi for living in Toronto and have ACZ driver's license. I have a perfect record both for professional as well regular demerit points. I haven't been pulled over as a matter of fact in some 15 years for…
I have recently gone to court for a speeding ticket issued by an OPP officer. As it stood, the officer forgot to sign the ticket. So at my trial, before I made a plea, I pointed this out to the justice of the peace and asked that the ticket be quashed. I was asked to produce my copy of the ticket, which I gave and the JOP then agreed with me and dismissed the case. Before he did so, the…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
So here's my situation, any advice would be appreciated.
On June 26, 2013 I received a ticket for 25 over in a 60 zone
In early October I received my notice of trial (Feb 25, 2014)
In early January I sent in my request for disclosure
In late January I received a letter to pick up my disclosure, however when I picked up my disclosure it wasn't typed (I had requested it to be) and I needed…
Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?
Scenario
- 2 vehicle accident
- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage
- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible
- a police Accident Report was completed
In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of…
I will be representing my wife at her speeding trial next week. Mostly everything is pretty much run of the mill but since she wasn't speeding we will be having her take the stand. Since this opens up the opportunity for the prosecutor to cross examine, I am just wondering if anyone here knows what kind of questions we should expect from the prosecutor in order to best prepare.
i got pulled over by a cop this morning in my kids's school zone for failure to stop at a stop sign. i am thinking of fighting this ticket, but i noticed that on the ticket itself it only says "disobey stop sign - fail to stop" and there is no mention of the demerit points. a co-worker mentioned to me that a ticket should state how many demerit points i am being docked. i know the Highway Traffic…
Alright, so this happened back awhile ago on June and I haven't appeared in Court. However, I would like some inputs and advice before I get into this battle.
Back in June I got a Speeding Ticket claiming I was going 100km/h on Blackcreek going south towards Lawrence. The Speed Limit there is 70km/h.
At this point of time, it was roughly traffic hour around 4-5PM. Coming off of the Highway, and…
Ive already done searches, read the act as best i can but still haven't read a complete answer. Where in the HTA does it state that the front license plate must be attached to the front bumper? I have it on the passenger sun visor (if ppl remember the old temp permits that taped to the pass side of windshield) i figured that this spot would be the same. However now they have got rid of…
My son was returning from school and was just entering the driveway when another vehicle hit the rear end. Police writes a ticket "fail to yield from private drive" 139(i). He is going to fight this ticket and made an application for disclosure. The trial is next week and he still hasn't received the disclosure.
He checked with the court last month and they said that they will call when disclosure…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i moved into the middle lane ahead of him to pass the slower moving car. When I accelerated, i…
So I was returning from my honeymoon in Montreal, and was cruising down the 401 just inside the Ontario/Quebec border. I was passing one of the Onroute stations and saw an OPP cruiser. I checked my speed and I was doing 120. A few kilometers up the road the cruiser pulled me over and told me I was clocked doing 132 by the aircraft. I was a little surprised to see the ticket was for the full…
I made a right turn during prohibited hours (7am-6pm) in Toronto. I was ticketed by a COP who was specially watching for that trap.
After I've received the ticket HTA144(9), I discovered one of the seven digits of my license plate was incorrectly written on my ticket. I was thinking about to make a First Attendance at the court office to see the prosecutor for a reduced charge...any advice or…
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
I am not sure if my case is really a case of " mis-use parking permit" and need some advises on whether i should fight the ticket. Here is what happened:
During the labor day long weekend, I took my parents to diner at a local shopping mall. (my father's hip was broken in 2016 and he's been on wheelchair since, the permit is in his name and I been using the permit to help him for doctor's…
I have a court date coming up where I need to subpoena one of the officers that was present when I got my ticket. The issuing officer didn't include the fact that the second one was present at the time in his report (disclosure) but did give me the second officers name and badge number after the judge told him to do it.
What I'm looking for help with is the process of me getting to…
I got pulled over on a 4 lane section fo Highway 7... Thank god I didn't get a stay at home ticket as well or my car impounded.
Officer clocked me at 156 km/h he decided not to impound my car and give me a 149 km/h since it was my first offence and he said I was polite and respectful. I would give this officer a 5/5 review if I could, very polite and respectful.
Long story short, I was driving from Toronto to Ottawa and around Napanee with my friend in two separated cars, the officer was parked on uturn. He followed us turn his light on and got between us and pulled us over, he told me that i was running at 152 km/h without showing me his LISAR. they suspended my and my friends license and impounded the two cars for 7 days. This was a Friday in January…
I'm unsure on what to do here. I was under the impression that I could request a stay on the day of trial because disclosure was not given to me in an adequate time. I requested disclosure 2x by fax, 5 months ago.
I read on ticketcombat that I had to file a motion 15 days prior to the trial to request a stay of proceedings.
Does anyone else get blinded by fog lights on rural roads? I don't seem to have a problem with them on lighted streets, but the badly aimed fog lights or ones with a poor cutoff really get to me when driving the Escort. I just came back from a 20-minute drive, and every single pickup truck had fog lights on, and forced me to focus on the bottom right of the road. My windshield is clean and…
