I had my first trial yesterday at Toronto 1530 Markham Rd. courthouse, had pre-filed a stay motion form 4F to stay proceedings based on Section 7 of the charter - incomplete disclosure (no typed notes, no testing procedures details, no manual etc), cop was present, stay motion was remedied by an adjournment to Nov. 15th, I had it noted to the JP that delay was caused by prosecutor not providing the complete disclosure in time to prepare my defense.
The prosecutor provided me the testing procedure pages from the radar manual, cop went over his notes in the prosecutors presence, confirmed that the lidar unit was tested before and after, and that they don't and won't provide typed notes etc.
Questions for the second trial date:
1. Before the JP arrives, most probably the prosecutor will offer to lower the fine with no demerits if I plead guilty (probably 15km/h over limit). Is it a good move to ask him/her to drop the "community safety zone" part of the ticket, i.e. halve my fine? If they refuse to do that, then see question 2.
2. With the JP present, can I argue that the prosecutor still has a legal obligation to provide to the court, a certified copy from the City of Toronto that the "community safety zone" by-law was in effect? If yes, can someone please tell me under which case law/section etc. does it fall under, just in case the prosecutor tells me that they don't have to prove it in the court?
3. If the prosecutor does not show that evidence (which they most probably don't have ready), can I motion to the JP to drop the "community safety zone" part of the ticket, i.e. halve my fine with what is already agreed with the prosecutor, lower fine with no demerits?
Having read through ticketcombat.com, the section 7 and 11b of the charter are not applicable in my case. The disclosure notes are complete and will be enough to complete the charge, so I am working towards options with the lowest cost hit to me.
Can someone please review/respond to my questions, and if I still have a chance to get the charges stayed/dropped completely other than paying $600-$1000 to a paralegal with a no charge drop no fee guarantee?
Thanks in advance.
My strategy on the CSZ part is as follows based on research:
1. The by-law that establishes the CSZ was not included in my disclosure.
2. If the crown seeks to enter the CSZ bylaw into evidence I will object since it was not included in the disclosure. Not sure if he JP will disallow the evidence or have an adjournment to allow the crown to disclose it and me to prepare to defend against it.
3. If the crown does not enter the CSZ bylaw into evidence then at the end of the crown's case I will move that the crown has not proved its case (the CSZ part anyway) since the bylaw has to be part of the evidence. If you look in the HTA you will see that a CSZ must have a bylaw and the bylaw must state what hours the CSZ is effective. The signs do not say the hours so the only way to prove that a CSZ is in effect is to show the bylaw. This is different than the 40 km/h speed limit which also requires a bylaw but they can assume there is a bylaw if there are signs.
4. If for some reason I get an adjournment and they disclose the bylaw then I will then show that the signs were too far apart based on the regulations. This is not easy to do because I have to take a lot of pictures and have the police officer walk through them and use Google Maps.
Hope this helps! Good luck.
I went to trial on Nov-15. I discussed the CSZ and HTA section 214.1 with the prosecutor during pre-trial. The prosecutor told me that if there are no signs for the hours, then it means that the CSZ is in effect 7/24/365. I kind of agreed with it as I have never seen the hours/days etc posted anywhere I have seen the CSZ signs, even near my work place in Richmond Hill where there are CSZ zones. The prosecutor had offered the speeding charge to be dropped by half, i.e. 10km/h over and no de-merits which was $60 fine (instead of $30 if CSZ was dropped) + $20 for victim surcharge. I thought it over with a cool mind. For an additional $30, I did not think it was worth the aggravation of going through an argument with the prosecutor/cop, as that could've opened the door to her charging me for the full fine amount and demerits. So I agreed to the $60 fine.
In the end, I feel satisfied that I walked out of a $190 fine with 3-demerits by bargaining it down to $80 with no demerits. Best of all I did it all myself with no paralegal who would've charged me at least $250. You should see those guys from OTT Legal across the street who come in for 30-45 seconds, have already got a pre-trial deal with the prosecutor for a lesser charge, plead guilty and walk out, and bill their clients $250-300 . I feel so sorry for those people who hired them for doing this!
Good Luck to you as well for your trial.
For the CSZ, I do not buy what the prosecutor says. Regulation 615 of the HTA specify what the signs must looks like and can be found at:
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/e ... 0615_e.htm
The CSZ signs in 5.2 have no allowance for any time of day indicators as part of the sign. So no CSZ signs will have them anywhere (which is why you have not seen them.) However, the HTA section 241.1(3) states that the bylaw must specify the times that the zone is in effect.
Since the signs cannot indicate when the zone is in effect and the bylaw must, the only way for the prosecution to prove that the zone was in effect is to produce the by-law. (This is different from say a 40 km/h zone since the bylaw that establishes those zones does not have to specify the times as the default is 24x7x365.)
- Similar Topics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests