Scenario regarding speeding charge - if a charge is not reduced at all at roadside, i.e. the charge, for example is "speeding 75 km/h in a 60 km/h zone contrary to s. 128," should that not mean the prosecution needs to prove that you are guilty of what you are being charged with, and not, simply, of speeding generally? I understand that if they prove a charge of even 61 km/h in a 60 km/h, they can obtain a conviction, however, if the charge itself in this case is 75 km/h in a 60 km/h - do they not have to prove you guilty of that offence in order to obtain a conviction? Where I'm going with this is that even if the prosecution can prove an officer is properly trained and perfectly operates and the unit, conditions are optimal, and the device is properly tested and calibrated, there is still a margin of error of up to 2 km/h for any speed mesuring device, easily proved with the radar manual. So with that in hand, is it not impossible to prove the defendant guilty as charged, if the speed is not reduced by at least that amount? Has anyone heard of this defence being tried? And certainly, if the prosecutor attempted to amend the charge in the middle of trial (by dropping the speed by 2km/h, for e.g.) there is case law to support this being prejudicial. Thoughts?
Scenario regarding speeding charge - if a charge is not reduced at all at roadside, i.e. the charge, for example is "speeding 75 km/h in a 60 km/h zone contrary to s. 128," should that not mean the prosecution needs to prove that you are guilty of what you are being charged with, and not, simply, of speeding generally? I understand that if they prove a charge of even 61 km/h in a 60 km/h, they can obtain a conviction, however, if the charge itself in this case is 75 km/h in a 60 km/h - do they not have to prove you guilty of that offence in order to obtain a conviction?
Where I'm going with this is that even if the prosecution can prove an officer is properly trained and perfectly operates and the unit, conditions are optimal, and the device is properly tested and calibrated, there is still a margin of error of up to 2 km/h for any speed mesuring device, easily proved with the radar manual. So with that in hand, is it not impossible to prove the defendant guilty as charged, if the speed is not reduced by at least that amount?
Has anyone heard of this defence being tried? And certainly, if the prosecutor attempted to amend the charge in the middle of trial (by dropping the speed by 2km/h, for e.g.) there is case law to support this being prejudicial.
fyi, that is not accurate information ^^ depends on the speed measuring equipment being used^^ You can get your info on the margin of error after disclosure
hwybear wrote:
mathers wrote:
there is still a margin of error of up to 2 km/h for any speed mesuring device
fyi, that is not accurate information
^^ depends on the speed measuring equipment being used^^
You can get your info on the margin of error after disclosure
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Please enlighten on equipment in current use that advertises a degree of accuracy of greater than +/- 1 mph (1.6 km/h). thx. If such does exist, the question remains open for all other equipment with accuracy of only +/- 1 mph (1.6 km/h) or worse. Defence ever attempted?
fyi, that is not accurate information
Please enlighten on equipment in current use that advertises a degree of accuracy of greater than +/- 1 mph (1.6 km/h). thx.
If such does exist, the question remains open for all other equipment with accuracy of only +/- 1 mph (1.6 km/h) or worse. Defence ever attempted?
you are reading a USA manual if you see MPH and is not applicable to canada it is in fact one unit of measure, whether it be km or mph +/- 1 is that the unit can almost always will never obtain a reading of say 100.000000 etc km/hr but the reading could be 100.9999999 etc (which is up to the +1) however the unit always will round down to the nearest whole number being "100", (which is the minus 1), thus the rounding down on every reading is a benefit to the driver
you are reading a USA manual if you see MPH and is not applicable to canada
it is in fact one unit of measure, whether it be km or mph
+/- 1 is that the unit can almost always will never obtain a reading of say 100.000000 etc km/hr
but the reading could be 100.9999999 etc (which is up to the +1) however the unit always will round down to the nearest whole number being "100", (which is the minus 1), thus the rounding down on every reading is a benefit to the driver
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The info you have is for slightly older models and it used to be the norm, i.e +/- 1 MPH, or 2 KMH.... There are some models of moving radar that are capable of measuring speed as well as estimating distance to target. These units, due in large part to the calc'ns required offered a error margin of +/- 3.2 KMH, however according to my sources, these were not purchased by the respective police force for that very reason.
The info you have is for slightly older models and it used to be the norm, i.e +/- 1 MPH, or 2 KMH.... There are some models of moving radar that are capable of measuring speed as well as estimating distance to target. These units, due in large part to the calc'ns required offered a error margin of +/- 3.2 KMH, however according to my sources, these were not purchased by the respective police force for that very reason.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Add onto that the cosine angle effect which is always to the benefit of the target and you have a displayed speed on the radar which is always less than the targets actual speed.
Add onto that the cosine angle effect which is always to the benefit of the target and you have a displayed speed on the radar which is always less than the targets actual speed.
The unit is the unit. It will not be more or less accurate whether you are north or south of the border. 1 mph = 1.6 kmh. The accuracy is the accuracy, whatever it may be. If the advertised accuracy of the unit is +/- 1 mph (or 1 kmh, for that matter), this is irrelevant to the argument. Yours is a discussion of rounding, not accuracy. If the reading is 100.1, it rounds down to 100, but due to the accuracy being +/- 1kmh, the actual speed could be 99.1 (or 98.5, if +/- 1.6).
you are reading a USA manual if you see MPH and is not applicable to canada
The unit is the unit. It will not be more or less accurate whether you are north or south of the border. 1 mph = 1.6 kmh. The accuracy is the accuracy, whatever it may be.
+/- 1 is that the unit can almost always will never obtain a reading of say 100.000000 etc km/hr
but the reading could be 100.9999999 etc (which is up to the +1) however the unit always will round down to the nearest whole number being "100", (which is the minus 1), thus the rounding down on every reading is a benefit to the driver
If the advertised accuracy of the unit is +/- 1 mph (or 1 kmh, for that matter), this is irrelevant to the argument. Yours is a discussion of rounding, not accuracy. If the reading is 100.1, it rounds down to 100, but due to the accuracy being +/- 1kmh, the actual speed could be 99.1 (or 98.5, if +/- 1.6).
The unit is the unit. It will not be more or less accurate whether you are north or south of the border. 1 mph = 1.6 kmh. The accuracy is the accuracy, whatever it may be. The accuracy is based on the unit of measure used and does not matter what type of unit is being used, it is the same math for each unit. (ie: 7apples divided by 3apples = 2.33apples / 7 kph divide by 3kph = 2.33. kph / 7L divide by 3L = 2.33L / 7inches divide by 3inches = 2.33inches) I know the difference between accuracy and rounding and that is specifically taught on course and why it the unit is accurate WITHIN + / - 1kph on each displayed reading. Because it is next to impossible to ever have a reading bang on the exact precise number after the calculation with decimal places. So that is where the accuracy part comes in...the true/precise accurate speed could be the 100.1kph as you describe, however the unit does not display in 10ths, 100ths or 1000ths etc, so it automatically programmed to round down to the nearest whole number, which would be 100. So in this case the unit is accurate within 0.1kph.
mathers wrote:
you are reading a USA manual if you see MPH and is not applicable to canada
The unit is the unit. It will not be more or less accurate whether you are north or south of the border. 1 mph = 1.6 kmh. The accuracy is the accuracy, whatever it may be.
The accuracy is based on the unit of measure used and does not matter what type of unit is being used, it is the same math for each unit.
(ie: 7apples divided by 3apples = 2.33apples / 7 kph divide by 3kph = 2.33. kph / 7L divide by 3L = 2.33L / 7inches divide by 3inches = 2.33inches)
+/- 1 is that the unit can almost always will never obtain a reading of say 100.000000 etc km/hr
but the reading could be 100.9999999 etc (which is up to the +1) however the unit always will round down to the nearest whole number being "100", (which is the minus 1), thus the rounding down on every reading is a benefit to the driver
mathers wrote:
If the advertised accuracy of the unit is +/- 1 mph (or 1 kmh, for that matter), this is irrelevant to the argument. Yours is a discussion of rounding, not accuracy. If the reading is 100.1, it rounds down to 100, but due to the accuracy being +/- 1kmh, the actual speed could be 99.1 (or 98.5, if +/- 1.6).
I know the difference between accuracy and rounding and that is specifically taught on course and why it the unit is accurate WITHIN + / - 1kph on each displayed reading. Because it is next to impossible to ever have a reading bang on the exact precise number after the calculation with decimal places. So that is where the accuracy part comes in...the true/precise accurate speed could be the 100.1kph as you describe, however the unit does not display in 10ths, 100ths or 1000ths etc, so it automatically programmed to round down to the nearest whole number, which would be 100. So in this case the unit is accurate within 0.1kph.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
This is illogical. The accuracy of a device is not based on a unit of measure. The accuracy of a device is based on how accurately it measures something. Your statements seem to imply that, but for rounding, any speed measuring device is 100% accurate, to a certain infinitesimal fraction of a kilometer. This is not however contained in the advertised accuracy of these devices. The devices are simply advertised as accurate to +/- x. That means that the internal reading itself, is accurate to within x. The internal speed clocked will never exactly represent the actual speed of the target. That speed will always vary to some degree from the internal reading. The advertised degree it can vary is x.
The accuracy is based on the unit of measure
This is illogical. The accuracy of a device is not based on a unit of measure. The accuracy of a device is based on how accurately it measures something.
I know the difference between accuracy and rounding and that is specifically taught on course and why it the unit is accurate WITHIN + / - 1kph on each displayed reading. Because it is next to impossible to ever have a reading bang on the exact precise number after the calculation with decimal places. So that is where the accuracy part comes in...the true/precise accurate speed could be the 100.1kph as you describe, however the unit does not display in 10ths, 100ths or 1000ths etc, so it automatically programmed to round down to the nearest whole number, which would be 100. So in this case the unit is accurate within 0.1kph.
Your statements seem to imply that, but for rounding, any speed measuring device is 100% accurate, to a certain infinitesimal fraction of a kilometer. This is not however contained in the advertised accuracy of these devices. The devices are simply advertised as accurate to +/- x. That means that the internal reading itself, is accurate to within x. The internal speed clocked will never exactly represent the actual speed of the target. That speed will always vary to some degree from the internal reading. The advertised degree it can vary is x.
The radar is accurate to within +/- 0.1 km/h. However, as hwybear says, the radar cannot read 89.9 km/h, so it rounds down to 89 km/h in that case. And actually hwybear's statement about "accuracy being based on a unit of measure" comes directly from the radar manufacturer: Decatur's statement is the radar is "accurate to within +/-1 unit of measure," because anywhere from 89.0 to 89.9 km/h, it will read 89.
The radar is accurate to within +/- 0.1 km/h. However, as hwybear says, the radar cannot read 89.9 km/h, so it rounds down to 89 km/h in that case. And actually hwybear's statement about "accuracy being based on a unit of measure" comes directly from the radar manufacturer: Decatur's statement is the radar is "accurate to within +/-1 unit of measure," because anywhere from 89.0 to 89.9 km/h, it will read 89.
* 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
Thx Radar - we may now be starting to get somewhere. Is this information advertised in the manuals for all radar/lidar? And if yes, is it backed up with any independently verified empirical data?
The radar is accurate to within +/- 0.1 km/h.
Thx Radar - we may now be starting to get somewhere. Is this information advertised in the manuals for all radar/lidar? And if yes, is it backed up with any independently verified empirical data?
The International Association of Chiefs of Police, among others, conduct field trials and audits on the devices for accuracy. This is independent of any tests that the manufacturer does to verify the accuracy of its products. The information about the accuracy is advertised in the manuals. Non-empirical, strictly anecdotal evidence: Every time I've been stopped the reading was +/- 1 km/h of the speed I thought I was doing, so in my experience the devices are fairly accurate. (Also I've been stopped often enough that I have a basis for this statement.)
The International Association of Chiefs of Police, among others, conduct field trials and audits on the devices for accuracy. This is independent of any tests that the manufacturer does to verify the accuracy of its products.
The information about the accuracy is advertised in the manuals.
Non-empirical, strictly anecdotal evidence: Every time I've been stopped the reading was +/- 1 km/h of the speed I thought I was doing, so in my experience the devices are fairly accurate. (Also I've been stopped often enough that I have a basis for this statement.)
* 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 followed the procedures mentioned in the previous threads regarding the disclosure and received it today. My court date is November 5 2009 in Whitby. After going through the notes I realized 2 things:
1- the notes are horribly illegible and difficult to read
2- I have notes from two different officers.
Now I am not sure if this means that both the officers will be at court for the hearing or…
I hope I can paint the picture with the accuracy that the truth deserves. I have no intention of just beating a ticket.. but more like beating a really unfair ticket. You decide!
I had entered Canada after a short trip downsouth through Detroit on my way to Toronto. Not being equipped with a GPS unit I had to rely on the printable poorman's version from Mapquest. I followed Huron Church Rd.,…
Need an expert advice here. 10 days ago I got a speeding ticket. Ticket has a fatal error on its face-offense not known to law. It says speeding 75km/hr in posted 60km/hr zone. What is the best way to proceed?
1. Should I completely ignore this ticket and let the JP to quash it?
2. Should I go with option 3 - request a trial and force the fatal error by not showing up at court?
My name is Brian. I am in my late 20s and live in Toronto. I do not own a car but half a dozen times a year I rent one with my Visa. (To get out of the city and go to a beach or ski for example.)
I have never drunk and drive but I face a problem and Im wondering if anyone can tell me what to do. Several months ago I was at a weekend party and had quit a bit to consume. When I stopped…
I was travelling east bound on ellesmere road and approached markham road attempting to make a right turn. All signal lights were red and cars traveling down markham road south were given the green arrow. I slowed down and attempted to make the right turn. I got ticketed by a cop who was parked in a gas station facing the intersection in a (no parking zone). I…
Crested a hill, officer coming at me, pulled a u turn and pulled me over.
I will go back and look again but I thought I was in an 80 not a 70 and I am positive I wasn't doing more than 120. My speedo read 110-115. I have aftermarket tires and rims so I assume this would be the difference.
It was around 7pm, already dark, nobody on the road but myself,…
I am looking for the case law that is commonly used when the prosecution says they only need to disclose the testing pages of a radar manual or laser manual.
I am only interested in the binding decisions (appeals court or higher?), and not in the non-binding Justice of the Peace decisions.
I was pulled over two nights ago and charged with failing to stop a stop sign. On the ticket, it says 'disobey stop sign - foil to stop' and does not say 'fail' -- something I think may be a fatal flaw? I have been driving for 12 years with no tickets, yet I live in Brampton where insurance prices are high so I do not want to be convicted as my insurance rates will spike significantly and…
A friend of mine (who is from China and with no knowledge of English at all) asked me to interpret for him on court.
He got pulled over by a stealth patrol car last october, got 3 tickets (fail to show insurance card, using cell phones and fail to stop on right for emergency vehicle) , court date is next week. He told me his insurance expired for less than a month and other charges are false…
I understand the severity of my offences, and I can't stress how much I regret it. I know I endangered the lives of myself and more importantly others. I usually do not speed and I know running late for work is an unacceptable excuse. I will be a man and accept the consequences of my actions although I would appreciate any advice for my situation.
Guys back in january i got a speeding ticket on dvp, but i am 90% sure he did not caught me on radar, i asked for disclosure request and i just received today, I have asked for: a full copy of the police officers notes, a copy of both sides of the officers copy of the ticket, witness will say statements, speed gun manual, calibration record, repair history and officer's training certificate but…
I need some help here. So today I was on my way to get my tires changed from my winter tires to my regular summer staggered set of tires. I was driving in mississauga on my way to my destination, I got pulled over by an officer where I was given a ticket for having improper mudguards. For some context, I drive a stock 2013 C63 AMG with winter tires at the time. I was never…
I'd like to start this off by saying for the last two weeks I have been browsing the forums. I'm trying to prepare myself for an early resolution meeting with a prosecutor (in Brampton, if that matters). I have a clean record and as a teacher, I always do my best to follow rules (trying to practice what I preach!)
On December 4, 2014 I was preparing to turn right at a very busy intersection.…
I have question, today I was going to work in my normal route there is a triangle intersection with my side being the only one with a stop sign.
There's a car in front me who stopped at the stop sign, and the third-side there's a incoming car with their hazard-light flashing but they don't have stop sign, yet coming in at a slow speed.
Right after the car in front me went through the stop sign,…
On my way to work this morning I received a ticket for disobey sign. I was on Hwy 10 Mississauga in the right lane. The right lane leads to the 401 and there is a sign saying Right Lane Exits. I Tried to merge left before the on ramp as did 3 other people. We all got a ticket for doing that. Is there anything I can do? I did not realize I was breaking any law it was a dotted line where I tried to…
This is my first post, before I jump right in I would like to thank the forum, members, posters and moderators for all the information posted. I feel like I have been able to learn a lot from others experiences, so thank you all.
This will be a lengthy post. But if you are dealing with a Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) - No Straight Through Intersection you may find this extremely…
Let me start this with saying that this isn't in regards to a ticket, more a discussion surrounding front license plates and learning about the rules behind them. (Most of the quote stuff is using colloquial terms, mostly because I couldn't really find a better way to describe it; it's not meant to be offensive.)
I know Ontario law/HTA mandates having a front license plate unlike some States in…
Hi Guys! I've just had my trial day yesterday. I was not at fault but was convicted anyways.
It is such a travesty! There is no justice at the traffic court. It is just a no mercy machine to part someone with his money, no common sense applies and no reasonable argument being considered. Such a shame! The justice, the policeman and the prosecutor ganged up against me. The justice kept interrupting…
Well first of all ... glad to have found the forum - hoping to find answers to 'alot' of questions
I was unfortunate in July 2010 in that I ended up rolling my 2009 Ranger three times, through a fence and landing on the roof on a rained-out road that was/is in need of proper repair in Eastern Ontario.
I was assisted out of the vehicle by the driver who was behind me.
I was traveling down the 401, noticed a speed trap, and started flashing my lights -- in order to warn oncoming drivers.
Within a 30 seconds, a car slowed, crossed the grass, and approached me from behind. Lights appeared, and I then realised that this was an officer in an undercover car.
The officer pulled me over, and while he was polite, clearly his motivation was to…
Does anyone know the specific law, statute, Charter right to refer to when a prosecutor or justice attempts to change the charge on a ticket after a trial has begun? I assume I'd object immediately (without interrupting anyone, of course) but what would be the specific legal basis of my objection?
I was right behind a school bus that looked like it was pulling over to the side in order to turn down a side street, I saw no lights so decided to go around (wide street). Was still moving as I was passing, then as I did pass I heard horn and looked back and in fact it was pulling over to p/u school kids (was a block away from my son's school, so just assumed it wouldn't be picking up kids...it…
