I got a speeding ticket where I was caught on radar. I'm uploading the disclosure and the ticket and the radar user manual.

User manual claims that the operator must estimate the speed of the motorist before he starts the radar gun process. Is the officer required to estimate the speed and disclose this info? It doesn't say why he decided to use the radar gun on my vehicle, and I personally think he could not have had enough time to sit there, estimate my speed to be speeding, then start radar me, which is according to the user manual of the radar.

Basically I'm inclining to challenge the procedure the officer took to clock me, as it was not according to the user manual.

I used a Ticket Combat Disclosure template which explicitly asks for a typed version. I however, received handwritten notes only. Can I apply for court adjournment? I can't clearly read what most of it says.

Is there anything else I can do that can create a credible challenge to my ticket?

Regards.

jackqu wrote:

I used a Ticket Combat Disclosure template which explicitly asks for a typed version. .

Last I looked the template was a generic guideline for all offences, so it is not the end all be all of disclosure requests.

Those officer notes you posted are quite clear and easy to read. Was able to read every word.

Estimation is done at same time as observing the vehicle. Once one views traffic daily in correlation to seeing a speed on a radar, one becomes very proficient at visually knowing how fast the vehicle is travelling.

Here is an example:

I was going to another city with my wife and saw this blue pickup same direction as us, told my wife here comes a 142...blows by me....I watch and brake lights come on...truck got stopped....I recognize officer and send him an email.....yep vehicle at 144km. My wife (civilian) was baffled by how I knew once I received the email.

The point of it is, it is second nature and just do the visual & estimation out of habit, even while off-duty.

First off thats not a Canadian Manual.

Second since Jan 2010 Police don't have to estimate the speed, just observe a vehicle in excess of speed limit.

Third since Aug 2010 that entire tracking history section is removed from manual.

Fourth, don't be surprised if original 88 in 60 speed is amended in court.

Good luck.

First off thats not a Canadian Manual.

Second since Jan 2010 Police don't have to estimate the speed, just observe a vehicle in excess of speed limit.

Third since Aug 2010 that entire tracking history section is removed from manual.

Fourth, don't be surprised if original 88 in 60 speed is amended in court.

Please do not mislead the public. The manual (or several pages as to the testing procedures) was provided by prosecution ans is irrelevant if it is a Canadian or French version. that is what prosecution will rely upon at trial. As to other two suggestions on changes to tracking history and estimation (besides my first comment) it is still applicable as per "testing procedures". I am not sure of your qualifications and source of information but we are one of the leading traffic tickets defence companies in GTA and fight hundreds of speeding tickets every week never heard this assertion.

jackqu wrote:

I used a Ticket Combat Disclosure template which explicitly asks for a typed version.

Agree with hwybear. If the notes are reasonably legible, a typed version is not required. The purpose of disclosure is to get the information you need to make a full answer and defence to the charge. Chances are, the Prosecutor could read the notes, so they said "good enough" and sent them to you. For the record, I could read the notes. FYI, I'm also currently fighting a speeding ticket, but I only asked for three things: 1. Notes, typed IF NOT LEGIBLE; 2. LIDAR manual; 3. Any other evidence the Crown plans to use in court.

Couple of other things:

The Stig wrote:

First off thats not a Canadian Manual.

How did you determine that?

The Stig wrote:

Second since Jan 2010 Police don't have to estimate the speed, just observe a vehicle in excess of speed limit.

Can you cite the case that said that?

The Stig wrote:

Third since Aug 2010 that entire tracking history section is removed from manual.

Doesn't matter. In the manual or not, the police still have to observe a vehicle is speeding before they use the radar/lidar device.

The Stig wrote:

Fourth, don't be surprised if original 88 in 60 speed is amended in court.

Agreed - good chance of this occurring.

Traffic Law wrote:

Please do not mislead the public.

Fine then, don't believe me. I don't really care. Or better yet call Decatur themselves. They are in this town called Decatur Illinois.

Radar;

The changes I referred to were respect to manual changes, not cases. The radar has to be operated as per the manufacturers instructions/manual. And yes I agree that despite the tracking history being removed, that Police still have to observe you speeding to use the radar.