Hi everyone. I received a ticket on Hwy 6 North in Guelph going 90 km/h in a posted 70 km/h zone. I was clocked at 110 km/h and the officer reduced it to 90 km/h. I requested for disclosure back in February 8th , after I received notice of trial for March 8th. The disclosure package did not get mailed, and when I went to the court on the day of trial, the clerk informed me that she had just received the disclosure package. I talked to the prosecutor, and he motioned for adjournment of the trial due to the inadequate preparation time given to me. The trial is going to be held on May 13th, and I'm wondering if I should just plead guilty, now that I have read the officer's notes. Attached is scanned copy of the disclosure. I did pull over before he put on the emergency lights, but I saw the officer pull out of his spot under the overpass and I thought I heard a siren so I proceeded to slow down and move to the right. I'm not sure if pulling over in itself would be treated as admitting guilt, but if it is, I would like the community's advice on how to proceed. Thanks in advance!
Hi everyone.
I received a ticket on Hwy 6 North in Guelph going 90 km/h in a posted 70 km/h zone. I was clocked at 110 km/h and the officer reduced it to 90 km/h.
I requested for disclosure back in February 8th , after I received notice of trial for March 8th. The disclosure package did not get mailed, and when I went to the court on the day of trial, the clerk informed me that she had just received the disclosure package. I talked to the prosecutor, and he motioned for adjournment of the trial due to the inadequate preparation time given to me. The trial is going to be held on May 13th, and I'm wondering if I should just plead guilty, now that I have read the officer's notes.
Attached is scanned copy of the disclosure.
I did pull over before he put on the emergency lights, but I saw the officer pull out of his spot under the overpass and I thought I heard a siren so I proceeded to slow down and move to the right. I'm not sure if pulling over in itself would be treated as admitting guilt, but if it is, I would like the community's advice on how to proceed.
It's not an admission of guilt, but it will certainly be used against you in a trial. It's hard to tell from the disclosure, but it reads like you were aware you were speeding. If the officer asked you "Do you know why I pulled you over?" and you actually answered with something related to speeding, then you'd be in a pretty big hole. Whether or not you decide to plead guilty is really up to you. It doesn't seem like you have a defense prepared, so you might want to consider a plea deal. If you go all the way to trial, you will most likely find yourself battling a ticket for 110/70 instead of 90/70. It's another thing to consider.
schumacher wrote:
I did pull over before he put on the emergency lights, but I saw the officer pull out of his spot under the overpass and I thought I heard a siren so I proceeded to slow down and move to the right. I'm not sure if pulling over in itself would be treated as admitting guilt, but if it is, I would like the community's advice on how to proceed.
Thanks in advance!
It's not an admission of guilt, but it will certainly be used against you in a trial. It's hard to tell from the disclosure, but it reads like you were aware you were speeding. If the officer asked you "Do you know why I pulled you over?" and you actually answered with something related to speeding, then you'd be in a pretty big hole.
Whether or not you decide to plead guilty is really up to you. It doesn't seem like you have a defense prepared, so you might want to consider a plea deal. If you go all the way to trial, you will most likely find yourself battling a ticket for 110/70 instead of 90/70. It's another thing to consider.
It's not an admission of guilt, but it will certainly be used against you in a trial. It's hard to tell from the disclosure, but it reads like you were aware you were speeding. If the officer asked you "Do you know why I pulled you over?" and you actually answered with something related to speeding, then you'd be in a pretty big hole. Whether or not you decide to plead guilty is really up to you. It doesn't seem like you have a defense prepared, so you might want to consider a plea deal. If you go all the way to trial, you will most likely find yourself battling a ticket for 110/70 instead of 90/70. It's another thing to consider. He didn't even ask me a question like that. He just assumed that I knew why I was pulled over. I said nothing about speeding. My original defense was going to be the fact that the officer did not perform calibration / testing on the Genesis II unit AFTER the shift was over, and that I was not provided any documentation in disclosure regarding the officer's competencies and training for the radar unit, even though it was specifically asked for. Another defense would have been the fact that the officer was parked directly under the overpass, and the highway curves where he was surveying the traffic. I remember reading an article that mentioned the radar unit has to be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway and vehicles and not set at an angle. Failing that, I would have tried to introduce ambiguity to the officer's testimony by asking detail questions like if he remembers the weather / road conditions, what I was wearing, if there were any other people in the vehicle. How would the prosecutor likely press on the "being aware" allegation? Simply go by the officer's notes?
bend wrote:
schumacher wrote:
I did pull over before he put on the emergency lights, but I saw the officer pull out of his spot under the overpass and I thought I heard a siren so I proceeded to slow down and move to the right. I'm not sure if pulling over in itself would be treated as admitting guilt, but if it is, I would like the community's advice on how to proceed.
Thanks in advance!
It's not an admission of guilt, but it will certainly be used against you in a trial. It's hard to tell from the disclosure, but it reads like you were aware you were speeding. If the officer asked you "Do you know why I pulled you over?" and you actually answered with something related to speeding, then you'd be in a pretty big hole.
Whether or not you decide to plead guilty is really up to you. It doesn't seem like you have a defense prepared, so you might want to consider a plea deal. If you go all the way to trial, you will most likely find yourself battling a ticket for 110/70 instead of 90/70. It's another thing to consider.
He didn't even ask me a question like that. He just assumed that I knew why I was pulled over. I said nothing about speeding.
My original defense was going to be the fact that the officer did not perform calibration / testing on the Genesis II unit AFTER the shift was over, and that I was not provided any documentation in disclosure regarding the officer's competencies and training for the radar unit, even though it was specifically asked for.
Another defense would have been the fact that the officer was parked directly under the overpass, and the highway curves where he was surveying the traffic. I remember reading an article that mentioned the radar unit has to be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway and vehicles and not set at an angle.
Failing that, I would have tried to introduce ambiguity to the officer's testimony by asking detail questions like if he remembers the weather / road conditions, what I was wearing, if there were any other people in the vehicle.
How would the prosecutor likely press on the "being aware" allegation? Simply go by the officer's notes?
"My original defense was going to be the fact that the officer did not perform calibration / testing on the Genesis II unit AFTER the shift was over, and that I was not provided any documentation in disclosure regarding the officer's competencies and training for the radar unit, even though it was specifically asked for." It appears that they just haven't copied enough notes towards the end of shift to include the final test. Either ask for that page including the final teest or just ask the officer if it goes to trial. You won't get any documentation regarding the officers training or competencies as part of disclosure. He or she will be asked on the stand by the prosecutor. "Another defense would have been the fact that the officer was parked directly under the overpass, and the highway curves where he was surveying the traffic. I remember reading an article that mentioned the radar unit has to be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway and vehicles and not set at an angle." Radar does not have to be used parallel or perpendicular. In fact this give the radar a cosine effect and the displayed speed on the radar is actually less than the actual target speed. "Failing that, I would have tried to introduce ambiguity to the officer's testimony by asking detail questions like if he remembers the weather / road conditions, what I was wearing, if there were any other people in the vehicle." Weather is already mentioned in the officers notes. What you are wearing and whether there was anyone in the vehicle may or may not be known by the officer, but it won't affect the speeding evidencce.
"My original defense was going to be the fact that the officer did not perform calibration / testing on the Genesis II unit AFTER the shift was over, and that I was not provided any documentation in disclosure regarding the officer's competencies and training for the radar unit, even though it was specifically asked for."
It appears that they just haven't copied enough notes towards the end of shift to include the final test. Either ask for that page including the final teest or just ask the officer if it goes to trial. You won't get any documentation regarding the officers training or competencies as part of disclosure. He or she will be asked on the stand by the prosecutor.
"Another defense would have been the fact that the officer was parked directly under the overpass, and the highway curves where he was surveying the traffic. I remember reading an article that mentioned the radar unit has to be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway and vehicles and not set at an angle."
Radar does not have to be used parallel or perpendicular. In fact this give the radar a cosine effect and the displayed speed on the radar is actually less than the actual target speed.
"Failing that, I would have tried to introduce ambiguity to the officer's testimony by asking detail questions like if he remembers the weather / road conditions, what I was wearing, if there were any other people in the vehicle."
Weather is already mentioned in the officers notes. What you are wearing and whether there was anyone in the vehicle may or may not be known by the officer, but it won't affect the speeding evidencce.
Thanks for your response. I guess the cosine error only becomes in my favour if the officer's vehicle was also moving. How about the fact that he was parked close to a large metal / concrete structure? Would that not affect the readings?
Decatur wrote:
"My original defense was going to be the fact that the officer did not perform calibration / testing on the Genesis II unit AFTER the shift was over, and that I was not provided any documentation in disclosure regarding the officer's competencies and training for the radar unit, even though it was specifically asked for."
It appears that they just haven't copied enough notes towards the end of shift to include the final test. Either ask for that page including the final teest or just ask the officer if it goes to trial. You won't get any documentation regarding the officers training or competencies as part of disclosure. He or she will be asked on the stand by the prosecutor.
"Another defense would have been the fact that the officer was parked directly under the overpass, and the highway curves where he was surveying the traffic. I remember reading an article that mentioned the radar unit has to be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway and vehicles and not set at an angle."
Radar does not have to be used parallel or perpendicular. In fact this give the radar a cosine effect and the displayed speed on the radar is actually less than the actual target speed.
"Failing that, I would have tried to introduce ambiguity to the officer's testimony by asking detail questions like if he remembers the weather / road conditions, what I was wearing, if there were any other people in the vehicle."
Weather is already mentioned in the officers notes. What you are wearing and whether there was anyone in the vehicle may or may not be known by the officer, but it won't affect the speeding evidencce.
Thanks for your response. I guess the cosine error only becomes in my favour if the officer's vehicle was also moving. How about the fact that he was parked close to a large metal / concrete structure? Would that not affect the readings?
Does not matter if the radar is stationary or moving. Cosine error is always in favour of the defendant such as Decatur already mentioned. example: a vehicle speed is 104, if the cosine is 5%, the radar might have a reading of 103km/hr. The greater the cosine error, a lower speed will always be displayed on the radar. Obviously a true 0 cosine would be the radar being directly in front of a vehicle and at the same height, which obviously is almost impossible. metal/concrete would not affect readings
schumacher wrote:
Thanks for your response. I guess the cosine error only becomes in my favour if the officer's vehicle was also moving. How about the fact that he was parked close to a large metal / concrete structure? Would that not affect the readings?
Does not matter if the radar is stationary or moving. Cosine error is always in favour of the defendant such as Decatur already mentioned.
example: a vehicle speed is 104, if the cosine is 5%, the radar might have a reading of 103km/hr. The greater the cosine error, a lower speed will always be displayed on the radar.
Obviously a true 0 cosine would be the radar being directly in front of a vehicle and at the same height, which obviously is almost impossible.
metal/concrete would not affect readings
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The red is the officer's car, green is my car, and the blue is another vehicle. In that situation, since the radar beam only travels in a straight line away from the source (the radar mounted on the patrol vehicle), would the vehicle exiting on the off-ramp not introduce ambiguity to the radar readings? In other words, it was not my vehicle that caused the reading, but the other vehicle?
The red is the officer's car, green is my car, and the blue is another vehicle. In that situation, since the radar beam only travels in a straight line away from the source (the radar mounted on the patrol vehicle), would the vehicle exiting on the off-ramp not introduce ambiguity to the radar readings? In other words, it was not my vehicle that caused the reading, but the other vehicle?
The officer was using a handheld radar and would have had it pointed down the roadway at your vehicle and not at the vehicles exiting the highway. It's not likey the radar beam would be wide enough to pick up the other vehicle.
The officer was using a handheld radar and would have had it pointed down the roadway at your vehicle and not at the vehicles exiting the highway. It's not likey the radar beam would be wide enough to pick up the other vehicle.
Hey there, I was stopped exactly at the same location this weekend. Officer wrote that the zone is a 60 km/h, but you're saying it's a 70. Is there anyway I can check this?
Hey there, I was stopped exactly at the same location this weekend. Officer wrote that the zone is a 60 km/h, but you're saying it's a 70. Is there anyway I can check this?
I'm familiar with the area and can confirm it's normally a 70 zone. The only problem is there has been lots of construction in the area lately with some lane closures and the limit may have been temporarily lowered to 60. You should request disclosure and see if the officer's notes confirm this.
I'm familiar with the area and can confirm it's normally a 70 zone. The only problem is there has been lots of construction in the area lately with some lane closures and the limit may have been temporarily lowered to 60. You should request disclosure and see if the officer's notes confirm this.
Just drove through Guelph again today. I can confirm they've covered up the old "70 km/hr" speed limit signs with new "60 km/hr" ones, from at least College to Paisley along the Hanlon Parkway. The signs appear to be proper. They're regular white speed limit signs, not the temporary orange ones.
Just drove through Guelph again today. I can confirm they've covered up the old "70 km/hr" speed limit signs with new "60 km/hr" ones, from at least College to Paisley along the Hanlon Parkway. The signs appear to be proper. They're regular white speed limit signs, not the temporary orange ones.
Thanks Stanton for updating me on this. It's been about 10 days since I got the ticket, would it be smart to go out there and take some pictures? I mailed my ticket + disclosure request today so I'll have to wait to see what happens. Figure there's not much I can do in the mean time.
Stanton wrote:
Just drove through Guelph again today. I can confirm they've covered up the old "70 km/hr" speed limit signs with new "60 km/hr" ones, from at least College to Paisley along the Hanlon Parkway. The signs appear to be proper. They're regular white speed limit signs, not the temporary orange ones.
Thanks Stanton for updating me on this. It's been about 10 days since I got the ticket, would it be smart to go out there and take some pictures? I mailed my ticket + disclosure request today so I'll have to wait to see what happens. Figure there's not much I can do in the mean time.
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got a ticket, Disobey stop sign, sec 136.1.a on dec 6th
I made a left in an intersection and was pulled over by a police officer in an unmarked car who had been sitting down the road. A classic fishing hole situation. I was genuinely surprised when he stopped me and told me I went through a stop sign without even slowing down. I know to shut up and be polite and take the ticket. I…
Yesterday morning, I rear-ended someone. I was going the speed limit. The sun was directly in front of me and it blinded my windshield and my eyes. At the same time, the person in front of me stopped/slowed down (also due to the sun). I started to slow down but didn't stop and I hit them since I couldn't see anything. I was not driving too close initially. I…
I was driving in the county at night and hit a limousine stretched out side ways across the road. The limo had its lights on and had side lighting as well. The police officer charged me with careless driving because it was "fully lit up".
It took me to the next day to figure out what had happened - what I remember made no sense. What I had run across was a "false visual reference" illusion.
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster untill I got pulled over at 147 on an 80 km hwy.
I alreaddy lost 3 points and this time was just the…
Hello, got stopped today for rolling a stop sign. Ticket says failure to stop, but quotes hta 1361b.
Doesn't 1361b mean failure to yield?
Is this a fatal error? Or could it be amended at trial. How can I prepare a defence if I don't know if I'm defending the failure to stop or the failure to yield?
After he was providing me with a ticket for failure to obey to the stop sign (I am pretty sure I stopped but less than 3 seconds recommended by my driver ed. instructor), I know everybody say that..as an excuse.
Then he stopped me again to return the documents.
Any advice and feed back would be really appreciated.
Can you get evidence for whether someone had an advanced green at an intersection? My dad was making a right turn on a red (after stopping) into a plaza parking lot. He got hit by someone making a left turn from the opposite lane. The driver told the officer called to the collision that he had an advance green. My dad said he came out of nowhere which makes me…
So i was driving on Eglinton Avenue East near Rosemount Ave.
The school bus was on the the curb on the opposite side of the road while i was travelling on the middle lane of the three-laned Eglinton Avenue East (five lanes apart plus a raised median island seperating the traffic)
I could not see the school bus as my view of the bus was being obstructed by the cars in front of me and on my left hand…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
This morning I had an exam for university. I was studying the entire night and i wanted to catch like maybe 1-2 hours of sleep before the exam so i went to sleep. I woke up like 5 hrs after and realize that I was about to miss my exam. I still could have made it so I asked my dad for his car since I was in a huge rush and he gave it to me.
I went on the highway and I was going at 135 km/h but…
the police officer was in in the opesite oncumming lane he was fallowing another car so close that i was not even able to see his cruser till he was buy he said that i was going 111 in a 80 he said he hade me on radar he only asked for me drivers licencs and never asked for my insurence so on the ticket there no insurence dose enyone think i can beat this i wana take it to cort becuse he was…
Hi I have a couple questions so I'll explain my situation and any advice would be appreciated.
Can't remember exact date so lets call it some time in 2008 I got a fine for $5000.00 for driving without in insurance. I never paid the fine and in 2012 I was pulled over and the officer asked to see my license. Although I had it on me I figured it would be under suspension for the unpaid fine from…
Alright, so I did something really stupid the other day, I was driving down a country road and wanted to hit the curves so I passed 3 cars at once, inadvertently making it up to very much past 50 over (80 limit)... Much to my chagrin there was a cop coming in the opposite direction who immediately skidded on the gravel shoulder and who I thought was 100% going to turn around and pull me over,…
Anyone know how backed this courthouse is? I submitted my ticket for trial at the end of August, and still no letter. Im scared it got lost in the mail, can i call the courthouse and find out my courtdate? Or would i have to go in personally?
I recently received a ticket for failure to use low beams - while following - Ticket was issued Sec 168 (
- it was on the 401 and no one was within 500 meters of me, I was warning a oncoming vehicle that there was an officer hiding (which is not illegal or I could not find a law against it) it was a police vehicle travelling at very high rate of speed in the opposite direction with no lights on…
I received a warning letter from MTO for a 2pts ticket.What happened is that the police officer issued a "unsafe left turn" and then changed the ticket to "failed to signal" at the scene, but she submitted both tickets!!! And I !!!ONLY!!! received the latter ticket from her(I requested trial for "failed to signal"). I recently received notice from MTO that I'm convicted for "unsafe left turn".
Hello everyone! I was given a ticket for using a hand-held communication device while driving. It was 3 am, I was at a stop light and the cop saw me with the my phone in my hand. I told him i was just checking the time on it. I received the notes a few weeks ago ill copy them down below. Any help is appreciated although i believe there's no hope for me. The cop recorded me saying what phone i…
I got pulled over about 15 or so days ago the court till this date has not received the summons what is the legal time period that the court has to follow to accept the summons from the office court says its 15 days is the legal timeframe the officer has to serve it on the court
I requested for disclosure of information two months ago.
I received the radar manual after one month, but not others (including maintenance/calibration record of the radar, certificate of police training). On further pursuit, the prosecutor told me that he did not have them and he did not see why I needed these documents. He said he did not know where to get them when I asked.
Last Friday I was pulled over by an OPP motorcycle cop who informed me I was going 134. I was on the SB 404, I did see him parked under a bridge and when I passed him he was not on his bike.
I'm hoping to get some insight for a defense in this case.
I was in lane 1 and I had a car in front of me, and a car behind me, also there was a car speeding down Lane 3 passing everyone and moved quickly into…
