slepy wrote:

hwybear wrote:

slepy wrote: Could the fact that my son was driving last in the group be used to defend that the cop could have catch the speed of the first vehicle accurately? Would the fact that he did not mention in his notes that my son was travelling in a group of cars? Anything, any pointers, or I am just waiting my time?.

How I would articlulate this as the officer, observed a solo motor vehicle at a higher rate of speed than the posted speed limit, activated the radar and obtained a reading of 68km/hr on the solo vehicle and stopped same. Now you ask how can it be solo, well once one the 2,3, 4 etc. veh in front of your son go past the location of the cruiser, your son's vehicle then becomes the solo vehicle (nothing else between it and the cruiser)

If I was aked if any vehicle in front, response would be, could have been, however no other vehicle grabbed my attention such as the defendant's vehicle.

You are fantasizing. He was driving in the opposite direction. This kind of operation is physically imposible, when a relative speed is over 100km/h. Plus, why would he make up such a story in court? Aren't they supposed to tell the truth.

absolutely not fantasizing. I just told you how to obtain a speed of the last vehicle in moving radar (opposite direction/approach mode). This is routine radar operation and can be performed at any speed.

mnstrcck wrote:

slepy wrote:

You are fantasizing. He was driving in the opposite direction. This kind of operation is physically imposible, when a relative speed is over 100km/h.

We sent people to the moon more than 40 years ago using analog technology. And you think it's impossible to capture an oncoming car's speed using radar inside a moving vehicle in 2012? As previously stated here, it's possible.

My advice is to take the plea option, get a reduced fine, and tell your son not to speed anymore. As for your fear of insurance hikes, a 15/km over shouldn't do it unless he's got other convictions. There's a high possibility that taking this to trial will end up with a finding of guilt and an amendment to the original speed he was caught at [making it worse]. You can also hire a paralegal to try and fight it, but that's an investment and may end up with nothing more than a plea deal. You can call around and get consultations for free.

I am not arguing with you. I am trying to find any way for us to defend. That is all. Di some reading, but do not have a lot of time to spend on it (and is it worth it). That is why I am asking around. Then I do not want to risk him being convicted to a higher charge. It is his first ticket, so I guess should be a lesson learned.

slepy wrote:Don't they have to show a by-law proving that the speed limit is 40km/h to convict you?

Nope. The 40 km/h sign is "prima facie" evidence of the existence of the by-law. This used to be a tactic that had some success (usually for "disobey sign" tickets) but it hasn't really worked very well recently, at least as far as I know.

If you can show that the by-law was revoked or amended to raise the speed limit above what your son was doing, then you might have a decent chance. (Public archives would have that information.)

The 15-over... I'd just pay it. But that's just me.