Trial Next Month

My son was charged with speeding. He is 20 and I am planning to attend the trial with him next month. Can I actively participate in the trial with him? I mean asking questions, requesting montions, I mean actually legally representing him or he has to do it himself?

Thanks,

You CAN represent your son if thats what you mean.

admin wrote:

You CAN represent your son if thats what you mean.

Just to clarify, not to go to the court on his behalf, but to participate in the trial while he is in court as well (as if I was his lawyer). Is it still YES?

Representation is covered under by-law 4 of the Law Society of Upper Canada which can be found online.

Section 30 sub 5.1 states:

Acting for family

Subject to subsection (2), the following may, without a licence, provide legal services in Ontario...

5.1. An individual

i. whose profession or occupation is not and does not include the provision of legal services or the practice of law,

ii. who provides the legal services only for and on behalf of a related person, within the meaning of the Income Tax Act (Canada), and

iii. who does not expect and does not receive any compensation, including a fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect, for the provision of the legal services.

In short, yes, but you may want to read the by-law just in case you're challenged in Court.

Also, in that regards you should really know what your doing too. If your just going to go to trial without any solid background defense strategy, you will lose and be convicted for the max in court. It maybe better to just hire a Paralegal, if you arent sure about what you are doing.

Thanks, guys.

So I reviewed the disclosure material, including the hand-written and type notes. The notes are stating estimated speed in 450 and 410 distance (?), but noting about radar clocked speed. My son was driving the last car in a group of 3-4 cars. The cop was coming from the opposite direction. I believe he use a radar, since the disclosure material contains the manual. But how could he clock my son's car speed, if he was driving last.

Any idea for defense? The trial is next week.

Thanks.

Radar can be used in various modes, moving same direction, moving opposing, stationary .

Short answer yes he can get you coming from other direction.

obtaining the last vehicle speed is one of the easiest speeds to obtain

So his ticket is for 55 in 40 zone. Do they have to produce a by-law in the court and disclosure?

Also, here is the text of the narrative:

"... truck e/b 460m west of bathurst st sing veh, est 65/40 68/40 460m 66/40 410m stopped 350m west of bathurst, prod docs ont ...".

Does it mean the radar reading or the cop's judgement (estimate)? Otherwise if he claims no guilty, would he be tried for 55/40 or 68/40? By the way, no specific mention about the redar reading in the narrative or handwritten notes.

It looks like the only option is to go to the court and bargain with the prosecutor, right? Any advice?

Thanks.

Firstly, if your son got a ticket for 15 over, why did you post in the 30-49 over forum? Secondly, it sounds like the cop took several different readings of the speed. And judging from those readings, he probably gave your kid a break and lowered it so he wouldn't lose points (you might want to ask your kid to clarify). If that's the case then you're probably not going to have much luck in court unless the cop doesn't show. If the 65/40, 68/40, and 66/40 refers to him doing those speeds in the 40 zone, and the cop did drop, then what do you have to bargain with? The cop already gave him a break.

What by-law are referring to, that they have to produce in court? The disclosure is for the defendant, so he can see what evidence there is against him. If you don't ask for it, they don't give it to you.

topic moved to 16-28km over

manwithaplan wrote:

Firstly, if your son got a ticket for 15 over, why did you post in the 30-49 over forum? Secondly, it sounds like the cop took several different readings of the speed. And judging from those readings, he probably gave your kid a break and lowered it so he wouldn't lose points (you might want to ask your kid to clarify). If that's the case then you're probably not going to have much luck in court unless the cop doesn't show. If the 65/40, 68/40, and 66/40 refers to him doing those speeds in the 40 zone, and the cop did drop, then what do you have to bargain with? The cop already gave him a break.

What by-law are referring to, that they have to produce in court? The disclosure is for the defendant, so he can see what evidence there is against him. If you don't ask for it, they don't give it to you.

Wouldn't 40h/km limit be regulated by a municipality, therefore a bylaw would have to back it up? Therefore they would have to produce such a document it the court (and disclose it to you) in order to convict you? It is mentioned on TicketCombat, but it is not clear to me. That is why I am asking.

The bottom line is, is there anything I could base our defense on, or just go to the court and hope the cop will not show up? 15km/h over the limit will affect our insurance, considering he is only 20. 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?

Thanks.

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.

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.

Could anyone, please, provide me with a solid advice?

The bottom line is that he was clocked on a teritiory of the Township of King, in non built-up area. So the speed limit accordongly to HTA128 is 80km/h. Don't they have to show a by-law proving that the speed limit is 40km/h to convict you?

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.

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.