I was stopped for allegedly doing 122 in a 90. I requested disclosure and like most received the minimum. The notes are just a photo copy with no explanations or typing. Only received parts of the manual that pertain to testing. Appears the officer was using a "Laser Atlanta Speed Laser", but no model or serial number is referenced in the notes. Testing is noted in two times written at the top of the ticket and it was only one reading at 534 meters. I was coming around a bend and have read about sweep errors etc. The office was holding the laser device in his hand, not mounted on a tripod. The trial is about 5 weeks away, but I am thinking of sending a second request for explanation of the notes and copy of the entire manual not just a few pages. I had also asked for the certificates that were requested in the "success story" posts and received nothing. I check and Davtech don't appear to be ISO certified, but that are IACP certified. Are there any certificates that I could request for this device to prove that it was manufactured/tested to standards? They likely won't get back to me for the trial so should I file a stay for non disclosure? In the mean time can someone tell me what this means?
I was stopped for allegedly doing 122 in a 90. I requested disclosure and like most received the minimum. The notes are just a photo copy with no explanations or typing. Only received parts of the manual that pertain to testing. Appears the officer was using a "Laser Atlanta Speed Laser", but no model or serial number is referenced in the notes. Testing is noted in two times written at the top of the ticket and it was only one reading at 534 meters. I was coming around a bend and have read about sweep errors etc. The office was holding the laser device in his hand, not mounted on a tripod. The trial is about 5 weeks away, but I am thinking of sending a second request for explanation of the notes and copy of the entire manual not just a few pages. I had also asked for the certificates that were requested in the "success story" posts and received nothing. I check and Davtech don't appear to be ISO certified, but that are IACP certified. Are there any certificates that I could request for this device to prove that it was manufactured/tested to standards? They likely won't get back to me for the trial so should I file a stay for non disclosure?
In the mean time can someone tell me what this means?
It's unlikely that you're going to get the full manual, but you can of course ask. It's also unlikely that you're going to get anything with respect to the device being manufactured/tested to any specific standards. What people need to remember, and I've said this before, is that the standard of proof required for a conviction is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" - this is not the same as absolute certainty. This argument about "what about the device that tested/calibrated the device that tested/calibrated the device...etc...that tested/calibrated the radar or laser used" is more applicable to a standard of absolute certainty. It is NOT, in my opinion, necessary to show this flawless history in order to meet the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that is why Crowns ignore such requests and why JP's don't usually entertain such arguments. I'm not saying that it is not possible to advance this argument or to be successful on it, I'm just saying that I think you will need more than just the bald assertion that possibly some device, somewhere along the line, wasn't tested/calibrated properly and therefore the radar/laser readings are unreliable.
It's unlikely that you're going to get the full manual, but you can of course ask.
It's also unlikely that you're going to get anything with respect to the device being manufactured/tested to any specific standards. What people need to remember, and I've said this before, is that the standard of proof required for a conviction is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" - this is not the same as absolute certainty. This argument about "what about the device that tested/calibrated the device that tested/calibrated the device...etc...that tested/calibrated the radar or laser used" is more applicable to a standard of absolute certainty. It is NOT, in my opinion, necessary to show this flawless history in order to meet the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that is why Crowns ignore such requests and why JP's don't usually entertain such arguments.
I'm not saying that it is not possible to advance this argument or to be successful on it, I'm just saying that I think you will need more than just the bald assertion that possibly some device, somewhere along the line, wasn't tested/calibrated properly and therefore the radar/laser readings are unreliable.
Hmm.. Would like to read about proper operation of the device..If anyone has a pdf copy of the manual please let me know. The other angle of approach that I would question is the distance, beam is ~1.5 meters at that distance. Only one reading was taken, the notes claim I was passing another vehicle but no reading of that vehicle was taken, it could be going less than the speed limit or braking. I was coming around a bend in the road and according to google maps 534m is just at or before the bend where I would come in to sight. I think it will be worth my while to go back and measure the distance and see exactly where that would put me in relation to where the cruiser was situated and what the cruiser's view would be at that distance. Maybe snap a few pictures of someone standing at the 534 meter mark. The distance and the fact that the laser was held in hand and not on a tripod - I think woudl question as too accuracy, especially considering it was dark.
Hmm.. Would like to read about proper operation of the device..If anyone has a pdf copy of the manual please let me know.
The other angle of approach that I would question is the distance, beam is ~1.5 meters at that distance. Only one reading was taken, the notes claim I was passing another vehicle but no reading of that vehicle was taken, it could be going less than the speed limit or braking. I was coming around a bend in the road and according to google maps 534m is just at or before the bend where I would come in to sight. I think it will be worth my while to go back and measure the distance and see exactly where that would put me in relation to where the cruiser was situated and what the cruiser's view would be at that distance. Maybe snap a few pictures of someone standing at the 534 meter mark. The distance and the fact that the laser was held in hand and not on a tripod - I think woudl question as too accuracy, especially considering it was dark.
A speed reading of the other vehicle isn't really relevant. If the officer noted you were passing it, it simply eliminates the possibility that the speed reading he obtained was of the other vehicle. Even if he did get a reading of the other vehicle, since you were passing it you were going at least just as fast. Accuracy argument is also somewhat difficult with lasers. Most have a scope or aiming sight, unlike radars which you just point in the general direction.
A speed reading of the other vehicle isn't really relevant. If the officer noted you were passing it, it simply eliminates the possibility that the speed reading he obtained was of the other vehicle. Even if he did get a reading of the other vehicle, since you were passing it you were going at least just as fast.
Accuracy argument is also somewhat difficult with lasers. Most have a scope or aiming sight, unlike radars which you just point in the general direction.
What about accuracy of speed if adequate testing was not performed at distance of over 500m? There seems to be plenty of case law to support that even where the driver was the sole vehicle on the road.
What about accuracy of speed if adequate testing was not performed at distance of over 500m? There seems to be plenty of case law to support that even where the driver was the sole vehicle on the road.
Have also seen in other posts where the visual ID of speeding before using the lidar is an important factor. At this distance and given the way the road is situated, I would have just come in to sight when the trigger was pulled. The notes state my speed and distance first and then go on to say the observed my pass a vehicle and slow down. Seems to me they were just sitting there with the triggered pulled and grabbed my speed first and observed me later. Can anyone shed some light on the relevance of this in a trial?
Have also seen in other posts where the visual ID of speeding before using the lidar is an important factor. At this distance and given the way the road is situated, I would have just come in to sight when the trigger was pulled. The notes state my speed and distance first and then go on to say the observed my pass a vehicle and slow down. Seems to me they were just sitting there with the triggered pulled and grabbed my speed first and observed me later. Can anyone shed some light on the relevance of this in a trial?
The lidar has a scope on it, the officer looks thru the scope which is magnified, therefore snapping a photo means nothing. Day and/or night is easy to use a lidar.
ridgid wrote:
I think it will be worth my while to go back and measure the distance and see exactly where that would put me in relation to where the cruiser was situated and what the cruiser's view would be at that distance. Maybe snap a few pictures of someone standing at the 534 meter mark. The distance and the fact that the laser was held in hand and not on a tripod - I think woudl question as too accuracy, especially considering it was dark.
The lidar has a scope on it, the officer looks thru the scope which is magnified, therefore snapping a photo means nothing. Day and/or night is easy to use a lidar.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
500m is a very long distance.....and it could be problematic. You will need to impress upon the JP that sweep error is possible at this distance, the nature of light....blah, blah. Probably not going to happen in court though. What you need to dig into is the testing of the unit. Officers need to check the device with a self test and a scope alignement check as well as a fixed distance test. If the officer only did the self test, then you can call into question his reading especially at that distance. You can find some lidar manuals online if you search, most are the same...... Good luck.
ridgid wrote:
What about accuracy of speed if adequate testing was not performed at distance of over 500m? There seems to be plenty of case law to support that even where the driver was the sole vehicle on the road.
500m is a very long distance.....and it could be problematic. You will need to impress upon the JP that sweep error is possible at this distance, the nature of light....blah, blah. Probably not going to happen in court though.
What you need to dig into is the testing of the unit. Officers need to check the device with a self test and a scope alignement check as well as a fixed distance test. If the officer only did the self test, then you can call into question his reading especially at that distance. You can find some lidar manuals online if you search, most are the same...... Good luck.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
I'll never forget being stopped in Quebec years ago. I was doing the limit (50 km) but the officer said I was doing 93. I was completely flabbergasted and asked her (politely) if it was possible her gun had caught traffic going in the opposite direction, as I was certain I wasn't speeding. She agreed, apologized and left. Radar, it seems, wasn't always so accurate. With Lidar, I think the chances for inaccuracy are greatly reduced.
I'll never forget being stopped in Quebec years ago. I was doing the limit (50 km) but the officer said I was doing 93. I was completely flabbergasted and asked her (politely) if it was possible her gun had caught traffic going in the opposite direction, as I was certain I wasn't speeding. She agreed, apologized and left. Radar, it seems, wasn't always so accurate. With Lidar, I think the chances for inaccuracy are greatly reduced.
500m is a very long distance.....and it could be problematic. routinely target vehicles around 1km with ease....RI can confirm that too! majority of units are not able to obtain the so called "sweep" error as programming prevents this. I have deliberately tried to replicate/perform the sweep error intentionally on every unit I have used with negative results every lidar I have seen requires the scope alignment check, fixed distance... many manuals alter year to year
Reflections wrote:
ridgid wrote:
What about accuracy of speed if adequate testing was not performed at distance of over 500m? There seems to be plenty of case law to support that even where the driver was the sole vehicle on the road.
500m is a very long distance.....and it could be problematic.
routinely target vehicles around 1km with ease....RI can confirm that too!
You will need to impress upon the JP that sweep error is possible at this distance, the nature of light....blah, blah. Probably not going to happen in court though.
majority of units are not able to obtain the so called "sweep" error as programming prevents this. I have deliberately tried to replicate/perform the sweep error intentionally on every unit I have used with negative results
What you need to dig into is the testing of the unit. Officers need to check the device with a self test and a scope alignement check as well as a fixed distance test. If the officer only did the self test, then you can call into question his reading especially at that distance.
every lidar I have seen requires the scope alignment check, fixed distance...
You can find some lidar manuals online if you search, most are the same...... Good luck.
many manuals alter year to year
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Wow, no point of challenging the evidence I guess or even going to court.. I will suggest that the officer's install a visa/interac terminal so I can pay on the spot next time and they don't have to wait so long for their money.. Maybe even include the 15% tip option like restaurants.
Wow, no point of challenging the evidence I guess or even going to court.. I will suggest that the officer's install a visa/interac terminal so I can pay on the spot next time and they don't have to wait so long for their money.. Maybe even include the 15% tip option like restaurants.
Back to business.. To recap, to date they have provided photo copy of notes and 4 page poor photo copies of the testing section of the manual. After receiving my initial disclosure I sent a second request, again requesting for short hand explanations and the full manual as well as model and serial number of device, and Laser Atlanta Annual Calibration Certificate. Received a letter from the prosecutor stating: 1. It is their position they have provided me with everything they are obligated to provide, if I indicate relevance of material and how I am impaired to make full answer they may reconsider. 2. With regards to short hand explanations they will be provided to me by the officer prior to the trial, again if not satisfied need to tell them how this impairs my ability to make full answer. 3. If I am not satisfied with their position I should bring an application to the court prior to the trial date so court can consider. It is now 3 weeks prior to the trial, should I respond to this letter? File an application for inadequate disclosure or just speak to the JP at trial?
Back to business.. To recap, to date they have provided photo copy of notes and 4 page poor photo copies of the testing section of the manual. After receiving my initial disclosure I sent a second request, again requesting for short hand explanations and the full manual as well as model and serial number of device, and Laser Atlanta Annual Calibration Certificate. Received a letter from the prosecutor stating:
1. It is their position they have provided me with everything they are obligated to provide, if I indicate relevance of material and how I am impaired to make full answer they may reconsider.
2. With regards to short hand explanations they will be provided to me by the officer prior to the trial, again if not satisfied need to tell them how this impairs my ability to make full answer.
3. If I am not satisfied with their position I should bring an application to the court prior to the trial date so court can consider.
It is now 3 weeks prior to the trial, should I respond to this letter? File an application for inadequate disclosure or just speak to the JP at trial?
Actually I think their response is pretty good. They've given you the opportunity to explain why you need the material. I think they're doing their due diligence. As for the requested material, here's my opinion: - Calibration Certificate: Not required. Lots of case law and precedent has settled this. Calibration certificate does not prove the device was working properly or operated correctly on the date of the alleged offence. - Model/serial number: Not required. If the manual is the same as the device that was used, disclosure has been adequate. - Full Manual: Not required; relevant parts only (testing/use). If you feel that you will not be able to make a full answer and defence without an explanation of the short hand in the notes, you should ask for an adjournment after the officer has provided it to you. However, you should also present the fact that you did ask, in advance, for the explanation and that the delay is the fault of the Prosecutor. It may work, it may not. Speeding is an absolute liability offence, so yes it is difficult to challenge. As bad as it may seem in Ontario, it's even harder to challenge it in some US states, or even in the United Kingdom. Here, if disclosure is fully satisfied, there are no errors on the ticket or notes, and it hasn't taken too long to go to trial, you can go to court and see if the officer trips up on testimony or get a plea deal. Yes I can confirm that. The sight range is well over 1 km and peering through the scope, it's easy to see if someone is zipping along and passing other vehicles... and I don't have any formal training on the devices.
Actually I think their response is pretty good. They've given you the opportunity to explain why you need the material. I think they're doing their due diligence.
As for the requested material, here's my opinion:
- Calibration Certificate: Not required. Lots of case law and precedent has settled this. Calibration certificate does not prove the device was working properly or operated correctly on the date of the alleged offence.
- Model/serial number: Not required. If the manual is the same as the device that was used, disclosure has been adequate.
- Full Manual: Not required; relevant parts only (testing/use).
If you feel that you will not be able to make a full answer and defence without an explanation of the short hand in the notes, you should ask for an adjournment after the officer has provided it to you. However, you should also present the fact that you did ask, in advance, for the explanation and that the delay is the fault of the Prosecutor. It may work, it may not.
Speeding is an absolute liability offence, so yes it is difficult to challenge. As bad as it may seem in Ontario, it's even harder to challenge it in some US states, or even in the United Kingdom. Here, if disclosure is fully satisfied, there are no errors on the ticket or notes, and it hasn't taken too long to go to trial, you can go to court and see if the officer trips up on testimony or get a plea deal.
hwybear wrote:
routinely target vehicles around 1km with ease....RI can confirm that too!
Yes I can confirm that. The sight range is well over 1 km and peering through the scope, it's easy to see if someone is zipping along and passing other vehicles... and I don't have any formal training on the devices.
* 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
Had my day.. Here's what happened.. Went up to the Prosecutor at the beginning, he had it marked that I was doing a charter application. Had me sit down. He pleaded all the others down.. The ones like mine were getting disobey sign $110 and 2 points. At the recess the prosecutor came up to me and offered me 15 over, said it was a one time deal. I told him I would think about it. Time came to make a decision and although I knew I should have gone for the 15, part of me wondered why he offered that so easily, I decided to talk to the JP about my application instead and make a learning experience. Crazy? I guess.. He was actually a very nice guy and listended to everything I had to say and was very fair. I had sent in my original disclosure request about 3 months before trial and the prosecutor was arguing it was my fault that it had gotten to the trial date where we were arguing a Sec 7 at trial. I had said that I did not recieve his final denial until 2 weeks prior to trial which was barely enough time for me to file the section 7. I argued that if had he given me everything I wanted on my first disclosure request I would have had time to prepare and everything would have been fine. Going through my list, the crown denied the existence of a calibration certificate which I know is bs because I know they exist. He was ordered to let me make an appt to see the whole manual and the officer was ordered to go through the notes with me in person. Here is the interesting part, the prosecutor asked for an adjournment and then I witnessed one of the dirtiest tricks ever. The prosecutor proposed a date about a week out, to which ofcourse I had to say there was no way I could prepare myself in a week. The JP then said I know why you are proposing that date because you want his 11b to be stopped. After that they proceeded to give me a day 3 months from now but said the delay was on my end. Is 1 week a reasonable amount of time to prepare this seems VERY unfair?? I think if I came in to 11b territory I would have to argue this tactic vigorously! Anyways, now instead of putting this to rest at 15 over like I should have I will be preparing my questioning and evidence for trial.. Will be a good experience anyways, my record is clean so I figured I would roll the dice this one time and see how I end up. Stay tuned..
Had my day.. Here's what happened..
Went up to the Prosecutor at the beginning, he had it marked that I was doing a charter application. Had me sit down.
He pleaded all the others down.. The ones like mine were getting disobey sign $110 and 2 points.
At the recess the prosecutor came up to me and offered me 15 over, said it was a one time deal. I told him I would think about it.
Time came to make a decision and although I knew I should have gone for the 15, part of me wondered why he offered that so easily, I decided to talk to the JP about my application instead and make a learning experience. Crazy? I guess.. He was actually a very nice guy and listended to everything I had to say and was very fair. I had sent in my original disclosure request about 3 months before trial and the prosecutor was arguing it was my fault that it had gotten to the trial date where we were arguing a Sec 7 at trial. I had said that I did not recieve his final denial until 2 weeks prior to trial which was barely enough time for me to file the section 7. I argued that if had he given me everything I wanted on my first disclosure request I would have had time to prepare and everything would have been fine.
Going through my list, the crown denied the existence of a calibration certificate which I know is bs because I know they exist. He was ordered to let me make an appt to see the whole manual and the officer was ordered to go through the notes with me in person.
Here is the interesting part, the prosecutor asked for an adjournment and then I witnessed one of the dirtiest tricks ever. The prosecutor proposed a date about a week out, to which ofcourse I had to say there was no way I could prepare myself in a week. The JP then said I know why you are proposing that date because you want his 11b to be stopped. After that they proceeded to give me a day 3 months from now but said the delay was on my end. Is 1 week a reasonable amount of time to prepare this seems VERY unfair?? I think if I came in to 11b territory I would have to argue this tactic vigorously!
Anyways, now instead of putting this to rest at 15 over like I should have I will be preparing my questioning and evidence for trial.. Will be a good experience anyways, my record is clean so I figured I would roll the dice this one time and see how I end up. Stay tuned..
I have a problem and not sure what the hell to do about it. Few days ago I was stopped on a street going westbound against blinding afternoon sun following the flow of traffic. I drive a taxi for living in Toronto and have ACZ driver's license. I have a perfect record both for professional as well regular demerit points. I haven't been pulled over as a matter of fact in some 15 years for…
I have recently gone to court for a speeding ticket issued by an OPP officer. As it stood, the officer forgot to sign the ticket. So at my trial, before I made a plea, I pointed this out to the justice of the peace and asked that the ticket be quashed. I was asked to produce my copy of the ticket, which I gave and the JOP then agreed with me and dismissed the case. Before he did so, the…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
So here's my situation, any advice would be appreciated.
On June 26, 2013 I received a ticket for 25 over in a 60 zone
In early October I received my notice of trial (Feb 25, 2014)
In early January I sent in my request for disclosure
In late January I received a letter to pick up my disclosure, however when I picked up my disclosure it wasn't typed (I had requested it to be) and I needed…
Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?
Scenario
- 2 vehicle accident
- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage
- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible
- a police Accident Report was completed
In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of…
I will be representing my wife at her speeding trial next week. Mostly everything is pretty much run of the mill but since she wasn't speeding we will be having her take the stand. Since this opens up the opportunity for the prosecutor to cross examine, I am just wondering if anyone here knows what kind of questions we should expect from the prosecutor in order to best prepare.
i got pulled over by a cop this morning in my kids's school zone for failure to stop at a stop sign. i am thinking of fighting this ticket, but i noticed that on the ticket itself it only says "disobey stop sign - fail to stop" and there is no mention of the demerit points. a co-worker mentioned to me that a ticket should state how many demerit points i am being docked. i know the Highway Traffic…
Alright, so this happened back awhile ago on June and I haven't appeared in Court. However, I would like some inputs and advice before I get into this battle.
Back in June I got a Speeding Ticket claiming I was going 100km/h on Blackcreek going south towards Lawrence. The Speed Limit there is 70km/h.
At this point of time, it was roughly traffic hour around 4-5PM. Coming off of the Highway, and…
Ive already done searches, read the act as best i can but still haven't read a complete answer. Where in the HTA does it state that the front license plate must be attached to the front bumper? I have it on the passenger sun visor (if ppl remember the old temp permits that taped to the pass side of windshield) i figured that this spot would be the same. However now they have got rid of…
My son was returning from school and was just entering the driveway when another vehicle hit the rear end. Police writes a ticket "fail to yield from private drive" 139(i). He is going to fight this ticket and made an application for disclosure. The trial is next week and he still hasn't received the disclosure.
He checked with the court last month and they said that they will call when disclosure…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i moved into the middle lane ahead of him to pass the slower moving car. When I accelerated, i…
So I was returning from my honeymoon in Montreal, and was cruising down the 401 just inside the Ontario/Quebec border. I was passing one of the Onroute stations and saw an OPP cruiser. I checked my speed and I was doing 120. A few kilometers up the road the cruiser pulled me over and told me I was clocked doing 132 by the aircraft. I was a little surprised to see the ticket was for the full…
I made a right turn during prohibited hours (7am-6pm) in Toronto. I was ticketed by a COP who was specially watching for that trap.
After I've received the ticket HTA144(9), I discovered one of the seven digits of my license plate was incorrectly written on my ticket. I was thinking about to make a First Attendance at the court office to see the prosecutor for a reduced charge...any advice or…
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
I am not sure if my case is really a case of " mis-use parking permit" and need some advises on whether i should fight the ticket. Here is what happened:
During the labor day long weekend, I took my parents to diner at a local shopping mall. (my father's hip was broken in 2016 and he's been on wheelchair since, the permit is in his name and I been using the permit to help him for doctor's…
I have a court date coming up where I need to subpoena one of the officers that was present when I got my ticket. The issuing officer didn't include the fact that the second one was present at the time in his report (disclosure) but did give me the second officers name and badge number after the judge told him to do it.
What I'm looking for help with is the process of me getting to…
I got pulled over on a 4 lane section fo Highway 7... Thank god I didn't get a stay at home ticket as well or my car impounded.
Officer clocked me at 156 km/h he decided not to impound my car and give me a 149 km/h since it was my first offence and he said I was polite and respectful. I would give this officer a 5/5 review if I could, very polite and respectful.
Long story short, I was driving from Toronto to Ottawa and around Napanee with my friend in two separated cars, the officer was parked on uturn. He followed us turn his light on and got between us and pulled us over, he told me that i was running at 152 km/h without showing me his LISAR. they suspended my and my friends license and impounded the two cars for 7 days. This was a Friday in January…
I'm unsure on what to do here. I was under the impression that I could request a stay on the day of trial because disclosure was not given to me in an adequate time. I requested disclosure 2x by fax, 5 months ago.
I read on ticketcombat that I had to file a motion 15 days prior to the trial to request a stay of proceedings.
Does anyone else get blinded by fog lights on rural roads? I don't seem to have a problem with them on lighted streets, but the badly aimed fog lights or ones with a poor cutoff really get to me when driving the Escort. I just came back from a 20-minute drive, and every single pickup truck had fog lights on, and forced me to focus on the bottom right of the road. My windshield is clean and…
