Hey everyone, first time offender here. So a couple of days ago I was pulled over on 401 for doing 130. It was pitch black and after I passed a couple of cars I was going to get into the right lane and slow down, but right that moment one of the cars I passed pop up behind me and flashed the lights. Officer told me I passed him doing 130. Now I don't know if he even used the radar, because as far as I know, they only use that when they're stationary and not while driving, so he judgement was probably based on intuition. I'm planning on going with the trial and request the presence of the officer, now as far as disclosure request goes, can I request the readings of the radar gun for that night? If no radar was used, would that mean the officer made the judgement himself and his claim would not be credible?
Hey everyone, first time offender here.
So a couple of days ago I was pulled over on 401 for doing 130. It was pitch black and after I passed a couple of cars I was going to get into the right lane and slow down, but right that moment one of the cars I passed pop up behind me and flashed the lights. Officer told me I passed him doing 130.
Now I don't know if he even used the radar, because as far as I know, they only use that when they're stationary and not while driving, so he judgement was probably based on intuition.
I'm planning on going with the trial and request the presence of the officer, now as far as disclosure request goes, can I request the readings of the radar gun for that night? If no radar was used, would that mean the officer made the judgement himself and his claim would not be credible?
The officer can testify that you were speeding and that he knows you were speeding because he paced you, visually estimated your speed, or used radar/laser. Any of these methods if done correctly will support a conviction. (The court will find you guilty if you admit to going 1 kilometer over the limit.) The disclosure you receive will indicate how he determined you were speeding. When you have this information you can begin to prepare a strategy.
The officer can testify that you were speeding and that he knows you were speeding because he paced you, visually estimated your speed, or used radar/laser. Any of these methods if done correctly will support a conviction. (The court will find you guilty if you admit to going 1 kilometer over the limit.) The disclosure you receive will indicate how he determined you were speeding. When you have this information you can begin to prepare a strategy.
I believe that the officer is trained to "bumper pace" other vehicles to determine their speed, which would require them to follow me for some distance, however in my case he immediately pulled in from the other lane and was catching up to me, I don't think there was enough time to for him to match pace with me to properly determine my speed before he started flashing. Would this claim help me in the trial? If the officer simply states that he matched my speed with his speedometer in the disclosure, can I even request any training material detailing exactly how they do the speed matching, to make sure he did it correctly?
ynotp wrote:
The officer can testify that you were speeding and that he knows you were speeding because he paced you, visually estimated your speed, or used radar/laser. Any of these methods if done correctly will support a conviction. (The court will find you guilty if you admit to going 1 kilometer over the limit.) The disclosure you receive will indicate how he determined you were speeding. When you have this information you can begin to prepare a strategy.
I believe that the officer is trained to "bumper pace" other vehicles to determine their speed, which would require them to follow me for some distance, however in my case he immediately pulled in from the other lane and was catching up to me, I don't think there was enough time to for him to match pace with me to properly determine my speed before he started flashing. Would this claim help me in the trial?
If the officer simply states that he matched my speed with his speedometer in the disclosure, can I even request any training material detailing exactly how they do the speed matching, to make sure he did it correctly?
Plead NOT GUILTY and request a trial with the officer present. Once you get your notice of trial, request disclosure (officers notes, make model serial number and manual for any speed measuring devices used, audio/video). Once you get disclosure post it here so we can review it.
Plead NOT GUILTY and request a trial with the officer present. Once you get your notice of trial, request disclosure (officers notes, make model serial number and manual for any speed measuring devices used, audio/video). Once you get disclosure post it here so we can review it.
"The officer can testify that you were speeding and that he knows you were speeding because he paced you, visually estimated your speed, or used radar/laser. Any of these methods if done correctly will support a conviction" No court in the land will convict on a visual estimation. Speed estimations use to be used as a part of tracking history only, which is no longer a part of tracking history. It would not have been laser as the cruiser was moving; Laser can only be used while stationary.
"The officer can testify that you were speeding and that he knows you were speeding because he paced you, visually estimated your speed, or used radar/laser. Any of these methods if done correctly will support a conviction"
No court in the land will convict on a visual estimation. Speed estimations use to be used as a part of tracking history only, which is no longer a part of tracking history. It would not have been laser as the cruiser was moving; Laser can only be used while stationary.
The officer does not need to pull in behind to pace. The officer could be going a steady speed while in front and the target vehicle gained on his vehicle and passed. "Officer told me I passed him doing 130". So who was doing the 130? the cop or the target vehicle? If the target vehicle passed doing 130 you have a radar charge. If it was the officer who was doing the 130, the target vehicle was going faster than the 130 and officer charged the driver at the 130 the officer was driving and it was a pace charge.
The officer does not need to pull in behind to pace. The officer could be going a steady speed while in front and the target vehicle gained on his vehicle and passed.
"Officer told me I passed him doing 130". So who was doing the 130? the cop or the target vehicle? If the target vehicle passed doing 130 you have a radar charge. If it was the officer who was doing the 130, the target vehicle was going faster than the 130 and officer charged the driver at the 130 the officer was driving and it was a pace charge.
Sorry to dig up this old post, I've finally managed to get my disclosure package after all this time. http://imgur.com/a/mXQvW Court date is in mid June. I'm not exactly sure what to look for that can help me in the court here. I do have a fairly clean record for the last 10 years. The 2nd image I believe is the officer's notes that indicated that the radar test was passed. Now at the time he pulled me over it was pitch dark with minimal traffic, but on his notes it indicated it was light with heavy traffic. I'm not sure what "Requal date" means but my offense date is Nov 7th 2015, at 6:41pm. Anyway, was hoping I could get some insight on this, thanks!
Sorry to dig up this old post, I've finally managed to get my disclosure package after all this time.
Court date is in mid June. I'm not exactly sure what to look for that can help me in the court here. I do have a fairly clean record for the last 10 years. The 2nd image I believe is the officer's notes that indicated that the radar test was passed. Now at the time he pulled me over it was pitch dark with minimal traffic, but on his notes it indicated it was light with heavy traffic. I'm not sure what "Requal date" means but my offense date is Nov 7th 2015, at 6:41pm.
Anyway, was hoping I could get some insight on this, thanks!
Sunset was 5:01 pm that date but was the road lit by street lights ? Requal date is the date he was requalified on the operation of the radar unit. It's likely he clocked your speed when you were behind him before you even saw him as it was an unmarked cruiser. You disagree on the volume of traffic. 6:41 pm on a Tuesday evening on Highway 401. I wasn't there but I doubt it was light, but it certainly was light when that comes between dawn and dusk. Not likely anything that will get you an acquittal but not iron clad either.
Sunset was 5:01 pm that date but was the road lit by street lights ?
Requal date is the date he was requalified on the operation of the radar unit. It's likely he clocked your speed when you were behind him before you even saw him as it was an unmarked cruiser.
You disagree on the volume of traffic. 6:41 pm on a Tuesday evening on Highway 401. I wasn't there but I doubt it was light, but it certainly was light when that comes between dawn and dusk.
Not likely anything that will get you an acquittal but not iron clad either.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !
So if you look at the pages of the radar manual they gave, the very last box says "Section 8.1 and 8.2 must be completed by the operator prior to enforcement and at the conclusion of the officer's tour of duty." Section 8.2 is the Road Test. Look at the notes you got and I see TESTED BEFORE @ 15:47 and TESTED AFTER @ 03:00 and then I see STARTUP CHECK PASSED. But then after that I see SELF-TEST blank for both before and after. And then I see SPEEDOMETER COMPARISON CHECK BEFORE 40/40 but AFTER is BLANK. When the officer testifies to anything that is in their notes, then it is very hard to bring reasonable doubt to it. However, when they testify to anything that is NOT in their notes, then it is much easier to bring reasonable doubt to what they said. Since their notes specifically have the AFTER ROAD TEST section left blank, this leaves a great opportunity to reasonable doubt as to whether they actually did it. Even if they actually say they did it, you can question them on the fact that it is specifically omitted from their notes. You will need to look up some case laws on "usual practice". These basically say that just because the officer said they did the road test afterwards and they say that is their usual practice, there is still reasonable doubt as to whether it was done or not, if it is not in their notes. And again, this disclsoure is even stronger because there an actual section to write the speeds in and it was left blank. Also, when the officer first gets on the stand, the prosecutor will ask a few questions about the officers notes and then ask the JP for permission for the officer to read from them. I would make sure you ask to quickly review what notes he has. If he has anything else besides what you got in disclosure, then you can object to the use of those things you did not get a copy of. So for example, if officer has his note book with hand written notes in it, but you did not get a copy of that notebook, then you can object and the officer should not be allowed to use it. I would also want to see the backside of the ticket where it says "ENFORECEMENT AGENCY NOTES". What you posted makes this page appear to be blank. But if there are notes on it, but your copy does not show those notes, then you could also object to the officer using them and show the JP your copy which appears to be blank.
So if you look at the pages of the radar manual they gave, the very last box says "Section 8.1 and 8.2 must be completed by the operator prior to enforcement and at the conclusion of the officer's tour of duty." Section 8.2 is the Road Test.
Look at the notes you got and I see TESTED BEFORE @ 15:47 and TESTED AFTER @ 03:00 and then I see STARTUP CHECK PASSED. But then after that I see SELF-TEST blank for both before and after. And then I see SPEEDOMETER COMPARISON CHECK BEFORE 40/40 but AFTER is BLANK.
When the officer testifies to anything that is in their notes, then it is very hard to bring reasonable doubt to it.
However, when they testify to anything that is NOT in their notes, then it is much easier to bring reasonable doubt to what they said. Since their notes specifically have the AFTER ROAD TEST section left blank, this leaves a great opportunity to reasonable doubt as to whether they actually did it. Even if they actually say they did it, you can question them on the fact that it is specifically omitted from their notes. You will need to look up some case laws on "usual practice". These basically say that just because the officer said they did the road test afterwards and they say that is their usual practice, there is still reasonable doubt as to whether it was done or not, if it is not in their notes. And again, this disclsoure is even stronger because there an actual section to write the speeds in and it was left blank.
Also, when the officer first gets on the stand, the prosecutor will ask a few questions about the officers notes and then ask the JP for permission for the officer to read from them. I would make sure you ask to quickly review what notes he has. If he has anything else besides what you got in disclosure, then you can object to the use of those things you did not get a copy of. So for example, if officer has his note book with hand written notes in it, but you did not get a copy of that notebook, then you can object and the officer should not be allowed to use it.
I would also want to see the backside of the ticket where it says "ENFORECEMENT AGENCY NOTES". What you posted makes this page appear to be blank. But if there are notes on it, but your copy does not show those notes, then you could also object to the officer using them and show the JP your copy which appears to be blank.
jsherk - first of all, thank you so much, that's some really helpful information! It definitely sheds some new light in my case and I feel a bit more confident about this now. One thing though, I'm a bit confused on how the officer testifies to what's in and not in their notes. It's going to be my 1st court appearance so I'm not sure of the proceedings, but why is it difficult to bring reasonable doubt to his notes if the after-test was clearly not indicated in his notes although he claims he did it, if I can object the usage of undisclosed notes? I mean, does he simply testifying to anything in their notes just empowers his claim, so that it kind of bypasses the whole reasonable doubt thing? Or is it more dependent on how the judge feels about it that's really not in my control?
jsherk - first of all, thank you so much, that's some really helpful information! It definitely sheds some new light in my case and I feel a bit more confident about this now.
One thing though, I'm a bit confused on how the officer testifies to what's in and not in their notes. It's going to be my 1st court appearance so I'm not sure of the proceedings, but why is it difficult to bring reasonable doubt to his notes if the after-test was clearly not indicated in his notes although he claims he did it, if I can object the usage of undisclosed notes? I mean, does he simply testifying to anything in their notes just empowers his claim, so that it kind of bypasses the whole reasonable doubt thing? Or is it more dependent on how the judge feels about it that's really not in my control?
Just a couple other points to mention (I know I am not answering your questions above yet)... Officer checked HEAVY TRAFFIC but then checked LONE TARGET. If he used radar, then this is useful in cross-examination. Now looking at the notes, maybe he did not use the radar at all and paced you instead (or maybe used radar AND paced you, but it is unclear to me). He circled PACE with the two arrows pointing the same direction, so does that mean that he used radar in MOVING/SAME-DIRECTION mode, or just followed behind you and paced you? It says LENGTH 3 SECONDS, so does this mean that he was 3 seconds behind your vehicle or that he turned the radar on for 3 seconds. If the officer paced you then all the radar stuff is really irrelevent, and the charge is much harder to beat. One thing you can question on pacing is "how far away were you" and "how long did you follow at that fixed distance"... basically if the officer was "catching up" the whole time then they can only prove they were going faster than you , but not how fast you were going. The thing you can question the accuracy of the speedometer, but they will say it matched the radar. I personally have an issue with that logic, because how can you say "the speedometer is accurate because it matched the radar, and the radar was accurate because it matched the speedometer" ... you can not compare them both to each other without one of them being verified by another outside "proven" source. But I digress, because you would need a very experienced cross-examiner to win this argument. Anyways, I would send a second disclosure request asking for: - Proof of speedometer calibration/accuracy. - Clarification of whether the speed was determined by radar only or by pacing only.
Just a couple other points to mention (I know I am not answering your questions above yet)...
Officer checked HEAVY TRAFFIC but then checked LONE TARGET. If he used radar, then this is useful in cross-examination.
Now looking at the notes, maybe he did not use the radar at all and paced you instead (or maybe used radar AND paced you, but it is unclear to me). He circled PACE with the two arrows pointing the same direction, so does that mean that he used radar in MOVING/SAME-DIRECTION mode, or just followed behind you and paced you? It says LENGTH 3 SECONDS, so does this mean that he was 3 seconds behind your vehicle or that he turned the radar on for 3 seconds.
If the officer paced you then all the radar stuff is really irrelevent, and the charge is much harder to beat. One thing you can question on pacing is "how far away were you" and "how long did you follow at that fixed distance"... basically if the officer was "catching up" the whole time then they can only prove they were going faster than you , but not how fast you were going. The thing you can question the accuracy of the speedometer, but they will say it matched the radar. I personally have an issue with that logic, because how can you say "the speedometer is accurate because it matched the radar, and the radar was accurate because it matched the speedometer" ... you can not compare them both to each other without one of them being verified by another outside "proven" source. But I digress, because you would need a very experienced cross-examiner to win this argument.
Anyways, I would send a second disclosure request asking for:
- Proof of speedometer calibration/accuracy.
- Clarification of whether the speed was determined by radar only or by pacing only.
Let's say if the officer has indeed paced me and the whole radar thing does not play any part in this, does the brightness have anything to do with his judgement? I mean he checked "light" but the fact of the matter is that it was actually completely dark out(with no highway street lights), there's an official site for nation research council Canada where it shows what time it got dark on what date, and nautical twilight end was at 18:07 on Nov 6 2015, so by 18:41 it would've been completely dark. As for the pacing distance I do remember him catching up to me from behind and stayed fix for maybe 3 seconds until he started flashing, question I guess would be does he himself remember only pacing me or actually used radar. Also, how does the heavy traffic/lone target combo play into my favor?
Let's say if the officer has indeed paced me and the whole radar thing does not play any part in this, does the brightness have anything to do with his judgement? I mean he checked "light" but the fact of the matter is that it was actually completely dark out(with no highway street lights), there's an official site for nation research council Canada where it shows what time it got dark on what date, and nautical twilight end was at 18:07 on Nov 6 2015, so by 18:41 it would've been completely dark.
As for the pacing distance I do remember him catching up to me from behind and stayed fix for maybe 3 seconds until he started flashing, question I guess would be does he himself remember only pacing me or actually used radar. Also, how does the heavy traffic/lone target combo play into my favor?
I got a speeding ticket in a speed trap for 66km/h in a 50km zone, which i do not beleive i was going that speed. I was in the right lane, and there was another vehicle in the left lane, and the officer pulled both of us over. When the officer approached my vehicle and asked for my licence and registration he mentioned that he clocked me at 66km/h and the other vehicle to my left at 72km/h. I…
I was hit while driving. It was the other guy's fault and he was charged with careless driving.
I have just received a "summons to witness". The summons threatens all sorts of dire consequences if I don't show up to court.
The problem is that I don't want to show up to court. Besides being difficult for me, the other driver is an acquaintance, and I would rather not see him get into trouble. His…
I got a ticket for not fully stop at a stop sign. I file a NOTICE OF INTENTION TO APPEAR. I requested full disclosure, I got no answer, I fax another request, no response. I went to the Persecutor office; they gave me the officer note but no video. On trial date the persecutor ask for adjournment until they get video disclosure
The second court date no video disclosure, I asked the…
Today I received a speeding infraction on shoreham drive near York University. A speed trap had been setup.
The infraction is 63 in a 40 as the officer stated it was a school zone. Also the insurance card that was in the glove box (parents car) was expired so a further infraction was issued. The officer stated that since I was a student he would cut me a break if I…
I've been stopped and fined for driving holding a communication device.
The first thing the officer said was "you were texting". I was actually in a conversation in a hands free mode (speakerphone):
"Hands-free mode allowed
(3) Despite subsections (1) and (2), a person may drive a motor vehicle on a highway while using a device described in those subsections in hands-free mode. 2009, c. 4, s. 2."
What is the requirement for stopping when a school bus is traveling down the roadway, initiates the flashing red lights while still moving but has not yet stopped? If a motorist is traveling through an intersection (through the free-flow approach, minor-street stop controlled) and an oncoming school bus initiates the lights while approaching the intersection, but is still moving and has not come…
Hi, I have a court date Oct. 21,08 for parking in the fire route of my friends building. How can i get this $100 fine reduced or eliminated? only argument i really have is that visitor parking was full and i went around a few times. I wasn't there for long either.
+
I just got a ticket for going right on red fail to stop(114[18])$180. No pedestrians were in the way. I'm not a unsafe driver, so I'm…
Hey everyone, sorry if this is the wrong section for this (i'm a new user )
Well today as I was coming home from class, I was travelling at about 116-118 and police officer was driving in the express holding up traffic and I didn't really see him. So as I go to pass in the middle lane we started going down a slight hill (before the service centre on townline exit); I didn't want to apply my…
I am new to the forum and am hoping for some guidance from forum members. Having recently been charged with Stunt Driving (speeding 157 in 100 zone on Hwy 407) and received a summons (for about a month from now), I had the following questions that I would be gracious for some feedback:
a) what is the actual process for next steps? My understanding is that when I appear at the summons, it is not a…
I currently drive a honda civic, with tinted windows. It is 35 % in the front and 20% in the back. however, i got a ticket due to a police officer said the front tints were to dark and he could not see me (at 4 pm, broad day light). Is this ticket unnecessary? and what is the legal limits?
The ticket said: Colour coating obscuring interior
I got a ticket for obstruct plate on morning of Feb 4 2009. I was driving in front of a police officer who was wearing sun glasses. He pulled me over and insisted he cannot see my plate but it was just some dirt or salt. Is it possible for me to fight the ticket? Also I went on york.ca to check the ticket but it says that the offence not found. It has been over 10 days since i got the ticket so I…
Was charged with not stopping for stop sign that I believe I stopped. I have searched the section number on the Internet and find no results for that charge. I have found HTA 136 1 A and HTA 136 1 B so what is HTA 136 1 9?
Is anybody interested in CVSA or commercial motor vehicle stuff? This was my specialty in policing. I can write some articles about weights, measures, documents, etc, if there's an audience for it.
We have a vehicle which needs to go to a repair shop before it can be licensed. The shop is 10km away. Can a licensed vehicle tow it to the shop? We are hoping to avoid paying for a lift truck to transport it.
Along the same lines, would the laws be different if a farm tractor or other slow moving vehicle were doing the towing? This is a rural property.
I had a perfect driving record. I am in the process of applying for a really good job that takes about year to go thru the application process. One of the conditions is to have a perfect driving record - spotless.
I got a ticket for "operate motor vehicle, no valid tag". The plate was expired. I was driving someone else's vehicle as a favour to them.
Both tickets can be dropped by prosecutor, because I got these tickets before and they just dropped it, when I showed a picture that I put my plate back on and I got the insurance slip.
I set a court date to fight the tickets, because I did not have time to meet with prosecutor. I…
Driving on a 80km/hr highway the car ahead hits the brakes and slows to 55, l slow down right behind him no reason to slow down traffic was moving between 80 and 90. I notice the driver is on the phone and looking through papers on the passenger seat. He begins to start to go a opp officer drives by doing 80 plus in oncoming lane turns around and says l was following to close. Told him what was…
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…
found this resource online, wanted to ask a few questions
I have my trial today, march 3rd in TOronto East
I got a speeding ticket APril 6th 2009 at 1:12am East bound on the BLoor Viaduct, 74 in a 50, officer was using Lidar and ran out in the middle of the street to stop me
the trial date is today.
I already have filed for an 11b a few weeks back by serving the prosecutor and mailing the…
Ok story starts as this. I admit, I wasn't the smartest!!! lol
I was helping people move on saturday, had a few drinks. Went out for a night dinner with the wife for date night, had a few more drinks at dinner... but nothing extreme. Got home felt tired and we had people coming over so I downed a Red Bull, first stupid mistake, then after they left i went to the bathroom and fainted, was…
Here's the situation. I entered the 401 heading east. After a minute or two I was on the left lane a few car-lengths behind a marked cruiser. He was driving annoyingly slow in the left lane, maybe 110km/h, even if that. (I saw something in the HTA that slower traffic must keep right according to the current flow.) That's why I thought it was 'safe' to pass him. After about 20 or so seconds…
So I have an vehicle which I don't drive over the winter. My birthday is in November. So, to save some cash flow before Christmas, in November 2018 I chose not to buy a sticker, knowing full well that when spring came I would still need to pay the $120 for the period November 2018 - November 2019.
Fast forward to last week, now we finally have some decent weather, I go to the ServiceOntario…
Good morning drivers, law enforcement, and traffic enthusiasts,
I recently received a ticket for "FAIL TO YIELD TO PEDESTRIAN." I was stopped at a red light in the left lane, signalling to turn left. The light turned green and as I pulled into the intersection, a pedestrian on the left crosswalk began crossing in the opposite direction. As I approached the crosswalk to complete the left turn, the…
)
