I was pulled over going 145kmph and had it reduced to 135kmph (on the 401). The location that the officer wrote down was the closest street that exited off of the 401 and also wrote the name of the town. However... I was basically radared by the "border" of the 2 towns and I believe I was closer to the next street up ahead. As well, I believe I was in the next town. So the location of the ticket would be wrong. Is this considered a fatal error or no?

Also, if the officer doesn't show up, is it an automatic victory for me?

Thanks.

At this point until you receive a trial date and request disclosure you will not have a great idea of what the officer will say when they testify. Even if you disagree with the location on the ticket what would be your plan? My magic 8 ball tells me no if you plan on saying "Your worship I was in fact speeding but the officer was incorrect about the exact location so you're gonna have to toss this one."

The officer not showing might get you off but it is not unusual for the prosecutor to ask for and be granted a request to reschedule the trial.

My trial is next month. I didn't get disclosure cause I thought this could increase the odds of the officer showing up. I've been in court once before and noticed there were 1-2 cops only for like 12 cases? So it seems like cops don't show up the majority of the time. Then again, this was an OPP officer. He was however, very formal and seemed like he had pretty poor communication skills.

So anyway, what do you guys suggest I do? Is this considered a fatal error based on the location? I'm planning on having a map printed out so I can show the area right before the border (as it is an uphill) indiciating that it's not possible for a car to park there.

If you don't have disclosure and receive it at trial the delay will be counted against you eliminating the possibility an 11b charter challenge. Without disclosure any defense is like playing cards without asking to see the other players hand. The rules say that upon reasonable request you are entitled to see the evidence against you before you go to trial.

You need to ask yourself what result are you looking to obtain? A further reduction? (that may be offered to you before trial) A dismissal? (that will require you analyzing the evidence and coming up with a viable strategy if one should exist)

Writing the wrong address on the ticket would only be problematic if the address did not exist at all (like if it said northbound 401 in Barrie). If you go to trial you would have to prove that the offence took place elsewhere unless the officer does it for you which will not happen. Most fatal errors can be amended in court; perform a search on fatal errors to better familiarize yourself with them if you plan on going that route as there are different ways of handling them.

If you are counting on the officer not attending court I wouldn't hold your breath. Police officers are usually paid overtime and are required to attend court, they seldom miss court. Court is scheduled so they can attend several trials at once.

ynotp wrote:

If you don't have disclosure and receive it at trial the delay will be counted against you eliminating the possibility an 11b charter challenge. Without disclosure any defense is like playing cards without asking to see the other players hand. The rules say that upon reasonable request you are entitled to see the evidence against you before you go to trial.

You need to ask yourself what result are you looking to obtain? A further reduction? (that may be offered to you before trial) A dismissal? (that will require you analyzing the evidence and coming up with a viable strategy if one should exist)

Writing the wrong address on the ticket would only be problematic if the address did not exist at all (like if it said northbound 401 in Barrie). If you go to trial you would have to prove that the offence took place elsewhere unless the officer does it for you which will not happen. Most fatal errors can be amended in court; perform a search on fatal errors to better familiarize yourself with them if you plan on going that route as there are different ways of handling them.

If you are counting on the officer not attending court I wouldn't hold your breath. Police officers are usually paid overtime and are required to attend court, they seldom miss court. Court is scheduled so they can attend several trials at once.

So what sort of strategy would exist for a dismissal in this case?

And last time only 1 or 2 cops were in the court room and several cases were withdrawn due to the cop not being there. Do I just take a look around and if he's not there then go forward with a trial? which will lead to the case being withdrawn?

metal9x wrote:

My trial is next month. I didn't get disclosure cause I thought this could increase the odds of the officer showing up. I've been in court once before and noticed there were 1-2 cops only for like 12 cases? So it seems like cops don't show up the majority of the time. Then again, this was an OPP officer. He was however, very formal and seemed like he had pretty poor communication skills.

Trials are scheduled in blocks and anyone charged by the same officer will likely be in that block all at once. Usually you'll only see 1-3 officers in a scheduled block because there are multiple cases there regarding the same officer. If they showed up one at a time, an officer would be in court every day of his life.

Not asking for disclosure and then arguing how/when/where the officer recorded your speed isn't a good strategy. You're running on assumptions, not facts.

What if I try tell the prosecutor that he got the location wrong and ask for 29kmph over (minor conviction) IF the officer is there or IF the crown refuses to reduce it below 30kmph over (major conviction)?

If he isn't there, just go ahead with a trial anyway.

Basically, 130 and 145 is the same in terms of insurance rates since it's all a major conviction anyway. So it seems like if I can't get a reduction below 130, then a trial is a good option.

Thoughts on this basic strategy?

metal9x wrote:

What if I try tell the prosecutor that he got the location wrong

You haven't asked for disclosure. You don't know for certain where your speed was recorded. You are assuming things by what you saw. That information would be located in your disclosure. You can't just assume these things going into trial.

metal9x wrote:

and ask for 29kmph over (minor conviction) IF the officer is there or IF the crown refuses to reduce it below 30kmph over (major conviction)?

They may offer you that deal just for showing up. It's up to the prosecutor. 30+ isn't seen as a major conviction to most insurance companies anyways. While it is up to the individual company, you won't see a major impact until you reach 50 and over.

I thought 16-29 over was minor and 30-49 was major? do insurance companies check the actual speed?

metal9x wrote:

I thought 16-29 over was minor and 30-49 was major? do insurance companies check the actual speed?

Yes. Most consider 50+ a major offence, but I've heard some start at 35+. Verify with your provider what the threshold is.

Okay so with the trial being in 3 weeks, is it too late to get disclosure?

You can still request disclosure, and I would do that ASAP, however it probably won't be ready in time for your court date. Instead you will probably get it at your court date and then you will be granted an adjournment so you can review it. You won't be able to count the time during the adjournment towards an 11B challenge (a motion to have your charges stayed due to unreasonable delay) because the delay will be attributed to you.