Doing EXACTLY 130 in a ninety zone. But only went 100

coolcustomer
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:53 pm

Doing EXACTLY 130 in a ninety zone. But only went 100

by: coolcustomer on
Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:05 pm

I didn't do it. REALLY. :D

in a 90 zone, we were doing 100, I didn't think much of it until a vehicle roared past us and suddenly put on his breaks doing 80 in front of us. The police stoped us however and slapped us with a 300 dollar ticket, we've been driving for decades without a ticket.

All the litterature I read including the HTA books pretty much want to give the impression that they don't lie or make the impression that we can't win this ourselves? Guys, does anybody know any good references? Chapters book stores has nothing. Everything else that could help is for the American's.


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

by: racer on
Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:35 pm

This forum is the best book available on the topic of dealing with OHTA charges lol:) There are more ways of beating the charge than you think. Do you know that you have to request disclosure?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


coolcustomer
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:53 pm

by: coolcustomer on
Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:37 pm

Well, me again, the originator of the thread I called the court office in Sudbury yesterday and I asked how I can change the date of my court, I work a normal job and she goes to school. AKA, I'm fighting this myself. We both should be there and you know what they told me?

The Traffic courts in Sudbury are only open on Wed and Thurs 2 times a week. I ask, can I fight on behalf of my wife then? They say we prefer that you hire counsil for that, the JP might not let you. Is this true?


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

by: racer on
Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:57 pm

No, this is not necessary. You can represent someone provided you do not charge them a fee. Only a registered paralegal/lawyer can ask a fee.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


coolcustomer
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:53 pm

by: coolcustomer on
Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:56 am

Ok, soo here is a list of questions I have from reading the above, I have to travel 450 km away to go to court and I only want to do this once. No first attendance or annything. Now I want to change my court date, they say I have to ask them in person, can I fax them over a request or something?

Secondly, when I ask for disclosure, I tried to ask by phone but they haven't gotten back to me. Is there a name for the office in particular that can help? I've been calling the court office.

Now for my evidence and how I immagine I'm going to fight this. As above I said I was going only 100kph's but the police said we did 130 in a ninety zone. There was one larger vehicle in close proximity to me at the time who just before I was stoped passed me on the passing lane and immediately slowed down to 80kph's.

Right now I don't have that police disclosure yet, so knowing this here is myMy first defense strategy.

1. Establish that the wife has a clean drivers abstract with no provious convictions. Go to the Drive test office and get an abstract.

Establishing knowledge of the long weekend.

A:) After the first We heard on the radio that the police would be in full force. We never wanted to be pulled over and since we were visiting familly we were in no hurry to get where we were going. Our age, I'm in my thirties my wife is 27

B:) The make and model of the vehicle, were driving is a 4 cylinder Dodge Caliber car on a hwy with no ascending or decending grades at the time. Going 130 kph. You would nottice in that car, but If I drove a larger vehicle, like that Dodge Charger of the same color who passed me that night, I know how hard it is to tell the difference between 100 kph's and 130.

There are two people in that car, my wife was driving at the time. Around that time, she was wearing her glasses and found the lights of the other vehicle were blinding her so she was slowing down most of the time at 10 below the limit, I was somewhat coaching her and keeping her attention until she got used to the oncomming traffic's headlights and I was watching the speed guauge right to the last minute we were pulled over.

I want to know exactly what my speed was? 130 is a pretty specific number.

The way I want to do it, since we were never doing more than 10 above the speed limit, that is how I want to plead. From the input I get, the DA would never go for it.

Would this stuff help in my case?

Thank you soo much for those who can offer assisstance.


liveontheedge
Member
Member
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 2:23 pm

by: liveontheedge on
Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:04 am

If you decide to plead down, the crown may not offer 10 over but 15 over is possible, a bit more fine but both carry no point.

If it goes to trial, the burden of proof for 30 over is on the Crown, you don't have to testify that you only did 10 over (you are already guilty, the only question left for the JP to decide is what the number associated with the conviction: 10 or 30 over).

Request disclosure is better done by fax and keep the fax receipt: officer's note, radar/ldar manual, officer's training record, repair history...

Another option is use paralegal as you are 450km from the court house.


Frozenover
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:15 pm

by: Frozenover on
Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:13 am

Based on reading your "first defense strategy" I'm going project that you'll be found guilty as a result of it. The reason being it's not really a defense strategy, it amounts more to saying "DID NOT" and will alway lose to the cops "DID TOO".

Most people are better off by taking a deal and pleading down to a lessor charge instead of going to trial. If you do go to trial then you need to create reasonable doubt, and you cannot do that by conflicting with the cops version. You need to agree with the cops version, but highlight something that the cop missed, couldn't see etc which creates doubt about the accuracy of what the cop though he saw.

In the description of your case it seems that it may have been dark and that you where passed by another car. If this is correct then your defense should focus on this aspect to create doubt that the cop pulled over the correct vehicle.

Wait for disclosure then decide how you want to proceed.


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

by: racer on
Fri Oct 16, 2009 2:19 pm

Yeah, don't call them asking for disclosure. Fax or registered mail only (or dropping it off, but that's not the case).
You want to know what, when, where, and how, and maybe why you were stopped. You already know this, but you need to know what the crown "knows".

Go to www.ticketcombat.com to read up on this.

Basically, at the trial you have to create doubt about the officer's testimony. You want to see whether he clocked you on the radar or lidar, or paced you, etc. If he used radar/lidar, were the instructions followed before and after. You will see all that in notes. Chances are the LEO wrote the ticket thinking that you being 450 km away wouldn't bother fighting it.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


coolcustomer
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:53 pm

by: coolcustomer on
Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:18 pm

Well, someones gotta keep em honnest. and yes I'm still angry. Giving them more of our taxpayer is kind of a funny way of doing it but I guess we just live in a funny world. Maybe I'll bore him into honnesty.


coolcustomer
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:53 pm

by: coolcustomer on
Sun Nov 01, 2009 5:21 pm

Say, I was wondering, I look at my ticket and the writing on it is beautiful and legible. However, the evidence that he mailed to me is terrible and barely legible. I wonder, if I can't read it, and nobody else can including the JP, can that be considered a #7 charter of rights violation? They gave me a number in my package to call with any help of the abreviations, maybe they can pull up the file and read the evidence back to me.


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

by: racer on
Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:18 pm

Ask for a typed copy in disclosure maybe?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

by: hwybear on
Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:46 pm

to keep the flow going...copied info over from

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1604.html (LOCKED thread)
coolcustomer wrote:Well, I am trying to get ahold of the prosecutors office. I was wondering, is there any chance I can plea bargain with them. The officers evidence is as follows.
----------------------------------
Stationary Hwy 69.
Bigwood Township. On West Shoulder Monitoring Nortbound Traffic
Skies Clear
Rd. Dry
3 Northbound Vehicles Approaching with Space Between Them. Middle.

D6. 04 september 09.

HRS High Rate of Speed. Compared to other two vehicles. Middle Vehicle catching up to lead (Observation) And pulling away from Last. Radar activated in fast mode. For only approaching traffic.
-Lead Vehicle 103kph.
-Middle Vehicle, 130-126kph's.
-Turned to catch up without losing sight.
-Target vehicle still second in line as it caught up to slower vehicle.

Last vehicle was a chev cavalier with a large load of cargo on a rooftop carrier.


Stoped vehicle and driver id'd. With a validated photo and drivers liscence.

------------------------------

Noting the time, it is dark outside in the middle of the country. It is hwy 69 on the way to Sudbury in the Bigwood Township A vehicle going at a high rate of speed catches up to my vehicle and is riding my bumper for a minute or so before passing me. Then suddenly he puts on his breaks and forces me to slow down at 80kph's. Then when were wondering what his game is, we found annother vehicle directly behind us, that vehicle was the police cruiser wich to our surprise pulls us over and charges us with a 40 over.

Comparing the top to the bottom, I am ensuing a mistake was made. However, I believe we were speeding slightly, as the evidence suggests 103kph's and not 130. Our cars were also similar as well as the colour, but the evidence the police provided did not state the type of vehicle the first one was. Can we write something to the prosecutor and see how this can be settled? what would be the outcome?

I don't really want to drive 450km to deal with this personally. Don't wanna hire a lawyer either.

When you own a small business, you dont hire a plumber to unclog your drain, you would never make a profit, you have to do it yourself.
Any help would be apreciated. If I have to lose, I'll just ask allot of questions and make sure I waste as much time as I can.
Radar Identified wrote:If you are unable to travel and can't hire representation, the best thing to do is to call the Prosecutor's office and discuss a plea bargain. See what they say. In this case, they'll probably be looking at something in the neighbourhood of 29 over the limit as an offer. In the discussion, try to act like you're trying to help them out and want to save them time (even though you don't).

If they don't want to bargain with you, I can see a couple of angles to push on this one, namely the possibility that he stopped the wrong vehicle (you're going to have to really meticulously cross-examine him), and it doesn't look like they gave you access to the radar manual... oh, and come to think of it... his notes don't indicate if he tested the device before and after the stop. (Test doesn't need to be immediately before and after, can be at the beginning/end of shift... but notes don't indicate that.) If you do have to go to court over it, then we can work on some questions for you to ask. Let us know how you'd like to proceed and we can try to help.
coolcustomer wrote:I didn't include the radar information. Yeah, they also gave me a page from their manual. They tested it at 7:30pm, but it dosn't say if it was tested at night The rest is pretty clear.

Angles I am thinking of.
-It's the long weekend, we knew they were inforced, it was all over the radio
-Has No speeding, crash or any other record whatsoever
-Driving a 4 cylinder vehicle to my parenths house, the other vehicle whom they're notes did not identify was a red dodge magnum, similar color, even thaught one is a hatchback and the other a sedan, they still look similar.
-In the dark in the middle of the country with no lights on, in a stationary position you cannot identify oncoming, outgoing traffic crossing your path travelling at 100kph's, no matter what the weather conditions unless you actually physically catch up to them with your cruiser. That I know for a fact.

I don't know, any other idea's? Thank you for your help.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Reflections
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
Location: somewhere in traffic

Moderator

by: Reflections on
Thu Nov 12, 2009 5:41 pm

coolcustomer wrote:They gave me a number in my package to call with any help of the abreviations, maybe they can pull up the file and read the evidence back to me.
We can translate those here...........post them up.......
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


coolcustomer
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:53 pm

by: coolcustomer on
Sat Nov 14, 2009 10:13 pm

Erick Ouellette and Jessica's Menard's Occurrence

1.There was never anybody in the front of us until the last few minutes before we were pulled over. We have been notticing a vehicle catching up to us from a couple of km's back pull up from behind at a High rate of speed. The vehicle was a red Charger or Magnum who didn't like the fact that we were only going 100kph's in a 90 zone.
2.Vehicle followed us dangerously close along with keeping his high beams on refusing to pass us, at one point, the high beams were not bothering us as the vehicle was too close for them to reach the rear windows, the nearest passing lane was coming up in less than a Km so I reassured Jessica not to worry. Jessica started slowing down slightly more as the lights of the oncoming traffic were hurting both our eyes.
3.The passing lane appears and vehicle passes us at a very high rate of speed. 2 seconds, along with a loud engine roar that only a sports car or a powerful sedan can do, then he pulls up in front of us and slows down to 80 km/h. We figured they were expressing anger at us refusing to speed.
4.The writer, Erick Ouellette looks behind and nottices the police vehicle and pulls us over.

During the Stop.

The officer looks at us and asks my wife, “Maam, where are you going, to Sudbury Jessica replied then he paused and said what's the rush u do know i caught u going 130 in a 90 zone, did you realise you were going this fast? The writer interjected, we never went more than 100 km/h”. Sir, Maam, our radar can track multiple vehicles and we caught you speeding. There are allot of large animals that cross the road at night and at your speed, if you hit one of them. But we were only going 100 Erick interjects again. We caught you when you caught up to that other car the officer said. Caught up to what car Erick said and without saying annother word left and came back 30 minutes later with the ticket.

Evidence to be Considered.

Jessica Menard, 27 years old never had any other speeding tickets or convictions which was noted in the evidence. Why are we not getting a reduction offer?

Driving an under powered 4 cylinder vehicle. We have never driven this vehicle at 130km/h. It's bad on gas and hard on the engine, this vehicle is just not ment to be driven that fast for long periods of time. Furthermore, unlike a large Sedan which i've personally seen can drive at 150kph's without the driver noticing he's speeding. Even at 120 kph's our cars higher rpms contribute to much more noise than otherwise. Hence, we know when we speed.

Labor Day Friday long weekend for two people who haven't ever had any speeding tickets. We knew they would be in full force as it's all over the radios.

Before we were beeing stopped, the opposing traffic had ambulances with their sirens and lights on and immediately followed by an 18 wheelers who coudn't stay on his side of the road, seriously, we were forced veer on the shoulder to avoid him. It is also written in the evidence that Jessica needs to wear corrective lenses. Jessica was complaining of the glare from the other vehicles lights. Her husband Erick was monitoring the speed on the dashboard the whole time from an hour before beeing pulled over.

What in the world does the Chev Cavalier have to do with evidence. The officer failed to identify the two vehicles involved. The only possibility is that his view could have been blocked from this vehicle so that the police officer missed the middle vehicle overtaking the lead. Good idea for when I do my cross examination. I do know that the passing lane likely wasn't available yet, most likely his sirens and flashers weren't on either.

Annother fact: (Maybe the most important one) I must prove to the court that there is no way to identify at night a vehicle opposising yours, even stationary and passing by at 100km's/h without a strong light source. The officers headlights beeing off while stationary is annother fact. This is not the city and there are no street lamps, the only light source possible would be on a full moon and in fact is was a new moon so it was dark. The officer would have required to catch up to the vehicles and hope the vehicle would still be speeding. If not, it's just two headlights going 130 kph's. The only thing the officer could tell would be truck, van or car, if he's lucky. Now, by the time the officer caught up to the vehicles in question, no one was speeding then. The one vehicle passed the other was somehow missed, as I mentioned earlier, probably because he was stuck behind that Chev Cav for some time.


Other question?

We never travel to Sudbury In December, January or February as the Parry Sound Snow belt is extremely treachurous and well known for storms. Do we automatically lose if we get stuck in a storm? How do we prevent this.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

by: hwybear on
Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:42 pm

coolcustomer wrote:]
-Driving a 4 cylinder vehicle to my parenths house, the other vehicle whom they're notes did not identify was a red dodge magnum, similar color, even thaught one is a hatchback and the other a sedan, they still look similar.
-In the dark in the middle of the country with no lights on, in a stationary position you cannot identify oncoming, outgoing traffic crossing your path travelling at 100kph's, no matter what the weather conditions unless you actually physically catch up to them with your cruiser. That I know for a fact.
- 4 cylinders can easily travel well above the limit
- stationary/moving at radar/lidar at night is not hard to do. Vehicle recognition and colour is easy. Reading and checking plates at night going in the opposite direction is often done
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics

Return to “Exceeding the speed limit by 30 to 49 km/h”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest