2 Officer Speed Trap

I received a 130 in a 100 on the 401 Easter Wknd. I have asked for early resolution (phone meeting due to distance) as the ticket is not mine. Both my wife and I witnessed the vehicle directly in front of me literally slam on the brakes and swerve into the driving lane almost losing control of their crossover in an attempt to 'dodge' the ticket which I subsequently rec'd on his behalf.

I was not travelling at 130, I had the cruise control on and would never go that fast as I am a professional driver with a spotless record.

First thing that doesn't sit right. There were two police vehicles sitting in the median. A large F250 (with cap) and a cruiser on the driver's side that was completely blocked from my view. I never touched the brakes as I was comfortable with my speed but as I drove past the OPP truck I then noticed the cruiser rolling 'out' ... also the passenger window rolling up. Can't prove it, but we'd all bet money the two of them were talking back and forth waiting for the radar to sound. ?? Probably not paying attention at all to the traffic. So if the officer in the pickup had his head turned to talk to the other officer on his left... traffic is approaching from his right... he didn't see the car's evasive action. Certainly the officer in the cruiser didn't and couldn't see anything.

I know the demerit and $$ increments that exist in speeding infractions... 130 is never an option for me. 4 points I don't deserve and money I can't afford to waste on a ticket. Thoughts suggestions welcome. I would accept a non-demerit ticket (<15 km/h) just to end this.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

A dashcam would have been a great investment.

Did the other vehicle pass you first and then slam on it's brakes? What are some more details on this other vehicle?

How fast were you actually going with cruise control set?

The good news is that you have a witness (your wife) that will testify the same thing as you, as far the fact that you were not doing 130 and to the actions of the other vehicle.

Now assuming you had cruise control set to anything from 101 to 129, then the bad news is that you have a witness (your wife) that will testify the same the thing as you, as far as the fact that you were actually speeding (even though you were not doing 130). Ontario law does not care why you were speeding, only that either YES you were or NO you weren't.

File for disclosure of the evidence against you (if you haven't already). You want the officer's notes and a copy of the relevant parts of the radar/laser manual, as well as any audio/video evidence that they have. Maybe the officer's notes have something missing.

Milkman38 wrote:

So if the officer in the pickup had his head turned to talk to the other officer on his left... traffic is approaching from his right... he didn't see the car's evasive action.

Unfortunately, I think your observations are correct, both in terms of what you saw and the officers likely waiting for a sound to go off. See what the officer's notes say but without your own video evidence, it will be hard to prove it. Your wife is a witness, and most certainly can testify, but BOTH of you will need to testify to the same thing and be unshaken on cross-examination by the Prosecutor.

You might luck out and the officer doesn't attend court, but that's rare.

I was in the driving lane, its Easter wknd so its extremely busy keep in mind, but coming up on a tr/tl I moved into the passing lane to get by it. I won't BS anyone and say that I wasn't speeding, but I will admit to going with the flow. Safer than being a rolling roadblock for everyone. 118-119 is the max speed I would ever go, but I can't say exactly what I was doing at that given moment. I didn't see the police cars in the median because I was distracted by the other car's evasive manoeuvers. I do specifically recall it was a white 4 door crossover because he got my full attention and I covered the brakes thinking there was an issue ahead.

Hoping I can just get it lowered during my early resolution. I don't have $600 to spend on a $300 ticket by hiring representation and going to court.

What I don't get is, the officer who actually wrote the ticket wasn't using the gun and never actually saw my vehicle (and quite likely neither did the other officer) and yet puts his name on the ticket based solely on what the other officer turned his head and saw? How's that work? He issues a ticket based solely on the words of another officer?

Milkman38 wrote:

I was in the driving lane, its Easter wknd so its extremely busy keep in mind, but coming up on a tr/tl I moved into the passing lane to get by it. I won't BS anyone and say that I wasn't speeding, but I will admit to going with the flow. Safer than being a rolling roadblock for everyone. 118-119 is the max speed I would ever go, but I can't say exactly what I was doing at that given moment.

Speeding is an absolute liability offense. They only care that you were speeding. You've (probably unknowingly) just admitted guilt to the charge.

Going with the flow is not going to be a defense under any circumstance.

You should probably nix the idea of your wife as a witness. She's not going to be doing you any favours.

Milkman38 wrote:

Hoping I can just get it lowered during my early resolution. I don't have $600 to spend on a $300 ticket by hiring representation and going to court.

If your ultimate goal is a reduction, it's almost a given that an offer will be made available to you.

There's nothing stopping you from requesting a trial and making a disclosure request, but I get the feeling you're content with just a reduction.

Milkman38 wrote:

What I don't get is, the officer who actually wrote the ticket wasn't using the gun and never actually saw my vehicle (and quite likely neither did the other officer) and yet puts his name on the ticket based solely on what the other officer turned his head and saw? How's that work? He issues a ticket based solely on the words of another officer?

You'd need to request disclosure to find out the details of your charge. There's no use in speculating as you can't make a case off speculation. That being said, it's perfectly normal for more than one officer to be involved with a charge, if that ends up being the case.

Still not clear what the other car was doing... it passed you and swerved into your lane and hit it's brakes?

Speeding is an absolute liability offence which means they do not care about WHY's or BUT's .... If you admit to speeding, even 1 km/h over, they will find you guilty. For insurance purposes, 1 km/h over to 30 km/h over is going to affect your insurance the same.

If one officer was operating the radar/lidar and another wrote the ticket, this is allowed, but they would both have to be in court to testify.

Choose the NOT GUILTY option requesting a TRIAL with the OFFICER PRESENT. Once you get your Notice of Trial, you can request disclosure (ALL of the officers notes and radar manual) and then go from there.

Post your disclosure back here once you get it.

I pretty much figured going to court would be a frivolous step as I really have only my testimony and my wifes. At this point, I do want a reduction. I would totally accept up to 19 over and no points. I don't want a 4 point ticket (or any for that matter) I realize anything over 100 is technically speeding, but I can't accept a ticket for 30 over when it wasn't mine to receive. Yes, I have little to no proof (I will buy a dashcam.)

While I cannot afford to pay this ticket (one of many reasons why my speeding is limited to 'going with the flow') I fear the costs of fighting it (I would get some sort of representation.) and losing would only put myself in a bigger financial hole, between the fine, costs and possible insurance increases should they find out. Not worth the gamble.

Going to court is not frivolous... it is your RIGHT. You have the right to a fair trial and the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. You and your wife both believe that you are innocent of going 130 in 100, and therefore you should not plead guilty to the charge. However, you and your wife will both probably agree that you were speeding to some degree, so if you both testify you MAY still be found guilty of speeding (just hopefully not at 130). Most people that represent themselves in court however, are usually not prepared at all and do not understand how the "system" works. If you try to play a game of chess against an expert chess player, and you do not know the rule of chess, you are 99.9% of the time going to lose! And you can complain that it is "not fair" or that "is not how it should work", but the game is over and you lost!

Anyways you need to get disclosure before you really decide how easy/hard it will be to win your case. Once you get disclosure, if the officers notes all look good and they did not miss anything then you can always try to get an early resolution meeting with prosecutor and try to get it knocked down from 130 to at least 129, instead of taking it to trial.

I think for insurance purposes, it's actually 1 over to 29 that are considered MINOR, but when it goes to 30 over that becomes MAJOR in terms of insurance. So you definitely want to try and get it down to at least 29 over as the worst case scenario.

Unless you already have several tickets and demerits on your record (or you think you might get several tickets in the next few years), I would suggest that 3 or 4 demerit points is not the issue. People get caught up in demerit points, when it is really insurance increases that you want to be concerned about.

1 to 15 over is 0 demerit points but is still considered minor infraction with insurance and can raise rates.

16 to 29 over is 3 demerit points and is also considered minor infraction with insurance and can raise rates.

30 to 49 over is 4 demerit points and is considered major infraction with insurance and can raise rates a lot more.

So you definitely want to do your best to get it down to at least 29 over to avoid the MAJOR infraction. But remember that whether it is 1 over or 29 over, it will affect your insurance the same as a minor infraction.

jsherk wrote:

I think for insurance purposes, it's actually 1 over to 29 that are considered MINOR, but when it goes to 30 over that becomes MAJOR in terms of insurance. So you definitely want to try and get it down to at least 29 over as the worst case scenario.

Always best to check with your provider as it can vary. Most seem to follow the facility insurance guidelines and set the threshold at 50 km/hr or more. Some posters have reported their insurers set the limit at 35 km/hr or more. Also note that speeding in a school zone or safety zone versus regular roadway can have a greater impact on insurance.