I was charged with 116 km/h in 80 km/h zone. Late at night on an empty highway, there were two officers in the patrol car, they were far ahead of me, pulled off to the shoulder and pulled me over after I passed them. I received my disclosure this morning, with a resolution meeting scheduled for tomorrow. I was literally about to call the prosecutor and ask for a new meeting date when she emailed me the disclosure. I replied with a request for a new meeting date so I could go over the notes. Her reply was very interesting: "No. There's plenty of time to read your notes, there's literally 26 lines of notes from Officer Gxxxx and a test time of the device from Officer Pxxxx. I can advise that I'm prepared to offer to reduce your charge to 95 km/h in an 80 km/h zone. That brings you down from a 4-demerit point offence, to 0-demerit points, and the fine is a total of $60.00. If this is not agreeable, your matter will proceed to trial and you'll get a trial notice in the mail with a new date. If this is agreeable, you're required to attend court tomorrow afternoon at 1:30 p.m." I was rather surprised to get the offer of 15 over 0 points, and am wondering if I got this offer because there is a fatal error or other grounds for acquittal/withdrawl. My first instinct is to take that offer and run with it. However, I had a really bad week in late May, and am facing another charge of 111 in an 80, in a nearby jurisdiction. So if there is a change for a total withdrawl/acquittal it maybe in my interest to see if I can get this one eliminated. I am attaching the notes. I am wondering if the statement in the first notes (officer G) that "observe veh coming from rear at high rate of speed, pass side mirror" was insufficient grounds to target my vehicle, given he was looking at distant headlights in a mirror, with an indirect view of the speedometer in the cruiser. Or if it should have been the officer driving making this note. Bottom line is I am not sure if they are offering me the 0 points $60 fine because they don't want to haul 2 officers into court, or because they know they have a bad ticket on their hands. Any timely feedback would be helpful as I need to make a decision by tomorrow.
I was charged with 116 km/h in 80 km/h zone. Late at night on an empty highway, there were two officers in the patrol car, they were far ahead of me, pulled off to the shoulder and pulled me over after I passed them. I received my disclosure this morning, with a resolution meeting scheduled for tomorrow. I was literally about to call the prosecutor and ask for a new meeting date when she emailed me the disclosure. I replied with a request for a new meeting date so I could go over the notes. Her reply was very interesting:
"No. There's plenty of time to read your notes, there's literally 26 lines of notes from Officer Gxxxx and a test time of the device from Officer Pxxxx.
I can advise that I'm prepared to offer to reduce your charge to 95 km/h in an 80 km/h zone. That brings you down from a 4-demerit point offence, to 0-demerit points, and the fine is a total of $60.00.
If this is not agreeable, your matter will proceed to trial and you'll get a trial notice in the mail with a new date.
If this is agreeable, you're required to attend court tomorrow afternoon at 1:30 p.m."
I was rather surprised to get the offer of 15 over 0 points, and am wondering if I got this offer because there is a fatal error or other grounds for acquittal/withdrawl. My first instinct is to take that offer and run with it. However, I had a really bad week in late May, and am facing another charge of 111 in an 80, in a nearby jurisdiction. So if there is a change for a total withdrawl/acquittal it maybe in my interest to see if I can get this one eliminated. I am attaching the notes. I am wondering if the statement in the first notes (officer G) that "observe veh coming from rear at high rate of speed, pass side mirror" was insufficient grounds to target my vehicle, given he was looking at distant headlights in a mirror, with an indirect view of the speedometer in the cruiser. Or if it should have been the officer driving making this note.
Bottom line is I am not sure if they are offering me the 0 points $60 fine because they don't want to haul 2 officers into court, or because they know they have a bad ticket on their hands. Any timely feedback would be helpful as I need to make a decision by tomorrow.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post. Register to view.
Unless you've got a way to defend yourself, I would just take the deal. The disclosure seems fine and there is nothing glaring that presents any defence for you. As for why they offered you a good deal, likely its because you didn't get any roadside reduction and have little or no record. Had you gotten a roadside reduction, I think you'd be SOL. At this point in the game, they are not worried about the officer availability because the trial will only be scheduled when both officers WILL be available. In any event, on trial dates, many jurisdictions now simply have the officers get radioed in to court after the prosecutor meets with the accused to determine whether a trial is actually going to proceed or not. That way, it avoids having a bunch of officers just sitting in court for no reason. After all, sometimes defendants don't show up, or they are seeking an adjournment, etc. This way, they just call the officer in a few minutes before the trial starts. It reduces their costs significantly and speeds things up in court. It also reduces the gamble some individuals take thinking they'll only make their decision if they see the officer in court. This way, it forces them to take a position at the start of the day or wait the rest of the day till their trial matter gets called up.
Unless you've got a way to defend yourself, I would just take the deal. The disclosure seems fine and there is nothing glaring that presents any defence for you.
As for why they offered you a good deal, likely its because you didn't get any roadside reduction and have little or no record. Had you gotten a roadside reduction, I think you'd be SOL.
At this point in the game, they are not worried about the officer availability because the trial will only be scheduled when both officers WILL be available. In any event, on trial dates, many jurisdictions now simply have the officers get radioed in to court after the prosecutor meets with the accused to determine whether a trial is actually going to proceed or not. That way, it avoids having a bunch of officers just sitting in court for no reason. After all, sometimes defendants don't show up, or they are seeking an adjournment, etc. This way, they just call the officer in a few minutes before the trial starts. It reduces their costs significantly and speeds things up in court. It also reduces the gamble some individuals take thinking they'll only make their decision if they see the officer in court. This way, it forces them to take a position at the start of the day or wait the rest of the day till their trial matter gets called up.
1 to 15km/h over is 0 demerit points but is still a minor offence and can affect your insurance. 16 to 30km/h over is 3 demerit points and is also a minor offence and can affect your insurance. You were charged with 36km/h over which is 4 demerit points and consider a MAJOR offence by insurance. The demerit points are not really the issue unless you have demerits on your record already and you are pushing the 9 to 15 demerit point range. Insurance IS the issue. So accepting 15 over can still affect your insurance, however it is only considered a minor offence as compared to 36 over which could have a much greater impact on your insurance rates. The officers don't need any grounds really to "target" you. However a good lawyer/paralegal would definitely drill the officer in cross examination about this observation (from the rear at NIGHT in the passenger mirror) but on it's own it is probably not enough to win. Also I think (although hard to read) there are two test times in the first officers notes... they must test before and after for charge to be valid. There is case law if there is only one test time so you should clarify this for sure. You have three options as far as I see it: 1 - If you can find a really good paralegal/lawyer that thinks they can win AND is willing to explain all the reasons why they think they can win, then you might consider taking it to court. 2 - You could try and fight it yourself in court, however if you do not have any experience in court there is good chance you will lose. The best way to get experience in court is to just go and do it, but in this case you get a MAJOR offence if you lose versus a minor one if you settle. 3 - Take the plea offer and try and get out of the other ticket instead.
1 to 15km/h over is 0 demerit points but is still a minor offence and can affect your insurance.
16 to 30km/h over is 3 demerit points and is also a minor offence and can affect your insurance.
You were charged with 36km/h over which is 4 demerit points and consider a MAJOR offence by insurance.
The demerit points are not really the issue unless you have demerits on your record already and you are pushing the 9 to 15 demerit point range.
Insurance IS the issue. So accepting 15 over can still affect your insurance, however it is only considered a minor offence as compared to 36 over which could have a much greater impact on your insurance rates.
The officers don't need any grounds really to "target" you. However a good lawyer/paralegal would definitely drill the officer in cross examination about this observation (from the rear at NIGHT in the passenger mirror) but on it's own it is probably not enough to win. Also I think (although hard to read) there are two test times in the first officers notes... they must test before and after for charge to be valid. There is case law if there is only one test time so you should clarify this for sure.
You have three options as far as I see it:
1 - If you can find a really good paralegal/lawyer that thinks they can win AND is willing to explain all the reasons why they think they can win, then you might consider taking it to court.
2 - You could try and fight it yourself in court, however if you do not have any experience in court there is good chance you will lose. The best way to get experience in court is to just go and do it, but in this case you get a MAJOR offence if you lose versus a minor one if you settle.
3 - Take the plea offer and try and get out of the other ticket instead.
That's not necessarily true. The OP would need to check with their provider to determine what the threshold is. Most providers seem to follow facility insurance guidelines which set the threshold for a major offence at 50 km/hr or more.
jsherk wrote:
You were charged with 36km/h over which is 4 demerit points and consider a MAJOR offence by insurance.
That's not necessarily true. The OP would need to check with their provider to determine what the threshold is. Most providers seem to follow facility insurance guidelines which set the threshold for a major offence at 50 km/hr or more.
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
