I'm pretty sure that the officer had printed out his notes now, as there is a list that goes down with Y/N's (Yes/No) and it says:
"Memo Book Notes w/ Evidence?" N
Also, my ticket was printed out, anyway he used abbreviations or what not and made it not very legible for me to read.
The ONLY thing regarding Laser usage in my disclosure is:
Ultra Lyte LRB LTI 20-20
Ser # xxxxxxxxx - CK
Test #1 0xxx - CK"
Also, I'm assuming the CK means - check, am I correct?
That is literally all the disclosure regarding the laser. I x'ed out of numbers just in case I'm not allowed to disclosure this information on public forums, not sure.
Anyway, there's no time, or second test (for after) mentioned.
Also, in addition:
R. v. Schlesinger, 2007
So what is my next step now? I feel like they do not have enough to convict me (unless there is new evidence). Should I just request additional disclosure (for what they were missing initially, legible notes, training record, etc.) and ignore that they forget the times, or should I ask for the time too and cite this case law hoping that they drop this case due to lack of evidence/precedent has been set.As noted in both Niewadomski and Roshani-Kalkhoran, supra, the testing of a high tech electronic laser device involves four separate tests. These tests require strict adherence to the manufacturerÃƒÂ¢Ã‚â‚¬Ã‚â„¢s instructions. They are decidely not trivial nor can they be done by way of cursory examination, in my view. It takes a conscious and explicit effort to follow the proper procedures. A laserÃƒÂ¢Ã‚â‚¬Ã‚â„¢s internal workings are not self-evident to an observer.
As a result, the standards which I believe that I need to apply in being satisfied that the tests have been properly done and the results of those tests verify the deviceÃƒÂ¢Ã‚â‚¬Ã‚â„¢s accuracy, must be correspondingly higher than those applied to a mouthpiece that is to be affixed to a breathalyzer prior to its use.
The standards that would satisfy this court are:
a) Evidence that the laser tests had been done by a qualified officer according to the manufacturerÃƒÂ¢Ã‚â‚¬Ã‚â„¢s specifications and that the device passed the tests and
b) Evidence of a specific time when the tests were done both before and after a speed enforcement stop .
No time was provided in Officer BrazierÃƒÂ¢Ã‚â‚¬Ã‚â„¢s testimony for his testing of the laser device prior to the stop of Mr Schlesinger.
I just want your opinions on the matter/if you think this is legitimate grounds to have the trial dropped, I've heard that if you bring up stuff like this to the prosecutor before the court case, he could simply ask the officer to write times (around the time I got the ticket) into his notes, even easier now as his seems to be already done on a computer/laptop. Should I go to trail and force the issue, or alert them in advance in hope of them dropping it?
- Similar Topics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest