speeding 31km/h

ontarian6
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

speeding 31km/h

Unread post by ontarian6 on

Hello,

on november 2015 i recieved a speeding ticket for going 91km/h on a 60 road.
I requested disclosure and this is what the notes say:
-I was southbound kennedy road in the passing lane south of mcnicoll avenue
-2 lanes northbound southbound posted 60km/h zone
-4284 bill mobile front antenna opposite direction test 6am-8:40am Good
-motor vechicle northbound in the passing lane. high rate of speed only vechile on the road way.
Toyota camry silver

My questions are does the 6am-8:40am good mean that the officier tested the device at 6 am and then at 8:40am?
Also the officier did not take note of the weather for that day, very dense fog.

Here is a brief summary of what happened in my perspective. I was going northbound kennedy. On the right lane when i noticed a car behind me speeding up towards me,
i could not make out what car was following me because of the fog, so i figured my best move was to go on to the passing lane to let the car pass. But that car did not pass and
came into the passing lane with me, at this time i may have panicked and speed up. It wasn't until i saw a red light that i stopped and noticed that it was a cop car behind me and that's
when the sirens came on...
Also to note the cruiser did not have its headlights on.

Would ommiting the fog in the notes be enough to drop this case? Or would the cop speeding up behind me be enough to classify it as an emergency to drop the case, unlikely?
If i talk to the proescutor giving my side of the story would it hurt my case or help with a plea deal.
I know this was extremely long and i appreciate the fact that anyone has read it to the end.


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by argyll on

Why would you move into the passing lane and not stay where you were to let the other car overtake you ?

The fog will have no bearing on the case and you can't claim an emergency due to a faster vehicle behind you when you effectively make a lane change to block its ability to overtake you.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

6am-8:40am ... not sure what this means. It could mean he tested it at 6 and then again at 8:40? Or it could mean that he tested it once sometime between 6 and 8:40? What time did he pull you over (time on your ticket)?

Weather is mostly irrelevent to your case and officer omitting it will not get your case dropped.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


ontarian6
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by ontarian6 on

thanks for the reply guys
argyll wrote:Why would you move into the passing lane and not stay where you were to let the other car overtake you ?

The fog will have no bearing on the case and you can't claim an emergency due to a faster vehicle behind you when you effectively make a lane change to block its ability to overtake you.
the car was initially in the same lane as I was and did not make any attempt to lane change first, but it was coming really close towards me. There was no indication that it was a police car, all i can see from my rear window was a shadow of a vechile approaching me. This vechile was not an "undercover" vechile. If the vechile was in the passing lane to begin with i wouldn't have bothered making the lane change.

jsherk wrote:6am-8:40am ... not sure what this means. It could mean he tested it at 6 and then again at 8:40? Or it could mean that he tested it once sometime between 6 and 8:40? What time did he pull you over (time on your ticket)?

Weather is mostly irrelevent to your case and officer omitting it will not get your case dropped.
i was pulled over at 8:35am and it says so on the ticket. Hence why i am somewhat confused by the 8:40 time.

Thanks for the feedback guys, also i would like to note that environmental canada issued a fog advisory for southern ontario that day. However i don't know if including this will help my case but i guess it would not hurt.


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

Can you scan and post all the disclosure you received (with personal info blacked out)?
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


ontarian6
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by ontarian6 on

jsherk wrote:Can you scan and post all the disclosure you received (with personal info blacked out)?
http://imgur.com/a/NyVU8 this was what i was given when i requested disclosure along with a manual for the radar

Any feedback would be appreciated, thank you


ontarian6
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by ontarian6 on

also have this under the section of additional information don't know if this would be of any use http://imgur.com/3z8Lzbl


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

Is the ticket handwritten, or is it electronic ticket (computer printed)?
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


UnluckyDuck
Member
Member
Posts: 201
Joined:

Unread post by UnluckyDuck on

jsherk wrote:Is the ticket handwritten, or is it electronic ticket (computer printed)?
Based on the disclosure provided, it was an electronic ticket.


ontarian6
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by ontarian6 on

the ticket is electronically printed


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

Did they give you more pages of the manual than just the cover page?

So my question would be, why are the test times written down together. There should have been an entry at 6am saying it was tested and then another after they wrote the ticket.

Also, fog can cause errors with radar as the moisture reflects the signal.

Anyways, these would be a couple areas that I would attack on cross-examination, but certainly no guarantee of a win.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


User avatar
Decatur
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 697
Joined:

Posting Awards

Moderator

Unread post by Decatur on

Fog does not cause errors with radar or lidar. It simply reduces the range at which targets can be read.


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

Yes, Decatur is right. I somehow had it in my head that fog was listed in the radar manuals as a source of interference, but I checked and it is not! Sorry.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


ontarian6
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by ontarian6 on

jsherk wrote:Yes, Decatur is right. I somehow had it in my head that fog was listed in the radar manuals as a source of interference, but I checked and it is not! Sorry.
Yes i was provided with the full manual and I also believe that the fog should not cause the radar to create any errors. However in the manual it states under Natural Influences, Inclement weather or slick road surfaces may also affect the patrol display. A patrol speed comparison with the speedometer is required. But he should not have been able to make this comparison since i was headed northbound and the officier was headed southbound. If he did act accordingly to the manual it was not written in the notes.

Lastly i find it a bit odd that he would say that I am the only car on the road way at 8:35am in the morning on a wednesday. when theres a school on kennedy and mcnicoil less than 30 seconds away.






Post Reply

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