Yes you should be able to talk to prosecutor before trial. You can always ask the prosecutor if the officer is there or is coming. If officer is not there then you should ask for ticket to be withdrawn.
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
Yes you should be able to talk to prosecutor before trial. You can always ask the prosecutor if the officer is there or is coming. If officer is not there then you should ask for ticket to be withdrawn.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
You should be able to speak with the prosecutor ahead of the trial. In many courts, the prosecutor either sets up a table outside the courtroom to meet with all defendants or speaks to defendants as they check in. If the prosecutor does not initiate a discussion, you should. At a bare minimum, the prosecutor will likely ask you how you intend to plead. At that point, you could say something like "Not Guilty, but I'm prepared to plead guilty to a reduced speed of 115." He or she may accept it, may say he or she needs to speak to the police officer, may make a counteroffer or may reject your offer. Many prosecutors are happy to strike deals because they finish the list more quickly. Reducing a speed by 24 km/h is far from easy, but it's worth a shot. There is no way of knowing in advance whether the officer will be there. These days, they almost never fail to show up. There needs to be a much more pressing matter for an officer not to be there. You should plan on the officer being there.
ottfarmboy wrote:
So i will get to speak to the prosecutor before the trial on court date ? or i ask for a drop on the trial ? is there a way to find out if the police officer is attending, if hes absent i the case should be closed ? how do i find out if the officer is coming. thank you
You should be able to speak with the prosecutor ahead of the trial. In many courts, the prosecutor either sets up a table outside the courtroom to meet with all defendants or speaks to defendants as they check in. If the prosecutor does not initiate a discussion, you should.
At a bare minimum, the prosecutor will likely ask you how you intend to plead. At that point, you could say something like "Not Guilty, but I'm prepared to plead guilty to a reduced speed of 115." He or she may accept it, may say he or she needs to speak to the police officer, may make a counteroffer or may reject your offer. Many prosecutors are happy to strike deals because they finish the list more quickly. Reducing a speed by 24 km/h is far from easy, but it's worth a shot.
There is no way of knowing in advance whether the officer will be there. These days, they almost never fail to show up. There needs to be a much more pressing matter for an officer not to be there. You should plan on the officer being there.
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
it is not uncommon for Prosecutors in the Northern Ontario courts to almost always run resolutions by the Officer involved before deciding whether or not to accept them. In central and Southern Ontario that is much less common.
Zatota wrote:
At a bare minimum, the prosecutor will likely ask you how you intend to plead. At that point, you could say something like "Not Guilty, but I'm prepared to plead guilty to a reduced speed of 115." He or she may accept it, may say he or she needs to speak to the police officer, may make a counteroffer or may reject your offer. Many prosecutors are happy to strike deals because they finish the list more quickly. Reducing a speed by 24 km/h is far from easy, but it's worth a shot..
it is not uncommon for Prosecutors in the Northern Ontario courts to almost always run resolutions by the Officer involved before deciding whether or not to accept them. In central and Southern Ontario that is much less common.
The content of this post is not legal advice. Legal advice can only be provided after a licenced paralegal has been retained, spoken with you directly, and reviewed the documents related to your case.
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
That's exactly what happened the one time I faced a speeding trial in Muskoka. I had requested a French trial, figuring the officer wouldn't show up. Of course, I'd forgotten there's more French in Northern Ontario than in the GTA. I had been charged with driving 100 in an 80 zone (I thought it was 90, but it happens). When I spoke with the prosecutor, I offered to plead guilty to 95. He said he'd check with the officer. He came back a few minutes later and said the officer was only willing to reduce it to 99 (wow...big break!!!). I then asked the prosecutor to ask her again and to tell her that if she said no again, I was prepared to cross-examine her all day and tie her up all day. I said my day was already shot as I'd driving up from the GTA. He told me I couldn't do that. I reminded him I could so long as my questions were relevant and non-repetitive. I also reminded him that because the officer didn't speak French, everything would take longer because of the interpreter. I told him to ensure he explained to the officer that she would be spending the day with me in court. He came back and said the officer would still only go to 99. So I told him to get ready for a long day and to suggest the officer get ready for a long day. Finally, about ten minutes before the trial, the prosecutor said he'd spoken to the officer again and she'd, at last, agreed to 95. She was clearly not happy. Afterwards, I saw the officer outside. I don't know if she followed me or just happened to be back at her car as I was leaving. She told me it's illegal to threaten a police officer. I said, "I didn't threaten anyone. I made a promise." And I walked away.
OTD Legal wrote:
it is not uncommon for Prosecutors in the Northern Ontario courts to almost always run resolutions by the Officer involved before deciding whether or not to accept them. In central and Southern Ontario that is much less common.
That's exactly what happened the one time I faced a speeding trial in Muskoka. I had requested a French trial, figuring the officer wouldn't show up. Of course, I'd forgotten there's more French in Northern Ontario than in the GTA.
I had been charged with driving 100 in an 80 zone (I thought it was 90, but it happens). When I spoke with the prosecutor, I offered to plead guilty to 95. He said he'd check with the officer. He came back a few minutes later and said the officer was only willing to reduce it to 99 (wow...big break!!!). I then asked the prosecutor to ask her again and to tell her that if she said no again, I was prepared to cross-examine her all day and tie her up all day. I said my day was already shot as I'd driving up from the GTA. He told me I couldn't do that. I reminded him I could so long as my questions were relevant and non-repetitive. I also reminded him that because the officer didn't speak French, everything would take longer because of the interpreter. I told him to ensure he explained to the officer that she would be spending the day with me in court. He came back and said the officer would still only go to 99. So I told him to get ready for a long day and to suggest the officer get ready for a long day. Finally, about ten minutes before the trial, the prosecutor said he'd spoken to the officer again and she'd, at last, agreed to 95. She was clearly not happy.
Afterwards, I saw the officer outside. I don't know if she followed me or just happened to be back at her car as I was leaving. She told me it's illegal to threaten a police officer. I said, "I didn't threaten anyone. I made a promise." And I walked away.
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
You got lucky with the officer. Any of the coppers I know would have said bring it on.....we get paid to be in court, I couldn't give a hoot how long you keep me on the stand and the JPs I know would have shut you down pretty quickly.
You got lucky with the officer. Any of the coppers I know would have said bring it on.....we get paid to be in court, I couldn't give a hoot how long you keep me on the stand and the JPs I know would have shut you down pretty quickly.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
My guess is the prosecutor didn't want to stay any longer than necessary and didn't want the first list to run into the second. Perhaps he persuaded her to agree. Either way, I was happy to be out of there.
My guess is the prosecutor didn't want to stay any longer than necessary and didn't want the first list to run into the second. Perhaps he persuaded her to agree. Either way, I was happy to be out of there.
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
Advantages of lidar over radar Radar has wide signal beam divergence, so that an individual vehicle cannot be targeted, requiring significant operator skill, training and certification in order to visually estimate speed so as to locate an offender in a traffic stream, and offenders may use the defence that some other vehicle was offending. Radar will register the speed of any object in its field, for example a tree swaying or an airplane passing overhead. Lidar has a narrow beam, and easily targets an individual vehicle, thereby eliminating the need for visual estimation, and records an image of the license plate at the same instant as recording the speed violation. Speed estimation takes less than half a second which together with the narrow, targeted beam results in offending vehicles having little warning even when using an evasion device. Lidar can measure the distance between vehicles to detect 'too close' (tailgating) infringements. The speed of a vehicle in the shadow of another vehicle cannot be measured <source:wiki> Just a quick note, this defence won't likely fly as LIDAR has a very narrow beam. This is in contrast to RADAR where the beam is very wide and it can be difficult to tell which vehicle is returning the speed reading (if there are multiple vehicles in the area)
Advantages of lidar over radar
Radar has wide signal beam divergence, so that an individual vehicle cannot be targeted, requiring significant operator skill, training and certification in order to visually estimate speed so as to locate an offender in a traffic stream, and offenders may use the defence that some other vehicle was offending. Radar will register the speed of any object in its field, for example a tree swaying or an airplane passing overhead.
Lidar has a narrow beam, and easily targets an individual vehicle, thereby eliminating the need for visual estimation, and records an image of the license plate at the same instant as recording the speed violation. Speed estimation takes less than half a second which together with the narrow, targeted beam results in offending vehicles having little warning even when using an evasion device. Lidar can measure the distance between vehicles to detect 'too close' (tailgating) infringements. The speed of a vehicle in the shadow of another vehicle cannot be measured
<source:wiki>
lolwut wrote:
ottfarmboy wrote:
Before i got the disclosure, i wanted to fight the ticket by arguing that 1) the speed recorded with the LIDAR was not my speed as there was other cars around me at the time,
Just a quick note, this defence won't likely fly as LIDAR has a very narrow beam. This is in contrast to RADAR where the beam is very wide and it can be difficult to tell which vehicle is returning the speed reading (if there are multiple vehicles in the area)
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
1- Radar can target an individual vehicle. 2-Radar will not register the speed of "any" object in its field. It most certainly won't pick up a tree swaying. 3-Lidar does not record an image of the licence plate unless that manufacture makes a camera attachment for that particular lidar (not used in Ontario to my knowledge) and it certainly doesn't measure the distance between vehicles. (It will measure the distance to a single vehicle though. Apparently if it's on wiki it must be true!
1- Radar can target an individual vehicle.
2-Radar will not register the speed of "any" object in its field. It most certainly won't pick up a tree swaying.
3-Lidar does not record an image of the licence plate unless that manufacture makes a camera attachment for that particular lidar (not used in Ontario to my knowledge) and it certainly doesn't measure the distance between vehicles. (It will measure the distance to a single vehicle though.
Apparently if it's on wiki it must be true!
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
Once the ticket is written and served, it is NOT the officers call on how to proceed. It is fully up to the prosecutor. The prosecutor does not need the officers permission to reduce it or withdraw it.
Once the ticket is written and served, it is NOT the officers call on how to proceed. It is fully up to the prosecutor. The prosecutor does not need the officers permission to reduce it or withdraw it.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
Radar can not target an individual vehicle. The beam is wide and most units now will tell you the speed of the fastest vehicle in the beam and also the speed of the strongest signal in the beam. However it can NOT tell the officer which vehicle is which. The officer must visually guess which vehicle is triggering which speed reading. Obviously if there is only one vehicle on the road, the assumption is that is the vehicle that is triggering the speed reading. Radar works on doppler shift, so it can measure the speed of anything moving that bounces back a signal. But most radars have a minimum speed they can measure, so the object has to be moving faster than this minimum speed (usually something like 15) AND it has to bounce back a big enough signal to measured. So theoretically it is possible to measure a moving tree (swaying back and forth) but most likely it would not register as the speed would not be high enough and the bounce back signal would be too weak (signal would be dispersed/absorbed by rough surface of tree). Things like planes could definitely be measured, however there is distance limitation to how far away they can be, so this would most likely only happen if there was an airport very close by and planes were taking off and landing. Lidar, to my knowledge, does not take a picture of the license/target although that could be theoretically possible and maybe there are some models that do that. Lidar measures the distance from the lidar unit to the target only. It can NOT measure the distance between two vehicles. Wiki is wrong.
Radar can not target an individual vehicle. The beam is wide and most units now will tell you the speed of the fastest vehicle in the beam and also the speed of the strongest signal in the beam. However it can NOT tell the officer which vehicle is which. The officer must visually guess which vehicle is triggering which speed reading. Obviously if there is only one vehicle on the road, the assumption is that is the vehicle that is triggering the speed reading.
Radar works on doppler shift, so it can measure the speed of anything moving that bounces back a signal. But most radars have a minimum speed they can measure, so the object has to be moving faster than this minimum speed (usually something like 15) AND it has to bounce back a big enough signal to measured. So theoretically it is possible to measure a moving tree (swaying back and forth) but most likely it would not register as the speed would not be high enough and the bounce back signal would be too weak (signal would be dispersed/absorbed by rough surface of tree). Things like planes could definitely be measured, however there is distance limitation to how far away they can be, so this would most likely only happen if there was an airport very close by and planes were taking off and landing.
Lidar, to my knowledge, does not take a picture of the license/target although that could be theoretically possible and maybe there are some models that do that. Lidar measures the distance from the lidar unit to the target only. It can NOT measure the distance between two vehicles. Wiki is wrong.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
As our friend OTD Legal pointed out, it's not uncommon for prosecutors in Northern Ontario to check with the officer first (my case was in Muskoka). I have occasionally seen prosecutors ask officers in the GTA if they agree with a proposed deal.
jsherk wrote:
Once the ticket is written and served, it is NOT the officers call on how to proceed. It is fully up to the prosecutor. The prosecutor does not need the officers permission to reduce it or withdraw it.
As our friend OTD Legal pointed out, it's not uncommon for prosecutors in Northern Ontario to check with the officer first (my case was in Muskoka). I have occasionally seen prosecutors ask officers in the GTA if they agree with a proposed deal.
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
There's various sources for LIDAR, not being able to post links (I got told of for that last time) as below "The "Distance Between Cars" feature, or DBC, is an optional feature that can be integrated into the firmware capabilities of LTI's Marksman and Ultralyte laser guns. This special operating mode is used to help enforce laws against tailgating by measuring the time and distance between two moving vehicles. Although DBC technology has been available since 1995, up until recently it has been mostly restricted to foreign markets. However, recently this feature has gained interest in the US, and it is reportedly being used or tested in a number of US jurisdictions, including some areas of Oregon, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Tennessee. One NHTSA research report describes the basic process required for taking a DBC measurement: "
There's various sources for LIDAR,
not being able to post links (I got told of for that last time)
as below
"The "Distance Between Cars" feature, or DBC, is an optional feature that can be integrated into the firmware capabilities of LTI's Marksman and Ultralyte laser guns. This special operating mode is used to help enforce laws against tailgating by measuring the time and distance between two moving vehicles.
Although DBC technology has been available since 1995, up until recently it has been mostly restricted to foreign markets. However, recently this feature has gained interest in the US, and it is reportedly being used or tested in a number of US jurisdictions, including some areas of Oregon, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Tennessee.
One NHTSA research report describes the basic process required for taking a DBC measurement: "
Decatur wrote:
1- Radar can target an individual vehicle.
2-Radar will not register the speed of "any" object in its field. It most certainly won't pick up a tree swaying.
3-Lidar does not record an image of the licence plate unless that manufacture makes a camera attachment for that particular lidar (not used in Ontario to my knowledge) and it certainly doesn't measure the distance between vehicles. (It will measure the distance to a single vehicle though.
Apparently if it's on wiki it must be true!
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
There's several sites regarding Lidar not just wiki
There's several sites regarding Lidar not just wiki
jsherk wrote:
Lidar, to my knowledge, does not take a picture of the license/target although that could be theoretically possible and maybe there are some models that do that. Lidar measures the distance from the lidar unit to the target only. It can NOT measure the distance between two vehicles. Wiki is wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
Well I stand corrected... DBC is an available feature on some LIDAR. Learn something new everyday!
Well I stand corrected... DBC is an available feature on some LIDAR. Learn something new everyday!
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++
Re: Trying to ask for additional disclosure what should i do
:)
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
Similar Topics
Featured Topics
130 in 100 zone, 5 hours away
I got a speeding ticket on the 401 by Cornwall. The officer said I was going 140 initially then dropped it to 130 (for the record I don't believe for a second I was going 140, that's way faster than I would ever intentionally drive). I filled out the info on the back of the notice to request a…
Something feels fishy with my stunt driving charge
I was recently charged with stunt driving on a 60kmh road. When I was pulled over, the officer told me I was going almost 100kmh (still 40kmh above the limit) but was charging me for stunt driving because I accelerated quickly from an intersection on an empty road (in a straight line). I know…
disobey sign staines rd & steeles ave
Hi everyone,
what to do about a an illegal right turn onto steeles from staines rd
got the ticket around october of last year
put it to trial
so there is a big mess of cars at this intersection and I see a cop outside standing directing traffic with a huge row of cars pulled over to the side, through…
Pursuit rating of non-domestic vehicles
Are any non-domestic vehicles "pursuit-rated" in North America? Also have the Michigan State Police (this is relevant because apparently they have the most accepted selection/testing process) tested any of them to see if they meet their criteria? Just curious...
Quebec also has "Street Racing" legislation
Ottawa, Canada (AHN) - Beginning Tuesday, or April Fool's Day 2008, fines on Quebec drivers caught overspeeding will be doubled. It is not only the money penalty that will go up, but also demerit points.
The new law, Bill 42, is similar to Ontario's street racing rule. It stipulates fines for…
Speeding - what should the set fine and total payable be?
Hi,
A friend got a ticket Jan. 9th of this year for doing 110 kph in a 90 kph zone, so 20 over.
What should the set fine and total payable read?
It's confusing to me, as the prescribed fine under HTA s.128 is different than the set fine enumerated by the Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice.
Wh…
First speeding ticket, OPP officer claims 40km/h on 401.
An OPP officer ticketed me claiming I was going 40km/h over the limit (140km/km) on my way home with a few friends on the 401. This is my first ever speeding offense. Although I am sure I was over the limit, I am almost certain that I was not going 40 over, more realistically closer to 30 over. The…
168 in 100 zone. 400
Hi Guys,
Yesterday night I was charged for stunt driving (excess over 50km/h) and I have a few inquiries. I'm sure you've all heard the same story, but the unmarked cop in an SUV was tailing me for a good 2-3 minutes as I was travelling 120~135 km/h. Then as he came close I decided to boot it up…
Disobey stop sign - fail to stop
I've been reading this site while waiting for my court date. My court date came in 2 weeks ago, and it is for August 22, 2011.
Brief first, than charge.
The Brief
Leaving my house to go to friends going away party.
Exit drive way, drive about 2/10s of a kilometer to stop sign. This is a stop sign I…
Received 3 demerit points in Quebec on zero tolerance
I had a speeding ticket in May 2013 which brought me to 9 demerit points out of 15. I received a letter and had to attend an interview. Due to a history of speeding tickets and a previous interview a few years prior, the interviewer decided to put me on zero tolerance for a year. Meaning if I…
