Fail to obey signs when passing an OPP cruiser

steb6s
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined:

Unread post by steb6s on

I hope this isn't considered necro-posting around here. I had something similar happen to me a few weeks ago with the same section 182(2) infraction.

I was in the Napanee area on the 401. Came upon an OPP cruiser in the left lane who couldn't seem to maintain a steady speed, travelling anywhere from 90 up to 110, but who refused to change lanes or allow anyone to pass him. Myself and a growing que of cars were stuck behind this guy because anytime anyone wanted to pass when he was slowing down to 100 or less, he'd turn on his emergency lights and prevent the pass. I saw him do this at least 5 times over a span of 15min. We were going slow enough that transports had started catching us and the road ahead was pretty much clear of traffic since we were travelling slower than the normal flow of traffic.

I passed the cop when he again slowed from 110 and I decided not to follow suit. I passed him in the right lane going 110 and when I got ahead of him, he pretty much instantly pulled in behind me and lit me up.

I'm already planning to fight this in court. He gave me a long winded speech about pulling me over for my safety, accusing me of being the type of driver that gets involved in accidents, and then concluding his diatribe by giving me some advice about passing cops and how "other officers" don't like being passed. WTF?

What I'd like to know is if his use of the emergency lights and his driving behaviour gives me grounds to file a complaint with the OPP? I think what this guy did was disgusting and an abuse of his position.


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined:
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

Unread post by racer on

No point resurrecting an old thread that is not general discussion of current issues. Much of what has been said in the topic you have originally posted this applies, but i'd rather split the thread while it's early. Every ticket is different.

As to your ticket, wait a bit, and request a disclosure. I guess you have already filed that you will dispute the charge.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


User avatar
racer
VIP
VIP
Posts: 959
Joined:
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Contact:

Unread post by racer on

steb6s wrote:What I'd like to know is if his use of the emergency lights and his driving behaviour gives me grounds to file a complaint with the OPP? I think what this guy did was disgusting and an abuse of his position.
Sound like the cop should be charged with 132 (unnecessary slow driving) and "interfering with flow of traffic". Must be a new cop on a power trip, no?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"

www.OHTA.ca & www.OntarioHighwayTrafficAct.com


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

In the disclosure request, also ask for the officer's driving and disciplinary record. If he has a history of this sort of behaviour it weakens his credibility on the witness stand.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Radar Identified wrote:In the disclosure request, also ask for the officer's driving and disciplinary record. If he has a history of this sort of behaviour it weakens his credibility on the witness stand.
Try to get a warrant for that one!!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

racer wrote:
steb6s wrote:What I'd like to know is if his use of the emergency lights and his driving behaviour gives me grounds to file a complaint with the OPP? I think what this guy did was disgusting and an abuse of his position.
Sound like the cop should be charged with 132 (unnecessary slow driving) and "interfering with flow of traffic". Must be a new cop on a power trip, no?
Unnecesary slow driving is driving below the MAXIMUM posted speed limit. Interfering with flow of traffic is not a charge. That section is intended for "interfere with traffic" ie parked on a live lane.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined:
Location: Stratford, Ontario

Unread post by Bookm on

Sounds to me like her was performing a "stunt" and should have his license yanked for a week!

Definition, “stunt”
8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,

i. driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to prevent another vehicle from passing,


User avatar
Reflections
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1490
Joined:
Location: somewhere in traffic

Moderator

Unread post by Reflections on

Bookm wrote:Sounds to me like her was performing a "stunt" and should have his license yanked for a week!

Definition, “stunt”
8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,

i. driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to prevent another vehicle from passing,
I smell a winner
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Bookm wrote:Sounds to me like her was performing a "stunt" and should have his license yanked for a week!

Definition, “stunt”
8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,

i. driving a motor vehicle in a manner that indicates an intention to prevent another vehicle from passing,
Do not see that meeting the complete definition....the part of "endanger", which there is no danger.

This is meant for 2 lane highways where Bookm is trying to pass Reflections, and Reflections keeps accelerating, preventing Bookm from passing successfully and then returning to the lane, thus endangering his life with the oncoming traffic.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined:
Location: Stratford, Ontario

Unread post by Bookm on

But it doesn't say that. Surely you're not suggesting this section of the Act isn't worded clearly enough ;)


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Bookm wrote:Surely you're not suggesting this section of the Act isn't worded clearly enough ;)
gov't law making at its best :shock: :shock:
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Reflections
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1490
Joined:
Location: somewhere in traffic

Moderator

Unread post by Reflections on

Definition, “stunt”
8. Driving a motor vehicle without due care and attention, without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway or in a manner that may endanger any person by,
Lack of consideration for others.......hhhhmmmmmmm
:evil:
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


steb6s
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined:

Unread post by steb6s on

The cop probably wasn't a rookie since he looked to be in his mid-30's/early 40's. He was definitely power tripping. The traffic stop itself took nearly 30minutes and the guy asked me rhetorically at the beginning of the stop, mid-way through, and at the end when he was giving me my ticket how much time I had lost being pulled over.

I have a question about my ticket. On the ticket itself it doesn't state what sign I was disobeying. It only says "disobey sign". That's it. That's got to give me something to work with, right?


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

On the ticket itself it doesn't state what sign I was disobeying. It only says "disobey sign".
Yes, sort of. I'm guessing he didn't say which sign it was, either. The disclosure request will be key, in that you will get the officer's notes and be able to form a defence from there, among other things. Ask for an explanation and clarification of the charge. He did write the offence location down, right?
Lack of consideration for others.......
Yep. Stunt driving. Cruiser should've been impounded, but you and I both know how likely that is...


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat on

I'm with Bear on this one. Doesn't meet the definition of stunt. The way it's written you must drive at a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed and cause any of the following:
  • lack or attention
  • lack of consideration
  • endangerment
There was no (excessive) speeding. Doesn't meet "the stunt" requirement.




Fight Your Ticket!


Post Reply

Return to “Failing to obey signs”