In a nutshell, in York Region, ran a stale yellow, cop was on a 407 off ramp and tickets me for red light. 2 week old pink slip, I forgot I put the new behind the expired one so I got a ticket for that as well. :lol: Had the first court date adjourned because I did not receive disclosure. I used the Ticketcombat template and faxed it over, they told me I never left a phone number. No surprise there, I figured they want me to pick it up. Gave it to me day of court and asked if I wanted to look it over, I politely declined and said I needed time to review disclosure. I requested in car camera video and typed notes, all I received was written notes and my driving abstract. I made another request for disclosure but haven't heard back from them regarding anything. I have the court date coming up in 2 weeks and wanted some advice on how to proceed? Should I request disclosure again? This is honestly dragging on for so long now and I don't want to just have to adjourn again. Thanks in advance.
In a nutshell, in York Region, ran a stale yellow, cop was on a 407 off ramp and tickets me for red light. 2 week old pink slip, I forgot I put the new behind the expired one so I got a ticket for that as well.
Had the first court date adjourned because I did not receive disclosure. I used the Ticketcombat template and faxed it over, they told me I never left a phone number. No surprise there, I figured they want me to pick it up. Gave it to me day of court and asked if I wanted to look it over, I politely declined and said I needed time to review disclosure. I requested in car camera video and typed notes, all I received was written notes and my driving abstract. I made another request for disclosure but haven't heard back from them regarding anything.
I have the court date coming up in 2 weeks and wanted some advice on how to proceed? Should I request disclosure again? This is honestly dragging on for so long now and I don't want to just have to adjourn again.
You usually don't get typed notes on a first request. It's hard to argue you can't read what you haven't seen. All parties were in the same room when you received your disclosure package. If you needed clarification, it could and would have been provided right then and there. It doesn't take much to know a set of hand written notes aren't legible. If you wanted video, it doesn't take much to see your package doesn't include any. If the disclosure package wasn't to your liking, it should have been brought to attention. You would then make your argument for why you need what you need. Is there a specific reason you feel there is any video? If it doesn't exist, it obviously wont be provided. You're the one who is going to be considered wasting the courts time, not the other way around. If you used the ticketcombat template (bloated irrelevant requests and all) and didn't at the very least leave an email address, that's going to be on you. If you wait until you've left the court to make requests for things that could have easily been squared while you were there, that's also going to be on you. Be prepared for an annoyed JP.
You usually don't get typed notes on a first request. It's hard to argue you can't read what you haven't seen.
All parties were in the same room when you received your disclosure package. If you needed clarification, it could and would have been provided right then and there. It doesn't take much to know a set of hand written notes aren't legible. If you wanted video, it doesn't take much to see your package doesn't include any. If the disclosure package wasn't to your liking, it should have been brought to attention. You would then make your argument for why you need what you need.
Is there a specific reason you feel there is any video? If it doesn't exist, it obviously wont be provided.
You're the one who is going to be considered wasting the courts time, not the other way around. If you used the ticketcombat template (bloated irrelevant requests and all) and didn't at the very least leave an email address, that's going to be on you. If you wait until you've left the court to make requests for things that could have easily been squared while you were there, that's also going to be on you. Be prepared for an annoyed JP.
Ticketcombat site has not been updated for years. The courts have decided that it is now up to YOU to check if disclosure is ready, and it is not up to the prosecution to have to hunt you down. So if it was ready and you did not check then they will count this first adjourment time delay against you not the prosecution. As far as fighting the red light ticket, what do the officers notes say? Do they say he saw you go thru a red light? So now it will be officers word against your word that it yellow. Who do you think the JP will believe? And it sounds like you got two tickets... what was the other ticket?
Ticketcombat site has not been updated for years. The courts have decided that it is now up to YOU to check if disclosure is ready, and it is not up to the prosecution to have to hunt you down. So if it was ready and you did not check then they will count this first adjourment time delay against you not the prosecution.
As far as fighting the red light ticket, what do the officers notes say? Do they say he saw you go thru a red light? So now it will be officers word against your word that it yellow. Who do you think the JP will believe?
And it sounds like you got two tickets... what was the other ticket?
I realize I would get written notes. The disclosure form provided by York Region lacks details on what is to be requested. I followed the Ticketcombat template, not entirely, but as a means to ask for the officers notes and dash cam footage specifically. I asked for an adjournment then reviewed what was in the disclosure package, I never opened it in court. Reviewing the footage would allow me to see where the officer was positioned and possibly light signal timing to back up my case.
bend wrote:
You usually don't get typed notes on a first request. It's hard to argue you can't read what you haven't seen.
All parties were in the same room when you received your disclosure package. If you needed clarification, it could and would have been provided right then and there. It doesn't take much to know a set of hand written notes aren't legible. If you wanted video, it doesn't take much to see your package doesn't include any. If the disclosure package wasn't to your liking, it should have been brought to attention. You would then make your argument for why you need what you need.
Is there a specific reason you feel there is any video? If it doesn't exist, it obviously wont be provided.
You're the one who is going to be considered wasting the courts time, not the other way around. If you used the ticketcombat template (bloated irrelevant requests and all) and didn't at the very least leave an email address, that's going to be on you. If you wait until you've left the court to make requests for things that could have easily been squared while you were there, that's also going to be on you. Be prepared for an annoyed JP.
I realize I would get written notes. The disclosure form provided by York Region lacks details on what is to be requested. I followed the Ticketcombat template, not entirely, but as a means to ask for the officers notes and dash cam footage specifically. I asked for an adjournment then reviewed what was in the disclosure package, I never opened it in court. Reviewing the footage would allow me to see where the officer was positioned and possibly light signal timing to back up my case.
Last edited by syxoi38 on Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Yeah I realize that, that's on me. The other ticket was for presenting 2 week old expired insurance slip (new one was behind it and I forgot about it). Is the dash cam of any use if it shows otherwise than provided in the notes, or nothing at all if he was behind a vehicle? Officers notes:
jsherk wrote:
Ticketcombat site has not been updated for years. The courts have decided that it is now up to YOU to check if disclosure is ready, and it is not up to the prosecution to have to hunt you down. So if it was ready and you did not check then they will count this first adjourment time delay against you not the prosecution.
As far as fighting the red light ticket, what do the officers notes say? Do they say he saw you go thru a red light? So now it will be officers word against your word that it yellow. Who do you think the JP will believe?
And it sounds like you got two tickets... what was the other ticket?
Yeah I realize that, that's on me. The other ticket was for presenting 2 week old expired insurance slip (new one was behind it and I forgot about it). Is the dash cam of any use if it shows otherwise than provided in the notes, or nothing at all if he was behind a vehicle?
Officers notes:
Traffic stop Dufferin St @ 407 E/B offramp.
-I'm stopped @ light facing E
-Obs lights go grn -> amber -> red. for N/S traf.
After turn red I hear very loud engine rev from sil car in S/B centre lane approx 5 car lengths from lights rapidly accelerate and drive through intersection.
So unless you have video (or another eye witness) that will testify that the light was not red when you went thru it, you will most likely lose at trial. So let's consider some options... Sometimes prosecutors will drop a charge like "fail to have insurance" if you show them the valid one and plead guilty to the other charge. The other thing to consider is that if you can be charged as OWNER of the vehicle instead of DRIVER then the charge does not affect your insurance. So maybe you start by asking if they will drop "no insurance" charge that you would plead guilty to 144(18.1) OWNER charge. It never hurts to ask.
So unless you have video (or another eye witness) that will testify that the light was not red when you went thru it, you will most likely lose at trial.
So let's consider some options... Sometimes prosecutors will drop a charge like "fail to have insurance" if you show them the valid one and plead guilty to the other charge. The other thing to consider is that if you can be charged as OWNER of the vehicle instead of DRIVER then the charge does not affect your insurance. So maybe you start by asking if they will drop "no insurance" charge that you would plead guilty to 144(18.1) OWNER charge. It never hurts to ask.
Previously the prosecutor offered to drop the no insurance charge for a guilty plea. Any conviction hurts the record but what is the least harmful plea offer in a situation like this that can be negotiated? I called the prosecutor's office and they told me that I did not receive dash cam footage because O.P.P. vehicles do not have them? Seems strange but I'm out of luck.
Previously the prosecutor offered to drop the no insurance charge for a guilty plea. Any conviction hurts the record but what is the least harmful plea offer in a situation like this that can be negotiated?
I called the prosecutor's office and they told me that I did not receive dash cam footage because O.P.P. vehicles do not have them? Seems strange but I'm out of luck.
So if you go to trial then they will want to charge you with both and that will be two MINOR charges against your insurance. If you take the plea, then you will only have the one MINOR charge. Tickets like this are very very hard to beat because it is basically your word against the officers. So with no video evidence and no other witnesses you are most likely going to lose. You can certainly hope the officer does not show up, but that is very rare these days. Do you have a chance at a charter argument for lack of disclosure or for time delays? Does not sound like those are options either. So the odds of you winning against either ticket appear to be slim to none. So you can fight it for the experience and take the two guilty convictions, or take the deal and only end up with one guilty conviction. If you agree to take the plea, ask if the prosecutor will change the charge to be against the OWNER not the DRIVER. They or may not agree, but if they do agree then the OWNER charge will not count against insurance.
So if you go to trial then they will want to charge you with both and that will be two MINOR charges against your insurance.
If you take the plea, then you will only have the one MINOR charge.
Tickets like this are very very hard to beat because it is basically your word against the officers. So with no video evidence and no other witnesses you are most likely going to lose. You can certainly hope the officer does not show up, but that is very rare these days. Do you have a chance at a charter argument for lack of disclosure or for time delays? Does not sound like those are options either.
So the odds of you winning against either ticket appear to be slim to none. So you can fight it for the experience and take the two guilty convictions, or take the deal and only end up with one guilty conviction. If you agree to take the plea, ask if the prosecutor will change the charge to be against the OWNER not the DRIVER. They or may not agree, but if they do agree then the OWNER charge will not count against insurance.
Definitely not taking on two guilty convictions. I have a clean record and will most likely have to agree to some plea as there's no video. I was under the impression this was a major offense. Are there any other resolution options? Is fail to yield worse better or worse than being charged as an "owner"?
Definitely not taking on two guilty convictions. I have a clean record and will most likely have to agree to some plea as there's no video.
I was under the impression this was a major offense. Are there any other resolution options? Is fail to yield worse better or worse than being charged as an "owner"?
Well you had better check with your insurance company on the status (Minor, Major, Serious) of each charge. Obviously minor charges are preferred. If you can get a charge changed to OWNER instead of as DRIVER, then it does NOT affect your insurance at all, and there are NO demerit points. Only charges to DRIVER incur demerits and insurance increases.
Well you had better check with your insurance company on the status (Minor, Major, Serious) of each charge. Obviously minor charges are preferred.
If you can get a charge changed to OWNER instead of as DRIVER, then it does NOT affect your insurance at all, and there are NO demerit points. Only charges to DRIVER incur demerits and insurance increases.
It most likely wont. Basic disobeying of traffic signs and signals are minor. Special circumstances involving kids, schools, etc will make it a major. Same goes for speeding, passing, etc. e.g. Not stopping for a stop sign is a minor. Put that stop sign on a school bus and pass improperly and it's a major.
syxoi38 wrote:
I was under the impression this was a major offense.
It most likely wont. Basic disobeying of traffic signs and signals are minor. Special circumstances involving kids, schools, etc will make it a major. Same goes for speeding, passing, etc.
e.g. Not stopping for a stop sign is a minor. Put that stop sign on a school bus and pass improperly and it's a major.
So I had to go to court to bring a motion to adjourn the trial because I cannot attend next week. At my first trial I received a plea deal but due to no disclosure I declined and adjourned. This time the prosecutor brought up the fact a deal was offered the first trial and proceeded to offereme the same deal. It was failure to yield and my insurance ticket would be dropped. I asked if he could change failure to yield to be charged as an owner for the red light as mentioned by jsherk - he told he could, but he won't; flat out refused. He emphasized that by me receiving my disclosure and declining the plea deal again that I cannot receive any deal at my rescheduled trial. Is this true? I figured it was an intimidation tactic to pressure me so he gets the win then and there, but considering the first plea was moot as I had no disclosure, does this count as a "second offer" and no future offers would be made? He noted down everything and emphasized those points before the court. I only came with the intention to bring forward the motion and reschedule my trial, I didn't even know that a resolution could be made during that trial. I know he is a prosector but damn he was really hard on me after I brought up the possibility of being charged as an owner.
So I had to go to court to bring a motion to adjourn the trial because I cannot attend next week. At my first trial I received a plea deal but due to no disclosure I declined and adjourned. This time the prosecutor brought up the fact a deal was offered the first trial and proceeded to offereme the same deal. It was failure to yield and my insurance ticket would be dropped. I asked if he could change failure to yield to be charged as an owner for the red light as mentioned by jsherk - he told he could, but he won't; flat out refused. He emphasized that by me receiving my disclosure and declining the plea deal again that I cannot receive any deal at my rescheduled trial. Is this true? I figured it was an intimidation tactic to pressure me so he gets the win then and there, but considering the first plea was moot as I had no disclosure, does this count as a "second offer" and no future offers would be made? He noted down everything and emphasized those points before the court. I only came with the intention to bring forward the motion and reschedule my trial, I didn't even know that a resolution could be made during that trial. I know he is a prosector but damn he was really hard on me after I brought up the possibility of being charged as an owner.
Last edited by syxoi38 on Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The prosecutor doesn't have to offer anything at anytime. They do it to sometimes to streamline the court docket. Ie offering someone a reduced fine or dropping one ticket for a plea on another
The prosecutor doesn't have to offer anything at anytime. They do it to sometimes to streamline the court docket. Ie offering someone a reduced fine or dropping one ticket for a plea on another
Plea deals are completely optional and the prosecutor has no obligation to offer them to you at all. They also have no obligation to offer you a deal again that they offered you before. If you get it adjourned a third time, it is still completely up to the prosecutor whether they offer you another deal or not. They can also change the deal they are offering as well, so they could make it better, worse or withdraw it completely. It is a bit of an intimidation tactic in one sense, but they don't have to offer you anything in the first place, so really it is more of a way for them to get a quick guilty plea without taking up much court time.
Plea deals are completely optional and the prosecutor has no obligation to offer them to you at all. They also have no obligation to offer you a deal again that they offered you before. If you get it adjourned a third time, it is still completely up to the prosecutor whether they offer you another deal or not. They can also change the deal they are offering as well, so they could make it better, worse or withdraw it completely.
It is a bit of an intimidation tactic in one sense, but they don't have to offer you anything in the first place, so really it is more of a way for them to get a quick guilty plea without taking up much court time.
So did I screw myself over completely or can I reason with the next prosecutor if I decide to plea guilty?
Decatur wrote:
The prosecutor doesn't have to offer anything at anytime. They do it to sometimes to streamline the court docket. Ie offering someone a reduced fine or dropping one ticket for a plea on another
So did I screw myself over completely or can I reason with the next prosecutor if I decide to plea guilty?
You won't know until that time comes. In our jurisdiction we have a full time prosecutor and one other that assists. They both take good notes for each other and have good memories.
You won't know until that time comes. In our jurisdiction we have a full time prosecutor and one other that assists. They both take good notes for each other and have good memories.
I think if you want any chance at still getting a deal, you better contact the prosecutor via email (in writing) soon. It is almost certain that they will not offer you a 3rd offer (or even the same one!) if you were warned on the record, and especially if you actually make them go through with preparing for the trial and calling the officer as a witness. As others have said, they don't have to make you ANY offers any time. But, if they made you an offer in the past, then they may still be up for it if you contact them soon and let them know that they no longer have to proceed with preparing for the trial. If you wait till trial day, unless the officer doesn't show up (which is extremely rare nowadays!), you'll have virtually NO chance for any resolution. In fact, they might decide to ask for a bigger fine since the set fine no longer applies but rather the statutory fines.
I think if you want any chance at still getting a deal, you better contact the prosecutor via email (in writing) soon. It is almost certain that they will not offer you a 3rd offer (or even the same one!) if you were warned on the record, and especially if you actually make them go through with preparing for the trial and calling the officer as a witness. As others have said, they don't have to make you ANY offers any time. But, if they made you an offer in the past, then they may still be up for it if you contact them soon and let them know that they no longer have to proceed with preparing for the trial. If you wait till trial day, unless the officer doesn't show up (which is extremely rare nowadays!), you'll have virtually NO chance for any resolution. In fact, they might decide to ask for a bigger fine since the set fine no longer applies but rather the statutory fines.
Funny you say that, never saw this post until now. As an update I had trial this week. Officer never showed up and charges were dropped. Thanks for all the help and advice.
highwaystar wrote:
I think if you want any chance at still getting a deal, you better contact the prosecutor via email (in writing) soon. It is almost certain that they will not offer you a 3rd offer (or even the same one!) if you were warned on the record, and especially if you actually make them go through with preparing for the trial and calling the officer as a witness. As others have said, they don't have to make you ANY offers any time. But, if they made you an offer in the past, then they may still be up for it if you contact them soon and let them know that they no longer have to proceed with preparing for the trial. If you wait till trial day, unless the officer doesn't show up (which is extremely rare nowadays!), you'll have virtually NO chance for any resolution. In fact, they might decide to ask for a bigger fine since the set fine no longer applies but rather the statutory fines.
Funny you say that, never saw this post until now. As an update I had trial this week. Officer never showed up and charges were dropped. Thanks for all the help and advice.
I got my first ticket(s) in 15 years, for a rolling stop of the Gardiner West ramp at Yonge, by a whole bunch of cruisers under the bridge pegging off people 1 by 1. I didn't have my wallet, so 1 ticket no licence surrendered, 1 ticket fail to stop.
1)Should I use a professional rep in court? or
2) My natural thought would be to pay the no licence ticket, and reschedule the court date later for…
Yesterday, I made the stupidest mistake of my entire life. I was on the way back to my apartment after studying at school. It was around 8:30 pm. What happened is that I tried to follow the curve of the road, which is very icy because the city truck does not usually pour salt on the road ( there was a snow storm in the early morning that day), I was going 55-60 km/hr. The speed limit was 50km/h.…
When one gets a ticket and at the time of the ticket, the COP had video taped the interaction, can the COP delete the video legally even though it holds evidentuary value should it go to trial ?
The officer observed him driving by from about 20 meters away. Given that the officer allegedly didn't see the seatbelt. Is this evidence ? My point would be that evidence requires you to actually see something, not seeing something is not evidence ?
alright well last night (march 19th) at 12:55 am i had recieved 2 tickets the first was failing to stop at a stop sign (i did a rolling stop) and it was dated the 19th the second ticket that i got at the exact same time was dated the 18th. The second one was because i had a blood alcohol level of 0.0025 instead of zero (i have a g2)
I'm considering buying a strap-on motor for a bicycle for this summer, such as the one at www.motorizedbicycle.ca/bicyâ¦ant-head-bike-motor-kit.html . However, I haven't been able to find any clear answers about what part of the law, if any, they fall under. The kit in question has a motor with a displacement of more than 50 cubic centimeters, which seems to mean it doesn't fall under the HTA's…
I was turning left from Creditview into the left lane of Argentia Road (in Missisauga), while a police cruiser driving the opposite direction turning right into the right lane of Argentia Road. As I saw the cruiser turning right into the right lane of Argentia Road, I also turned left into the left lane of Argentia Road. The officer stopped me and told me that I was wrong, I had to wait until…
Bac above zero, g2 driver, 24 hour suspension. Had half a beer and drove 1 hr later. Failed breathalizer. I am in police foundations college course, did i ruin my future career? First offence, otherwise clean.
So here is my situation, I was accused of speeding 127 km/h in a 100 km/h zone.
My ticket says contrary to "Highway Traffict Act #128". Set fine calculated by the officer is $101.25 ( $3.75/km). Plus $30 for court charges and Victim charges to a total of $131.25.
However, according to section 128 i should be paying 27 x $4.5/km = $121.50 + Plus $30 for court charges and Victim charges to a total of…
So I was driving this morning to work at a new location in Toronto. I made a left turn into a street and a police officer was there waiting. He informed me you cannot make left turns between 7-9am. I told him I did not see or notice any sign. I have a clean driving record and never got a ticket before. Nonetheless, he hit me with a disobey sign ticket ( 182.2). I went back to the…
I was served with a Fail to Surrender Insurance Card (S3(1) of Compulsory Auto Insurance Act). He received it within the jurisdiction of Barrie POA. The trial is scheduled for November 14 2017.
I was stopped by Barrie OPP on my way back from a weekend up in Midland ON on June 28, 2017 and I originally had a digital copy of my insurance card but the officer wouldn't have it. He required a…
i recently got pulled over by an opp in and undercover car for going 118 in an 80.
I am planning on fighting it because i cant really afford the $283 ticket or the 4 demerit points because i have already gotten a speeding ticket in the states which got me 3 demerit points.
so here is my story, i was following a van that was going to slow for my liking so i…
I've been researching for months for defence strategy and basic trial information regarding my speeding ticket. However, the information is so conflicting that I have no confidence whatsoever that I know what I'm doing.
I didn't get this info from a friend of a friend, it came from this website, court officials, case laws, and a consultation with a traffic ticket fighting company.
Hi Gang. I'm back, but I'm asking for a friend this time.
A friend received a ticket the other day for driving 87 km/h in a 70 km/h zone. The problem is it's a posted 80 zone (I've verified this fact with him). Is an incorrectly identified speed limit a fatal error? There isn't a police officer in the province who would stop a driver who's only 7 km/h over the limit, so if the officer had realized…
Need some help here for the 1st time speeding ticket?
Sunday morning 12:10am when I was going home from work I was doing bit speeding on Gardiner. I was going with about 130km/h. I know its fast. I always take the same way and I know where the cops hide. They always hide entrance of the highways. If I will do speeding I always look my back and did look this time too. I took gardiner…
I have several problems and I'm wondering what my options are. This past weekend I was driving home from Lake Huron and was caught going 112 in an 80km/h zone. I am currently on my Quebec probationary license which is revoked at 4 demerit points. The penalty in Quebec for going +32 km/h over is 3 demerits, but even then it's cutting things close. The Ontario penalty is 4 demerits, will I receive…
I was pulled over for not having the front plate on the bumper, the plate was VERY clearly visible on the dash from the front. The only reason the officer pulled me over because the car is flashy and stands out. I was not speeding or doing anyting wrong. He insisted that it has to be on the bumper, I asked him to show me that in the HTA and he said that he could not as its common sense that it…
i was driving my dad's car when i was caught by the red light camera in Brampton. My dad would've to take time off work to go ask for a trial and then go to one.
Can i represent him? if yes, what do i need to do?
I'll tell the story of the accident quickly.. I was coming back from work near the airport around 6pm, when I got near Dufferin and Steeles. I approached a red light and my brakes completely stopped working, I pressed on it and it went all the way down loosely, I tried to go into the island separating the streets but ended up crashing into 3 cars waiting at the light. Nobody was seriously hurt…
