Some months ago I was stopped after entering an intersection on an amber then completing the turn. The ticket reads "Did commit the offence of DISOBEY RED LIGHT - FAIL TO STOP contrary to HTA 144(18)". I don't see any fatal flaws so looks like I'm legitimately arguing my case in court. Not expecting to get off on 11b either. The "disclosure" included the officers notes (hand written). This is what they say:
<somewhat accurate car description>
20 ft behind stop line
as it turned red
2nd of 2 vehicle disobeying red light
<drawing of intersection at time of incident>
<notes on light cycle and clear conditions>
That is it. The rest of the disclosure is my driving record, the disclosure request, copy of the ticket and and some notice to defendant. I feel like this isn't really adequate to prove guilt. I think his notes are not accurately depicting what happened but I don't have evidence it's inaccurate. My plan right now is to introduce doubt through cross examination of his testimony but I'm wondering if anyone else has any advice or opinion on the officers notes? Does that really seem like enough to prove my guilt?
Thanks. I think I have a some ways to cast doubt to the officers story and am pretty clear on my version of what happened so I will likely also testify and let the prosecutor try and trip me up. Appreciate the advice.Stanton wrote:The notes could be sufficient to prove guilt for the alleged offence. The fact that you and the officer have a differing recollection of what transpired doesn't make the officer's note's inaccurate, it's simply his version/recollection of what transpired. You'll need to think of some specific, relevant points to question the officer on. You can also consider testifying yourself if you think you can give a clear, strong and consistent statement of what happened.