OK, I need advice on this and I'm hoping people can provide their views and good suggestions: What happened: My wife was charged with failing to stop at a stop sign, T intersection, her direction is the only one with stop sign. As she made a right turn and approached the police cruiser, he exited his car and motioned her to pull over. Stated that he will be right with her, walked over to the car he had stopped earlier, handed over his/her a ticket and DL etc and came back to my wife stating she failed to stop. She argued that she did and he said "no ma'am, you didn't, and I have dash cam video of you" Today I picked up copy of disclosure and it says no ICC (in car camera) Now, according to the disclosure he had clear unobstructed view of the intersection and the sign etc. When I went and parked my car where he was stopped, the view is more than 80% obstructed by a large light post and shrubs. Here is the most important question, can I use the officer's statement about the dash cam video against him? If so, how should I go about it not to offend anyone, it is a bit delicate.
OK, I need advice on this and I'm hoping people can provide their views and good suggestions:
What happened:
My wife was charged with failing to stop at a stop sign, T intersection, her direction is the only one with stop sign. As she made a right turn and approached the police cruiser, he exited his car and motioned her to pull over. Stated that he will be right with her, walked over to the car he had stopped earlier, handed over his/her a ticket and DL etc and came back to my wife stating she failed to stop. She argued that she did and he said "no ma'am, you didn't, and I have dash cam video of you"
Today I picked up copy of disclosure and it says no ICC (in car camera)
Now, according to the disclosure he had clear unobstructed view of the intersection and the sign etc.
When I went and parked my car where he was stopped, the view is more than 80% obstructed by a large light post and shrubs.
Here is the most important question, can I use the officer's statement about the dash cam video against him? If so, how should I go about it not to offend anyone, it is a bit delicate.
I don't see it being an issue unless there actually was a camera in the car and the officer didn't record the offence without some reasonable explanation as to why. If the officer failed to obtain/provide evidence, you might have something to argue. If the officer simply stated there was a camera when there wasn't, I don't see it causing significant credibility issues on it's own. You could try and explore the issue at trial, but there could be a simple explanation. Maybe the officer was simply trying to elicit a confession, maybe the officer simply forgot for a moment that he didn't have a camera in his car that day. Without further evidence to show something nefarious, it's not enough to imply the officer perjured himself, etc.
I don't see it being an issue unless there actually was a camera in the car and the officer didn't record the offence without some reasonable explanation as to why. If the officer failed to obtain/provide evidence, you might have something to argue.
If the officer simply stated there was a camera when there wasn't, I don't see it causing significant credibility issues on it's own. You could try and explore the issue at trial, but there could be a simple explanation. Maybe the officer was simply trying to elicit a confession, maybe the officer simply forgot for a moment that he didn't have a camera in his car that day. Without further evidence to show something nefarious, it's not enough to imply the officer perjured himself, etc.
Let's assume you can actually get the officer to admit (while on the stand) that he said there was a camera in the car even though he knew there really was not actually one... I don't think it will make a difference. The JP gets to "weigh" all the evidence given, so although this may look negative towards the officer, it will not have much weight because it is not relevent to the charge itself. Also, the Police are allowed to lie while exercising their duties, just like they are allowed to speed, so again this means that even if he admits to it, the JP will barely consider it. Now if you the officer takes the stand and says he did NOT say that and you have evidence (specifically video) that he did, then it would have much more weight because he lied on the stand.
Let's assume you can actually get the officer to admit (while on the stand) that he said there was a camera in the car even though he knew there really was not actually one... I don't think it will make a difference. The JP gets to "weigh" all the evidence given, so although this may look negative towards the officer, it will not have much weight because it is not relevent to the charge itself.
Also, the Police are allowed to lie while exercising their duties, just like they are allowed to speed, so again this means that even if he admits to it, the JP will barely consider it.
Now if you the officer takes the stand and says he did NOT say that and you have evidence (specifically video) that he did, then it would have much more weight because he lied on the stand.
First, I want to thank you all for your replies and advice. To the best of my knowledge, all unmarked traffic enforcement cruisers in Markham are equipped with cameras. You are 100% correct, I have no idea why I used that word, I guess I should be more careful in my choice of words. Valid points. Also, what does NCVP stand for? One more question (pulling a Lieutenant Columbo here), it looks to me like the disclosure was prepared by editing a template that was edited to fit this case, more or less, would I be right to assume this is relatively routine procedure for garden variety traffic stops?
First, I want to thank you all for your replies and advice.
Stanton wrote:
I don't see it being an issue unless there actually was a camera in the car and the officer didn't record the offence without some reasonable explanation as to why. If the officer failed to obtain/provide evidence, you might have something to argue.
If the officer simply stated there was a camera when there wasn't, I don't see it causing significant credibility issues on it's own. You could try and explore the issue at trial, but there could be a simple explanation. Maybe the officer was simply trying to elicit a confession, maybe the officer simply forgot for a moment that he didn't have a camera in his car that day. Without further evidence to show something nefarious, it's not enough to imply the officer perjured himself, etc.
To the best of my knowledge, all unmarked traffic enforcement cruisers in Markham are equipped with cameras.
argyll wrote:
Perjury is not lying in the public. It's lying under oath
You are 100% correct, I have no idea why I used that word, I guess I should be more careful in my choice of words.
Let's assume you can actually get the officer to admit (while on the stand) that he said there was a camera in the car even though he knew there really was not actually one... I don't think it will make a difference. The JP gets to "weigh" all the evidence given, so although this may look negative towards the officer, it will not have much weight because it is not relevent to the charge itself.
Also, the Police are allowed to lie while exercising their duties, just like they are allowed to speed, so again this means that even if he admits to it, the JP will barely consider it.
Valid points.
Also, what does NCVP stand for?
One more question (pulling a Lieutenant Columbo here), it looks to me like the disclosure was prepared by editing a template that was edited to fit this case, more or less, would I be right to assume this is relatively routine procedure for garden variety traffic stops?
I was at my parents' house in Mississauga early this week, and my mother told me about this SUV which always parks down the street for four to six hours a day, headlights on and the occupants inside. When she takes her afternoon walk, she will usually see a man and a woman inside smoking or…
Last week, around 9:30 at the Britannia water purification plant (Ottawa), undercover cops put on their lights. I was outside of my mom's vehicle (van) about to go for a simple #1 in the bushes (even had a bunch of tissues in my hands) when one officer asked me what I was doing (my bf was also…
We are living in the age of digital video. HD 720p and 1080p CRYSTAL CLEAR Video. If a picture is worth a thousand words, then a video is worth a million.
I had video evidence for a case but it was not accepted. I apparently did not submit it properly/ at the right time. Despite this I had my ticket…
According to current regulations, no electric car can be driven in Ontario (and anywhere else in Canada except BC). Do you find it somewhat ridiculous that, despite all the fanfare about the environmentally friendliness talk, and high gas prices moans, we cannot use the most…
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
I might be moving from Manitoba to the Ottawa area.
My question is, I drive a 4x4 truck and my summer tires stick out beyond the fenders about 1.5-2inches. Is that illegal in Ontario? If so will installing fender flares take care of the problem? Also the truck has True dual exhaust (2 pipes from…
Okay so while at school today i parked on a residential street in Hamilton Ontario. the person in front of me did not pull up very far so i was forced to park fairly close to the driveway of the house i was in front of. I got out to make sure they had plenty of room to drive out if they wanted to,…
Just wondering if I can get some help on what to do for this ticket. I have a court date on August 17th. I simply cannot afford this. I haven't had an offence in years, and pay attention to my speeds now. One night when I was too focused on the road and not the speedometer, I get pulled…
I got pulled over for doing 147 in a posted 90 zone on hwy 17 heading east towards Ottawa where I live. My car was impounded for 7 days and the officer took my licence. I'll probably go with one of those traffic ticket places. I don't feel like driving to North Bay 4 or 5 times.
Officers statement at the location
