Received Disclosure Police has NO written notes- Only has In Car Camera (copy of video ) Is the case over since Police has no written notes? Police also provide a detail typed description based on the video Is police allow to read the typed description? Should I object to police reading or referring to the typed description? Can I ask question about the video before Court shows it? The Court is New Market- How do I show my dash cam video? Should I bring a copy of the DVD or memory stick? Should I bring my own computer too? Thanks
Totally agree with you If I lose, it is a minor conviction with 3 points If I go for plea bargin, I still get a conviction but no point Impact on insurance is the SAME. I will shoot like a machine gun and enjoy the process. The prosecutor tried very hard to scare me out of the trial. I was very surprised why she wants to adjourn saying there is not enough time. The JP said there is enough time and asked if there is something... I can see the JP realized that the prosecutor didn't want to go ahead.. and allow the adjournment. If I don't have a leg to stand on, the prosecutor should try to get me out within 10 mins. It was 20 mins to noon. The prosecutor request an hour to try my case. That is very big deal for a stop sign case... I don't think that will last that long. I will enjoy every second of that.
jsherk wrote:
My personal opinion is that you need to use the shotgun approach when fighting a ticket, because if you are relying on only one thing, then there is a good chance that they will have answer and you are done. With the shotgun approach, they need an answer for each point you bring up AND it gives a greater chance for the JP to make a mistake AND it gives you more ammunition for an appeal if you lose at trial.
Totally agree with you
If I lose, it is a minor conviction with 3 points
If I go for plea bargin, I still get a conviction but no point
Impact on insurance is the SAME.
I will shoot like a machine gun and enjoy the process.
The prosecutor tried very hard to scare me out of the trial. I was very surprised why she wants to adjourn
saying there is not enough time. The JP said there is enough time and asked if there is something... I can see the JP
realized that the prosecutor didn't want to go ahead.. and allow the adjournment.
If I don't have a leg to stand on, the prosecutor should try to get me out within 10 mins. It was 20 mins to noon.
The prosecutor request an hour to try my case. That is very big deal for a stop sign case... I don't think that will last that long.
Whereas the judge will not. Scattergun approaches by self representing defendants just piss them off and you might see the effect on sentence. It won't be much but you have to ask yourself why the professional lawyers don't use the same tactic if it is so successful.
Whereas the judge will not. Scattergun approaches by self representing defendants just piss them off and you might see the effect on sentence. It won't be much but you have to ask yourself why the professional lawyers don't use the same tactic if it is so successful.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !
I pay more to see asport game I will have a good time with a prosecutor and judge play Judge Judy with me
argyll wrote:
Whereas the judge will not. Scattergun approaches by self representing defendants just piss them off and you might see the effect on sentence. It won't be much but you have to ask yourself why the professional lawyers don't use the same tactic if it is so successful.
I pay more to see asport game
I will have a good time with a prosecutor and judge play Judge Judy with me
Good for you! Per-diem prosecutors love people like you who just want to go to court even when they have very little chance of winning because the per-diem gets paid by the hour (at a very good hourly rate too!). So, knock yourself out. Take time out of your work day (if you work), spend money on parking, waste a few hours sitting in court and preparing for your case, and then go argue your case in court. You'll definitely learn quite a bit, especially the difference between set fines and statutory fines; not to mention the proper rules of evidence. In your case, the prosecutor could ask for up to $500 (the statutory max for the offence). Given that they have video of you not stopping AND its an absolute liability offence (with no due diligence defense), you're really gonna make a per-diem prosecutor's day. Its easy money for them. While there are cheaper ways to learn things, its your money. The system needs people like you. So, have fun learning and spending your money.
fisherman7351 wrote:
I pay more to see asport game
I will have a good time with a prosecutor and judge play Judge Judy with me
Good for you! Per-diem prosecutors love people like you who just want to go to court even when they have very little chance of winning because the per-diem gets paid by the hour (at a very good hourly rate too!).
So, knock yourself out. Take time out of your work day (if you work), spend money on parking, waste a few hours sitting in court and preparing for your case, and then go argue your case in court. You'll definitely learn quite a bit, especially the difference between set fines and statutory fines; not to mention the proper rules of evidence. In your case, the prosecutor could ask for up to $500 (the statutory max for the offence). Given that they have video of you not stopping AND its an absolute liability offence (with no due diligence defense), you're really gonna make a per-diem prosecutor's day. Its easy money for them.
While there are cheaper ways to learn things, its your money. The system needs people like you. So, have fun learning and spending your money.
The system definitley needs people like you that are willing to take a stand for their rights and learn how the un-justice system in Canada and Ontario works. Even if you don't win, it is the cost of your education in how it all works. Personally I think ALL stop signs should be replaced with yield signs which would eliminate the cash grad of absolute liability offences like this. I hate absolute liability offences as they do not have to prove that what you did was actually unsafe and/or caused a problem for anybody.
The system definitley needs people like you that are willing to take a stand for their rights and learn how the un-justice system in Canada and Ontario works. Even if you don't win, it is the cost of your education in how it all works.
Personally I think ALL stop signs should be replaced with yield signs which would eliminate the cash grad of absolute liability offences like this. I hate absolute liability offences as they do not have to prove that what you did was actually unsafe and/or caused a problem for anybody.
One of the first lessons most should learn is that if you're not happy with some law, run for office or lobby your government. That's democracy. Unfortunately, many go to court thinking their displeasure with a law is a defence or going to change things. You're in the wrong building folks! :lol:
One of the first lessons most should learn is that if you're not happy with some law, run for office or lobby your government. That's democracy. Unfortunately, many go to court thinking their displeasure with a law is a defence or going to change things. You're in the wrong building folks!
Democracy is using the rights that were giving to you such as the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial by an impratial person. This means it is well within your rights to take every single charge, no matter how small or minor, to court and have them prove you are are guilty, regardless of whether you think you are guilty or not. You are innocent until they prove otherwise. Make them work for it!
Democracy is using the rights that were giving to you such as the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial by an impratial person. This means it is well within your rights to take every single charge, no matter how small or minor, to court and have them prove you are are guilty, regardless of whether you think you are guilty or not. You are innocent until they prove otherwise. Make them work for it!
Regardless of anything else that happens... If your trial does, indeed, wind up being under twenty minutes (and I highly suspect that will be the case), you should consider filing a complaint against the prosecutor with the prosecutor's office. She has the experience to know how long a trial will likely take. It seems she wanted the adjournment because she acknowledged some of the disclosure was improper and wanted a second chance. Prosecutors' offices do take complaints seriously.
Regardless of anything else that happens...
If your trial does, indeed, wind up being under twenty minutes (and I highly suspect that will be the case), you should consider filing a complaint against the prosecutor with the prosecutor's office. She has the experience to know how long a trial will likely take. It seems she wanted the adjournment because she acknowledged some of the disclosure was improper and wanted a second chance. Prosecutors' offices do take complaints seriously.
Theoretically, there's NOTHING wrong with putting the Crown to its burden, regardless of innocence or guilt. That's a constitutional right. But practically speaking, I find it foolish when folks actually spend their time and money exercising rights that they can reasonably assume will yield them no positive outcome or benefit and will actually waste more of their own resources. If only they would dedicate such time, energy and effort to causes that could yield something of benefit; they might actually better themselves and/or society. Some folks truly ARE innocent; some also have valid defences and/or excuses---those folks should definitely go to court. But then there are also individuals who only go to court because they have a genuine belief that they are correct (even though the law and evidence says otherwise). Going to court for those people will hopefully be helpful since they will learn from their mistake and hopefully correct their ways. So, again, its not a waste of time to go to court---something good will yield. But, then there's another group of individuals----those that only go to court out of stubbornness or passive-aggressiveness. Those are the ones I think society actually feels sad for because they become victims of the system. After all, their emotions or personalities have simply gotten the best of them and they'll never learn. They will spend more of their time, money and effort on causes that will yield them very little, if anything. That's sad. Everyone should therefore always ask themselves under which category they belong! :wink:
jsherk wrote:
Democracy is using the rights that were giving to you such as the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial by an impratial person. This means it is well within your rights to take every single charge, no matter how small or minor, to court and have them prove you are are guilty, regardless of whether you think you are guilty or not. You are innocent until they prove otherwise. Make them work for it!
Theoretically, there's NOTHING wrong with putting the Crown to its burden, regardless of innocence or guilt. That's a constitutional right. But practically speaking, I find it foolish when folks actually spend their time and money exercising rights that they can reasonably assume will yield them no positive outcome or benefit and will actually waste more of their own resources. If only they would dedicate such time, energy and effort to causes that could yield something of benefit; they might actually better themselves and/or society.
Some folks truly ARE innocent; some also have valid defences and/or excuses---those folks should definitely go to court. But then there are also individuals who only go to court because they have a genuine belief that they are correct (even though the law and evidence says otherwise). Going to court for those people will hopefully be helpful since they will learn from their mistake and hopefully correct their ways. So, again, its not a waste of time to go to court---something good will yield. But, then there's another group of individuals----those that only go to court out of stubbornness or passive-aggressiveness. Those are the ones I think society actually feels sad for because they become victims of the system. After all, their emotions or personalities have simply gotten the best of them and they'll never learn. They will spend more of their time, money and effort on causes that will yield them very little, if anything. That's sad.
Everyone should therefore always ask themselves under which category they belong!
Good for you! Per-diem prosecutors love people like you who just want to go to court even when they have very little chance of winning because the per-diem gets paid by the hour (at a very good hourly rate too!). So, knock yourself out. Take time out of your work day (if you work), spend money on parking, waste a few hours sitting in court and preparing for your case, and then go argue your case in court. You'll definitely learn quite a bit, especially the difference between set fines and statutory fines; not to mention the proper rules of evidence. In your case, the prosecutor could ask for up to $500 (the statutory max for the offence). Given that they have video of you not stopping AND its an absolute liability offence (with no due diligence defense), you're really gonna make a per-diem prosecutor's day. Its easy money for them. While there are cheaper ways to learn things, its your money. The system needs people like you. So, have fun learning and spending your money. I don't see why you say what you said here. Are you trying to scare me to plea guilty???? I really don't need your bull **** I am retired so I have all the time in the world to play this game. I have accessible parking plate and I don't have to pay for parking My son lives a few minutes away from that Court and I normally go to stay there a few days per week. Satutory fine ???? What kind of bull*** is that??? If I lose the case, I pay whatever on the ticket. Unless the judge want to risk his cosy job, I dare him to increase the set fine... What make you think that they can increase the fine because I fought them too hard?? I have the right to defend myself. I am innocent until proven guilty... I know how JP got their job. The majority of them are NOT lawyer. Just because English is not my first language does not mean I can be scared by people like you. I like to thank Jsherk who has provided very good advice. charter of right challenge 6 days after the adjounment. I have filed 11b challenge and hand delivered them to Ag Canada, Ontario, Prosecutor and Court all in one day. For those who want to scare people like me off ... I donot need your bull ****
highwaystar wrote:
fisherman7351 wrote:
I pay more to see asport game
I will have a good time with a prosecutor and judge play Judge Judy with me
Good for you! Per-diem prosecutors love people like you who just want to go to court even when they have very little chance of winning because the per-diem gets paid by the hour (at a very good hourly rate too!).
So, knock yourself out. Take time out of your work day (if you work), spend money on parking, waste a few hours sitting in court and preparing for your case, and then go argue your case in court. You'll definitely learn quite a bit, especially the difference between set fines and statutory fines; not to mention the proper rules of evidence. In your case, the prosecutor could ask for up to $500 (the statutory max for the offence). Given that they have video of you not stopping AND its an absolute liability offence (with no due diligence defense), you're really gonna make a per-diem prosecutor's day. Its easy money for them.
While there are cheaper ways to learn things, its your money. The system needs people like you. So, have fun learning and spending your money.
I don't see why you say what you said here. Are you trying to scare me to plea guilty????
I really don't need your bull ****
I am retired so I have all the time in the world to play this game.
I have accessible parking plate and I don't have to pay for parking
My son lives a few minutes away from that Court and I normally go to stay there a few days per week.
Satutory fine ???? What kind of bull*** is that??? If I lose the case, I pay whatever on the ticket. Unless the judge want to risk his cosy job, I dare him to increase the set fine... What make you think that they can increase the fine because I fought them too hard?? I have the right to defend myself.
I am innocent until proven guilty...
I know how JP got their job. The majority of them are NOT lawyer.
Just because English is not my first language does not mean I can be scared by people like you.
I like to thank Jsherk who has provided very good advice. charter of right challenge 6 days after the adjounment.
I have filed 11b challenge and hand delivered them to Ag Canada, Ontario, Prosecutor and Court all in one day.
For those who want to scare people like me off ... I donot need your bull ****
So you only like those responses with which you agree and will hurl insults at those who dare to offer a different opinion ?! You CAN be fined more if you go to trial and are found guilty. It happens all the time. The set fine is for those who choose to pay the ticket, if you choose to go to court then the judge can impose anything within the parameters laid down in the Act. "What make you think that they can increase the fine because I fought them too hard?? " Ummm,....the law ?
So you only like those responses with which you agree and will hurl insults at those who dare to offer a different opinion ?!
You CAN be fined more if you go to trial and are found guilty. It happens all the time. The set fine is for those who choose to pay the ticket, if you choose to go to court then the judge can impose anything within the parameters laid down in the Act.
"What make you think that they can increase the fine because I fought them too hard?? "
Ummm,....the law ?
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !
Its not bull **** if its true. Don't be so sensitive. :lol: Clearly, you have no concept of how the fine system works. Statutory fines apply the moment you go in to court. In your case, section 214 applies. That means, a minimum of $60 (which almost never happens with that charge!) to a maximum of $500. Generally, you can expect between $200-400 (depending on several factors). I only wish I could be in attendance to see you DARE the JP to increase the fine beyond the set fine. Clearly, you haven't read case law. The set fine is simply NOT applicable and it is an error of law for a JP to just 'rubber stamp' and order the set fine. They certainly CAN order an amount equivalent to the set fine (but that's simply because its within the statutory range). The trend lately is to order a higher fine. Good for you. Hopefully you'll learn a lot about the system from going through the effort of doing a Charter application. I hope you 'perfected' your application so that it is actually heard by the court. Of course, I suspect you also haven't read the latest Supreme Court decision on 11b delays in courts (I'd cite the decision for you but I don't want to scare you any further!). A 10 month delay will simply be laughed at by the court. So, good luck with your application! :roll: So, in conclusion, you've clearly shown your ignorance in law thus far and even more so towards those trying to steer you in the right direction. I therefore suspect that unless the case has a serious evidentiary flaw, you'll be outplayed very quickly by any experienced prosecutor! There ARE ways to attack these cases (and case law) to back it up. But, given that you don't want any bull ****, scare easy, and seem to think you know it all----I'll refrain from offering any more suggestions. I've already taught you about 11B delays, statutory fines, AND by-law requirements. That's enough education for one case! :mrgreen:
fisherman7351 wrote:
...
I don't see why you say what you said here. Are you trying to scare me to plea guilty????
I really don't need your bull ****
Its not bull **** if its true. Don't be so sensitive.
fisherman7351 wrote:
Satutory fine ???? What kind of bull*** is that??? If I lose the case, I pay whatever on the ticket. Unless the judge want to risk his cosy job, I dare him to increase the set fine... What make you think that they can increase the fine because I fought them too hard?? I have the right to defend myself.
Clearly, you have no concept of how the fine system works. Statutory fines apply the moment you go in to court. In your case, section 214 applies. That means, a minimum of $60 (which almost never happens with that charge!) to a maximum of $500. Generally, you can expect between $200-400 (depending on several factors).
I only wish I could be in attendance to see you DARE the JP to increase the fine beyond the set fine. Clearly, you haven't read case law. The set fine is simply NOT applicable and it is an error of law for a JP to just 'rubber stamp' and order the set fine. They certainly CAN order an amount equivalent to the set fine (but that's simply because its within the statutory range). The trend lately is to order a higher fine.
fisherman7351 wrote:
I have filed 11b challenge and hand delivered them to Ag Canada, Ontario, Prosecutor and Court all in one day.
Good for you. Hopefully you'll learn a lot about the system from going through the effort of doing a Charter application. I hope you 'perfected' your application so that it is actually heard by the court. Of course, I suspect you also haven't read the latest Supreme Court decision on 11b delays in courts (I'd cite the decision for you but I don't want to scare you any further!). A 10 month delay will simply be laughed at by the court. So, good luck with your application!
So, in conclusion, you've clearly shown your ignorance in law thus far and even more so towards those trying to steer you in the right direction. I therefore suspect that unless the case has a serious evidentiary flaw, you'll be outplayed very quickly by any experienced prosecutor! There ARE ways to attack these cases (and case law) to back it up. But, given that you don't want any bull ****, scare easy, and seem to think you know it all----I'll refrain from offering any more suggestions. I've already taught you about 11B delays, statutory fines, AND by-law requirements. That's enough education for one case!
Its not bull **** if its true. Don't be so sensitive. :lol: Clearly, you have no concept of how the fine system works. Statutory fines apply the moment you go in to court. In your case, section 214 applies. That means, a minimum of $60 (which almost never happens with that charge!) to a maximum of $500. Generally, you can expect between $200-400 (depending on several factors). I only wish I could be in attendance to see you DARE the JP to increase the fine beyond the set fine. Clearly, you haven't read case law. The set fine is simply NOT applicable and it is an error of law for a JP to just 'rubber stamp' and order the set fine. They certainly CAN order an amount equivalent to the set fine (but that's simply because its within the statutory range). The trend lately is to order a higher fine. Good for you. Hopefully you'll learn a lot about the system from going through the effort of doing a Charter application. I hope you 'perfected' your application so that it is actually heard by the court. Of course, I suspect you also haven't read the latest Supreme Court decision on 11b delays in courts (I'd cite the decision for you but I don't want to scare you any further!). A 10 month delay will simply be laughed at by the court. So, good luck with your application! :roll: So, in conclusion, you've clearly shown your ignorance in law thus far and even more so towards those trying to steer you in the right direction. I therefore suspect that unless the case has a serious evidentiary flaw, you'll be outplayed very quickly by any experienced prosecutor! There ARE ways to attack these cases (and case law) to back it up. But, given that you don't want any bull ****, scare easy, and seem to think you know it all----I'll refrain from offering any more suggestions. I've already taught you about 11B delays, statutory fines, AND by-law requirements. That's enough education for one case! :mrgreen: I don't have to learn any system I go in and put up my defence If the JP doesn't like it, he can find me guilty What else can he/she do? Don't try to scare me. I am ready to go through the whole dame show and have the fines ready.... I will enjoy my time..
highwaystar wrote:
fisherman7351 wrote:
...
I don't see why you say what you said here. Are you trying to scare me to plea guilty????
I really don't need your bull ****
Its not bull **** if its true. Don't be so sensitive.
fisherman7351 wrote:
Satutory fine ???? What kind of bull*** is that??? If I lose the case, I pay whatever on the ticket. Unless the judge want to risk his cosy job, I dare him to increase the set fine... What make you think that they can increase the fine because I fought them too hard?? I have the right to defend myself.
Clearly, you have no concept of how the fine system works. Statutory fines apply the moment you go in to court. In your case, section 214 applies. That means, a minimum of $60 (which almost never happens with that charge!) to a maximum of $500. Generally, you can expect between $200-400 (depending on several factors).
I only wish I could be in attendance to see you DARE the JP to increase the fine beyond the set fine. Clearly, you haven't read case law. The set fine is simply NOT applicable and it is an error of law for a JP to just 'rubber stamp' and order the set fine. They certainly CAN order an amount equivalent to the set fine (but that's simply because its within the statutory range). The trend lately is to order a higher fine.
fisherman7351 wrote:
I have filed 11b challenge and hand delivered them to Ag Canada, Ontario, Prosecutor and Court all in one day.
Good for you. Hopefully you'll learn a lot about the system from going through the effort of doing a Charter application. I hope you 'perfected' your application so that it is actually heard by the court. Of course, I suspect you also haven't read the latest Supreme Court decision on 11b delays in courts (I'd cite the decision for you but I don't want to scare you any further!). A 10 month delay will simply be laughed at by the court. So, good luck with your application!
So, in conclusion, you've clearly shown your ignorance in law thus far and even more so towards those trying to steer you in the right direction. I therefore suspect that unless the case has a serious evidentiary flaw, you'll be outplayed very quickly by any experienced prosecutor! There ARE ways to attack these cases (and case law) to back it up. But, given that you don't want any bull ****, scare easy, and seem to think you know it all----I'll refrain from offering any more suggestions. I've already taught you about 11B delays, statutory fines, AND by-law requirements. That's enough education for one case!
I don't have to learn any system
I go in and put up my defence
If the JP doesn't like it, he can find me guilty
What else can he/she do?
Don't try to scare me. I am ready to go through the whole dame show and have the fines ready....
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…
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…
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…
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...
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…
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.
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…
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…
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…