So this happened in December 2008 and my court date now is in may 2010. I go to school outside of Ontario so my father has had to go to court twice now to postpone the trail. Each time they just give him a date and that's that...and the cop shows every time. They never listened to the fact that I wouldn't be in the province because of school and now this last new court date is final, i forget the term but they said I cant change it anymore. I don't know if I can make any argument concerning that but there it is.

So the situation was that the cop was camped out at the old stock yards in the Junction, west end of Toronto. There was literally 10 cars pulled over as everyone turns right there and I guess they finally decided to enforce it. The only argument that I can come up with is that the sign is not visible at all until you are at the corner. I don't know if that matters but google street view shows it pretty well:

that's 70 meters away, if you keep moving forward you can only see the no right turn when you come to a stop at the corner.

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=d&source=s ... 79,,0,-1.3

I just found the site and have been busy at school, just finishing exams now so I haven't had time to really prepare anything and don't know if i have time for disclosure or whatever i need to do. I believe my date is like may 17th or something. Lastly, I my first notice of trial is dated march 18th 2009 while the offense took place on December 16 2008.

I'm a young male so any real ticket is a huge problem. Help is extremely appreciated, sorry about the long post.

On the link you provided.....there is 2 "no right turn" signs at that location. One on the same post as the stop sign and one across the street. Appears to also be a silly location for trees, why the trees were not planted 1 metre closer to the sidewalk...seems might be larger problems in the future when the trees are large, not in this direction, but others on the cross road too.

anyway, signs have to be visible for at least 60 metres.

the no right turns were put in after the development of the area because residents on that road were complaining about increase in traffic. The trees were there first, so i guess they get to stay.

In terms of arguing this in trial, is this argument something that could work, because the signs are not visible from 60 m and do you know the relevant section

ok so this is what i have found

45. A sign prescribed by this Regulation, other than a sign prescribed by section 13, 14, 15, 24, 25, 26 or 27, shall be so placed as to be visible at all times for a distance of at least 60 metres to the traffic approaching the sign. O. Reg. 175/08, s. 15.

-13, 14, 15 are for stop signs

- 24, 25, 26 are parking

So could I use this as an argument if I have pictures as evidence to back it up? How would I go about making the argument and how should I present my evidence?

I think through the use of photos I could prove that the signs are not visible from 60m but does that even matter? Also, are google street view photos ok or do i need to take me own?

kades1234 wrote:

I think through the use of photos I could prove that the signs are not visible from 60m but does that even matter?

Yes it does. If the signs are not visible from 60m away, they are not enforceable. The thing about photographs is, they must reasonably show the type of scene that you would've encountered at the time the offence was committed, unless they were taken almost immediately afterwards. Also, see this sticky on submitting photographs:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1765.html

Radar Identified wrote:

kades1234 wrote:

I think through the use of photos I could prove that the signs are not visible from 60m but does that even matter?

Yes it does. If the signs are not visible from 60m away, they are not enforceable.

Pending, there is an excemption for the 60m rule too.

Plus, if the driver was able to see the stop sign and come to a stop, they would have seen the no right turn on the same post, plus the one across the intersection.

[Pending, there is an excemption for the 60m rule too.

Plus, if the driver was able to see the stop sign and come to a stop, they would have seen the no right turn on the same post, plus the one across the intersection]

My response to this is that stop signs are one of the exemptions from the 60 m rule. The argument is that if you were only first able to see the no turn sign at 30 m, or 5 m like in the photo, it is not enforceable. The stop sign is enforceable at 1 m.

That is what i would say to the prosecutor, but please people respond, i would like to know what you think. If I am offered a plea that means i wont loose points or insurance will go up, i will take it.