I got a ticket for 'Disobey Stop Sign' in November of 2013 (in York Region), requested disclosure and went to court in August of 2014. At my first appearance, I did not plea but requested an ajournment to to consult legal advice. The JOP set the next appearance in September. I contacted a paralegal about my options. He told me that on my next appearance, if the police officer did not show, the charges would be withdrawn (he didn't encourage me to choose that option, merely informed me of the possibility). However, on my next court appearance in September, I went to the prosecutor and said I was pleading 'not guilty' (the officer was not present in court), and instead the JOP schedule a trial date several months from now. I am confused now. Did I miss something? My second question is if, at this stage, it's still possible to contact the prosecutor's office or the court before the trial, and attempt to plea to a lesser charge (thus forgo the trial appearance). It's not that I don't want to fight it, but it's dragging on longer than I may be able afford to deal with (taking time off work to go to court, etc.). Thanks.
I got a ticket for 'Disobey Stop Sign' in November of 2013 (in York Region), requested disclosure and went to court in August of 2014. At my first appearance, I did not plea but requested an ajournment to to consult legal advice. The JOP set the next appearance in September.
I contacted a paralegal about my options. He told me that on my next appearance, if the police officer did not show, the charges would be withdrawn (he didn't encourage me to choose that option, merely informed me of the possibility).
However, on my next court appearance in September, I went to the prosecutor and said I was pleading 'not guilty' (the officer was not present in court), and instead the JOP schedule a trial date several months from now.
I am confused now. Did I miss something?
My second question is if, at this stage, it's still possible to contact the prosecutor's office or the court before the trial, and attempt to plea to a lesser charge (thus forgo the trial appearance). It's not that I don't want to fight it, but it's dragging on longer than I may be able afford to deal with (taking time off work to go to court, etc.).
Rough Timeline Received Ticket: Nov 2013 1st Trial: Aug 2014 2nd Trial: Sep 2014 3rd Trial: ???? You're at-fault for the time between the 2nd and 1st trial. But the rest is the crown's fault. I would consider an 11b application. Prosecutor will always plea-bargain in order to avoid a lengthy trial.
Rough Timeline
Received Ticket: Nov 2013
1st Trial: Aug 2014
2nd Trial: Sep 2014
3rd Trial: ????
You're at-fault for the time between the 2nd and 1st trial. But the rest is the crown's fault. I would consider an 11b application.
Prosecutor will always plea-bargain in order to avoid a lengthy trial.
Hi iFly55, Next court appearance is in December. I am thinking an 11b might be a hard sell considering I was the one who requested the adjournment in August. I am just totally confused because it looks like it doesn't matter whether the police officer shows up even for your first appearance? If the outcome of pleading not guilty on your first appearance means they simply schedule a date for your trial (and the officer can show up then)?
iFly55 wrote:
Rough Timeline
Received Ticket: Nov 2013
1st Trial: Aug 2014
2nd Trial: Sep 2014
3rd Trial: ????
You're at-fault for the time between the 2nd and 1st trial. But the rest is the crown's fault. I would consider an 11b application.
Prosecutor will always plea-bargain in order to avoid a lengthy trial.
Hi iFly55,
Next court appearance is in December. I am thinking an 11b might be a hard sell considering I was the one who requested the adjournment in August. I am just totally confused because it looks like it doesn't matter whether the police officer shows up even for your first appearance? If the outcome of pleading not guilty on your first appearance means they simply schedule a date for your trial (and the officer can show up then)?
Your adjournment only accounts for a one month delay. I don't think you understand how 11b time calculations are done, you should review R. v. Andrade: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj470.html From what you described the officer has another opportunity to appear for your next trial. Just like how you requested an adjournment to seek legal counsel, the prosecutor can request an adjournment so their witness (officer) can be present. It works both-ways. In busier jurisdictions, the prosecutor will withdraw the charge if the officer isn't present. In other places, they're happy to schedule another date and give the officer an opportunity to testify.
From what you described the officer has another opportunity to appear for your next trial. Just like how you requested an adjournment to seek legal counsel, the prosecutor can request an adjournment so their witness (officer) can be present. It works both-ways.
In busier jurisdictions, the prosecutor will withdraw the charge if the officer isn't present. In other places, they're happy to schedule another date and give the officer an opportunity to testify.
Thanks for that link and explanation iFly55! I am surprising to see that the 11(b) worked in this case (11 months), as I thought the standard was usually a year or more (for delays due to the Crown). I've reading up on the 'how to file 11(b)' threads, that looks like a ton of work as well. Eh..
From what you described the officer has another opportunity to appear for your next trial. Just like how you requested an adjournment to seek legal counsel, the prosecutor can request an adjournment so their witness (officer) can be present. It works both-ways.
In busier jurisdictions, the prosecutor will withdraw the charge if the officer isn't present. In other places, they're happy to schedule another date and give the officer an opportunity to testify.
Thanks for that link and explanation iFly55! I am surprising to see that the 11(b) worked in this case (11 months), as I thought the standard was usually a year or more (for delays due to the Crown). I've reading up on the 'how to file 11(b)' threads, that looks like a ton of work as well. Eh..
But very, very, very satisfying if you succeed! One of the hardest things you will ever do is to keep the smile off your face when the justice of the peace stays the charge and you walk out of the courtroom past the prosecutor :lol: :lol: :lol:
zopiclone wrote:
Thanks for that link and explanation iFly55! I am surprising to see that the 11(b) worked in this case (11 months), as I thought the standard was usually a year or more (for delays due to the Crown). I've reading up on the 'how to file 11(b)' threads, that looks like a ton of work as well. Eh..
But very, very, very satisfying if you succeed! One of the hardest things you will ever do is to keep the smile off your face when the justice of the peace stays the charge and you walk out of the courtroom past the prosecutor
So I was reading all the threads about how to file an 11(b), and saw that I should request transcripts (in my case, for the first appearance when I requested an adjournment and the second appearance when the prosecutor requested an adjournment). So I was trying to figure out where I would have to go to request my transcripts and found this... http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.c ... cripts.asp Am I understanding this correctly? They've outsourced transcript requests to "independent, authorized court transcriptionist" and I would have to pay the crazy fees to obtain the transcripts to go along with my 11(b) application?
So I was reading all the threads about how to file an 11(b), and saw that I should request transcripts (in my case, for the first appearance when I requested an adjournment and the second appearance when the prosecutor requested an adjournment). So I was trying to figure out where I would have to go to request my transcripts and found this...
Am I understanding this correctly? They've outsourced transcript requests to "independent, authorized court transcriptionist" and I would have to pay the crazy fees to obtain the transcripts to go along with my 11(b) application?
Forget that link, just go to the ticket office where you filed your ticket for trial; they will take your transcript request. The costs depends on how much was actually said during the adjournment; if it was a few minutes than you're going to spend less than $20 for three copies.
Forget that link, just go to the ticket office where you filed your ticket for trial; they will take your transcript request. The costs depends on how much was actually said during the adjournment; if it was a few minutes than you're going to spend less than $20 for three copies.
You certainly can try your luck with an 11b application, just don't expect to win. Many people don't really understand this remedy and waste their time applying and even worse, telling others to apply. They simply look at the Andrade decision and think that's the law (several decisions have been decided since then!). Plus, they don't understand the complex arguments involved----its not just math! To succeed, you have to prove that you were READY for trial but couldn't proceed because of the Crown's delays and you were prejudiced because of it. It doesn't appear to apply in your case---after all, you were STILL asking for disclosure in August 2014! You therefore can't argue from one side of your mouth that you still needed disclosure and consult with a legal representative (which means you weren't ready to proceed to trial!) AND that you were also ready for trial----which was it? Remember, there are transcripts for these things so be careful not to perjure yourself. Your Aug 2014 date was likely a trial date but YOU were the one who couldn't proceed because YOU asked for the adjournment. Your September date was just a 'set date'----to schedule a trial (whereby the officer does not need to attend!)---it was likely NOT another trial date!!! I highly doubt they would have given you another trial date within 1 month. Check that out and you'll likely see I'm correct. Once again, section 11b remedies are for unreasonable delays not attributed to you. I therefore wouldn't waste my time with such nonsense--any prosecutor worth their weight will easily shoot down your arguments and even if the JP gets the law wrong, an appeal court will likely rule re-open the case so you'd be back to square one. Instead, be prepared to proceed to trial on your next trial date.
You certainly can try your luck with an 11b application, just don't expect to win. Many people don't really understand this remedy and waste their time applying and even worse, telling others to apply. They simply look at the Andrade decision and think that's the law (several decisions have been decided since then!). Plus, they don't understand the complex arguments involved----its not just math!
To succeed, you have to prove that you were READY for trial but couldn't proceed because of the Crown's delays and you were prejudiced because of it. It doesn't appear to apply in your case---after all, you were STILL asking for disclosure in August 2014! You therefore can't argue from one side of your mouth that you still needed disclosure and consult with a legal representative (which means you weren't ready to proceed to trial!) AND that you were also ready for trial----which was it? Remember, there are transcripts for these things so be careful not to perjure yourself.
Your Aug 2014 date was likely a trial date but YOU were the one who couldn't proceed because YOU asked for the adjournment. Your September date was just a 'set date'----to schedule a trial (whereby the officer does not need to attend!)---it was likely NOT another trial date!!! I highly doubt they would have given you another trial date within 1 month. Check that out and you'll likely see I'm correct.
Once again, section 11b remedies are for unreasonable delays not attributed to you. I therefore wouldn't waste my time with such nonsense--any prosecutor worth their weight will easily shoot down your arguments and even if the JP gets the law wrong, an appeal court will likely rule re-open the case so you'd be back to square one.
Instead, be prepared to proceed to trial on your next trial date.
Actually, I didn't request disclosure on my first appearance in August. I requested disclosure beforehand (3 times) and finally received a call to pick it up and sign for it 3 weeks before the August appearance. But yes, I did request an adjournment in my first appearance in August to consult legal counsel, and the JOP scheduled the next appearance for September--this is the part that I indicated in my original post that I was confused about. As mentioned, I did contact a paralegal for advice over the phone. When I specifically asked "...if the police officer does not show on my next appearance, does that mean my ticket will be withdrawn?" The paralegal's answer was "yes." But it didn't happen on my second appearance in September. Instead, they set a trial date for December. I know I am responsible for the 1 month delay resulting for my request for an adjournment from August - September, this is why I indicated in my original post that I didn't think I'd have a case for filing an 11(b). I always thought the 'magic number' was 13 months. But in R. v. Andrade, the judge stayed the proceedings even though the total delay time was 11 months (I think the 3 months delay between September and December for my next appearance constitutes "institutional delay"?) I did do some quick calculations, and I think in my case, I might fall literally just a few days short of 11 months (my next appearance is in - very early - December). I know that even 11 months delay 11(b) might be a hard-sell, but you are saying it won't work at all? I am really confused :/
highwaystar wrote:
To succeed, you have to prove that you were READY for trial but couldn't proceed because of the Crown's delays and you were prejudiced because of it. It doesn't appear to apply in your case---after all, you were STILL asking for disclosure in August 2014! You therefore can't argue from one side of your mouth that you still needed disclosure and consult with a legal representative (which means you weren't ready to proceed to trial!) AND that you were also ready for trial----which was it? Remember, there are transcripts for these things so be careful not to perjure yourself.
Your Aug 2014 date was likely a trial date but YOU were the one who couldn't proceed because YOU asked for the adjournment. Your September date was just a 'set date'----to schedule a trial (whereby the officer does not need to attend!)---it was likely NOT another trial date!!! I highly doubt they would have given you another trial date within 1 month. Check that out and you'll likely see I'm correct.
Actually, I didn't request disclosure on my first appearance in August. I requested disclosure beforehand (3 times) and finally received a call to pick it up and sign for it 3 weeks before the August appearance. But yes, I did request an adjournment in my first appearance in August to consult legal counsel, and the JOP scheduled the next appearance for September--this is the part that I indicated in my original post that I was confused about.
As mentioned, I did contact a paralegal for advice over the phone. When I specifically asked "...if the police officer does not show on my next appearance, does that mean my ticket will be withdrawn?" The paralegal's answer was "yes." But it didn't happen on my second appearance in September. Instead, they set a trial date for December.
I know I am responsible for the 1 month delay resulting for my request for an adjournment from August - September, this is why I indicated in my original post that I didn't think I'd have a case for filing an 11(b). I always thought the 'magic number' was 13 months. But in R. v. Andrade, the judge stayed the proceedings even though the total delay time was 11 months (I think the 3 months delay between September and December for my next appearance constitutes "institutional delay"?)
I did do some quick calculations, and I think in my case, I might fall literally just a few days short of 11 months (my next appearance is in - very early - December). I know that even 11 months delay 11(b) might be a hard-sell, but you are saying it won't work at all? I am really confused :/
I'm not saying don't try----after all, you COULD very well succeed with your argument. I personally wouldn't waste my time, given all the effort involved and the odds of success. However, if you've got the time and patience (or just want to use this experience to educate yourself on these things), then go ahead. Just be ready to argue the math surrounding the delay and why a stay is the appropriate remedy (i.e. the prejudice to your case). The prejudice component might be the difficult one to really meet in your case. Plus, don't just go in there with the Andrade decision---update yourself on the law since that case. I simply mentioned the 11b issues because you stated that the case was dragging on more than you might be able to afford---hence, why you wanted to plea bargain. Going the 11b route is going to take time and effort on your part. If you had a very solid 11b case then it would absolutely be worth it. However, it really is a 50/50 (at best). So, if you do a cost-benefit analysis, it is probably cheaper to just focus in on a defence for your case and/or consider a plea bargain. After all, chances are good that if you file an 11b application and lose, the prosecutor is less likely to give you a good plea deal. Again, that's just my take on it----every person has a different perspective and neither is wrong. As long as you go in with eyes wide open and are aware of the consequences, its your decision to make. Regardless, best of luck with your case.
I'm not saying don't try----after all, you COULD very well succeed with your argument. I personally wouldn't waste my time, given all the effort involved and the odds of success. However, if you've got the time and patience (or just want to use this experience to educate yourself on these things), then go ahead. Just be ready to argue the math surrounding the delay and why a stay is the appropriate remedy (i.e. the prejudice to your case). The prejudice component might be the difficult one to really meet in your case. Plus, don't just go in there with the Andrade decision---update yourself on the law since that case.
I simply mentioned the 11b issues because you stated that the case was dragging on more than you might be able to afford---hence, why you wanted to plea bargain. Going the 11b route is going to take time and effort on your part. If you had a very solid 11b case then it would absolutely be worth it. However, it really is a 50/50 (at best). So, if you do a cost-benefit analysis, it is probably cheaper to just focus in on a defence for your case and/or consider a plea bargain. After all, chances are good that if you file an 11b application and lose, the prosecutor is less likely to give you a good plea deal. Again, that's just my take on it----every person has a different perspective and neither is wrong. As long as you go in with eyes wide open and are aware of the consequences, its your decision to make. Regardless, best of luck with your case.
Ah ok, I get you. Thanks for the clarification. The plea deal I would be looking at for this jurisdiction (the one offered to all the people who had the same charge on my first and second appearance) is 2 demerits and reduction of fine to something like $60. To me that is virtually meaningless as a 'lesser plea' for a 3 demerit and $110 or so offence. So yeah, I am tired of this whole thing and it's seriously cutting into my schedule (more so if I have to take at least an entire afternoon off to do the whole 11(b) thing at the courthouse), but I feel they are not leaving me much choice. But really appreciate your caution.
Ah ok, I get you. Thanks for the clarification.
The plea deal I would be looking at for this jurisdiction (the one offered to all the people who had the same charge on my first and second appearance) is 2 demerits and reduction of fine to something like $60. To me that is virtually meaningless as a 'lesser plea' for a 3 demerit and $110 or so offence. So yeah, I am tired of this whole thing and it's seriously cutting into my schedule (more so if I have to take at least an entire afternoon off to do the whole 11(b) thing at the courthouse), but I feel they are not leaving me much choice. But really appreciate your caution.
Here's an 11b success story where they only had a 7mnth delay: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com ... tml#p21984 highwaystar does have good advice here, it's not just about the time delay you also have to show how the delay has prejudiced you: sleep deprivation, problems at work/school, always thinking about it, frowned upon at work for requesting numerous days off in relation to the matter, concerned family members wondering why you're always at the court house... distrust, that maybe you were charged with something more serious. I'm merely just thinking out loud here... Most prosecutors will accept your 11b as long as your delay is within the guidelines; if they disagree who's responsible for the delay, then that's when you'll have to go through the pre-trial motion and convince the JP. Most JPs focus solely on the time delay, and they accept inferences of prejudice and don't even require you to swear under oath. highwaystar is correct there are a number of decisions since Andrade: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/#search/ty ... de%20delay Perusing through the relevant cases, they appear to be positive and pro-defendant. It'll be in your best interest to go through them.
highwaystar does have good advice here, it's not just about the time delay you also have to show how the delay has prejudiced you: sleep deprivation, problems at work/school, always thinking about it, frowned upon at work for requesting numerous days off in relation to the matter, concerned family members wondering why you're always at the court house... distrust, that maybe you were charged with something more serious. I'm merely just thinking out loud here...
Most prosecutors will accept your 11b as long as your delay is within the guidelines; if they disagree who's responsible for the delay, then that's when you'll have to go through the pre-trial motion and convince the JP.
Most JPs focus solely on the time delay, and they accept inferences of prejudice and don't even require you to swear under oath.
Thanks so much for the link to the cases iFly55. Quick question: an I correct to assume the decisions from the human rights and labour tribunals are not binding, but merely 'persuasive' (at best), since they are not decisions from higher courts? In fact, how do I 'rank' the court decisions in relation to 'traffic court'? Superior Court of Justice Court of Appeal for Ontario Ontario Court of Justice <-- trials for HTA offences fall here, i.e. me? Is this correct?
Thanks so much for the link to the cases iFly55. Quick question: an I correct to assume the decisions from the human rights and labour tribunals are not binding, but merely 'persuasive' (at best), since they are not decisions from higher courts? In fact, how do I 'rank' the court decisions in relation to 'traffic court'?
Superior Court of Justice
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Ontario Court of Justice <-- trials for HTA offences fall here, i.e. me?
Ignore the Civil, Commercial, Human Rights cases, look for decisions like R. v. Jair, 2013 ONCJ 142 (CanLII): http://canlii.ca/t/fwnhp R. v. Szewczyk, 2012 ONCJ 680 (CanLII): http://canlii.ca/t/ftlss Make sure they discuss 11b and R. v. Andrade Cases that are binding will be any decision made at a court higher than the regular trial (JP); so if the decision is written by a justice/judge then it's binding to your trial court. Even JP decisions are persuasive depending on who wrote it and how well written it is. Sister/Brother JPs have to provide explanations/reasons as to why they disagree.
Ignore the Civil, Commercial, Human Rights cases, look for decisions like
Cases that are binding will be any decision made at a court higher than the regular trial (JP); so if the decision is written by a justice/judge then it's binding to your trial court. Even JP decisions are persuasive depending on who wrote it and how well written it is. Sister/Brother JPs have to provide explanations/reasons as to why they disagree.
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got a ticket, Disobey stop sign, sec 136.1.a on dec 6th
I made a left in an intersection and was pulled over by a police officer in an unmarked car who had been sitting down the road. A classic fishing hole situation. I was genuinely surprised when he stopped me and told me I went through a stop sign without even slowing down. I know to shut up and be polite and take the ticket. I…
Yesterday morning, I rear-ended someone. I was going the speed limit. The sun was directly in front of me and it blinded my windshield and my eyes. At the same time, the person in front of me stopped/slowed down (also due to the sun). I started to slow down but didn't stop and I hit them since I couldn't see anything. I was not driving too close initially. I…
I was driving in the county at night and hit a limousine stretched out side ways across the road. The limo had its lights on and had side lighting as well. The police officer charged me with careless driving because it was "fully lit up".
It took me to the next day to figure out what had happened - what I remember made no sense. What I had run across was a "false visual reference" illusion.
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster untill I got pulled over at 147 on an 80 km hwy.
I alreaddy lost 3 points and this time was just the…
Hello, got stopped today for rolling a stop sign. Ticket says failure to stop, but quotes hta 1361b.
Doesn't 1361b mean failure to yield?
Is this a fatal error? Or could it be amended at trial. How can I prepare a defence if I don't know if I'm defending the failure to stop or the failure to yield?
After he was providing me with a ticket for failure to obey to the stop sign (I am pretty sure I stopped but less than 3 seconds recommended by my driver ed. instructor), I know everybody say that..as an excuse.
Then he stopped me again to return the documents.
Any advice and feed back would be really appreciated.
Can you get evidence for whether someone had an advanced green at an intersection? My dad was making a right turn on a red (after stopping) into a plaza parking lot. He got hit by someone making a left turn from the opposite lane. The driver told the officer called to the collision that he had an advance green. My dad said he came out of nowhere which makes me…
So i was driving on Eglinton Avenue East near Rosemount Ave.
The school bus was on the the curb on the opposite side of the road while i was travelling on the middle lane of the three-laned Eglinton Avenue East (five lanes apart plus a raised median island seperating the traffic)
I could not see the school bus as my view of the bus was being obstructed by the cars in front of me and on my left hand…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
This morning I had an exam for university. I was studying the entire night and i wanted to catch like maybe 1-2 hours of sleep before the exam so i went to sleep. I woke up like 5 hrs after and realize that I was about to miss my exam. I still could have made it so I asked my dad for his car since I was in a huge rush and he gave it to me.
I went on the highway and I was going at 135 km/h but…
the police officer was in in the opesite oncumming lane he was fallowing another car so close that i was not even able to see his cruser till he was buy he said that i was going 111 in a 80 he said he hade me on radar he only asked for me drivers licencs and never asked for my insurence so on the ticket there no insurence dose enyone think i can beat this i wana take it to cort becuse he was…
Hi I have a couple questions so I'll explain my situation and any advice would be appreciated.
Can't remember exact date so lets call it some time in 2008 I got a fine for $5000.00 for driving without in insurance. I never paid the fine and in 2012 I was pulled over and the officer asked to see my license. Although I had it on me I figured it would be under suspension for the unpaid fine from…
Alright, so I did something really stupid the other day, I was driving down a country road and wanted to hit the curves so I passed 3 cars at once, inadvertently making it up to very much past 50 over (80 limit)... Much to my chagrin there was a cop coming in the opposite direction who immediately skidded on the gravel shoulder and who I thought was 100% going to turn around and pull me over,…
Anyone know how backed this courthouse is? I submitted my ticket for trial at the end of August, and still no letter. Im scared it got lost in the mail, can i call the courthouse and find out my courtdate? Or would i have to go in personally?
I recently received a ticket for failure to use low beams - while following - Ticket was issued Sec 168 (
- it was on the 401 and no one was within 500 meters of me, I was warning a oncoming vehicle that there was an officer hiding (which is not illegal or I could not find a law against it) it was a police vehicle travelling at very high rate of speed in the opposite direction with no lights on…
I received a warning letter from MTO for a 2pts ticket.What happened is that the police officer issued a "unsafe left turn" and then changed the ticket to "failed to signal" at the scene, but she submitted both tickets!!! And I !!!ONLY!!! received the latter ticket from her(I requested trial for "failed to signal"). I recently received notice from MTO that I'm convicted for "unsafe left turn".
Hello everyone! I was given a ticket for using a hand-held communication device while driving. It was 3 am, I was at a stop light and the cop saw me with the my phone in my hand. I told him i was just checking the time on it. I received the notes a few weeks ago ill copy them down below. Any help is appreciated although i believe there's no hope for me. The cop recorded me saying what phone i…
I got pulled over about 15 or so days ago the court till this date has not received the summons what is the legal time period that the court has to follow to accept the summons from the office court says its 15 days is the legal timeframe the officer has to serve it on the court
I requested for disclosure of information two months ago.
I received the radar manual after one month, but not others (including maintenance/calibration record of the radar, certificate of police training). On further pursuit, the prosecutor told me that he did not have them and he did not see why I needed these documents. He said he did not know where to get them when I asked.
Last Friday I was pulled over by an OPP motorcycle cop who informed me I was going 134. I was on the SB 404, I did see him parked under a bridge and when I passed him he was not on his bike.
I'm hoping to get some insight for a defense in this case.
I was in lane 1 and I had a car in front of me, and a car behind me, also there was a car speeding down Lane 3 passing everyone and moved quickly into…
