O.P.P criuser impounded under 172

Moderators: Radar Identified, Reflections, admin, hwybear, Decatur, bend



tdrive2
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:49 pm

by: tdrive2 on
Wed Mar 18, 2009 9:42 pm

Is the court date still March 24th.

Im hoping they throw the book at this unethical officer.

Do as you expect others to do, not what you can get away with by abusing your authority.

I hope they give her the full deal. 10 000 $ fine stuck with the charges and the whole works.

The province has already screwed over by now i assume some close to 15 000 people i hope they add her to that list aswell.

I can't wait till the day someone catches Fantino for getting a speeding ticket. Maybee we could get the whole ohta crew out to start a parade infront of the court house?

I can't wait till his day is done with the OPP. It looks as if that boy has run into trouble. To many scandals and lies. That latest one where he was trying to evict another officer as a witness in some case with a dispute of a fellow officer and his wife.

Toronto didn't like Fantino and neither did The province of Ontario.

The way they treat this officer, who was OUT OF PATROL AREA, DRIVING 65 OVER, in an UNMARKED CAR, NOT ON CALL, with NO LIGHTS. Should be punished just as all the other thousands who have been screwed over by this stunt driving law. She deserves more for thinking she can abuse her power as an officer.

Is there any way will be able to find out how this happens in court? If she was convicted of this would she lose her job? Does she work for a Highway safety division?


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
Location: Toronto

Moderator

by: Radar Identified on
Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:53 pm

As much as I admit to having a streak of schadenfreude after hearing the OPP officer got the car impounded, for the court proceeding I think that she should get the same treatment as anyone else who was caught going 165 under this stupid law. The reason being that she is likely facing a Disciplinary Hearing in addition to the HTA charges.

The public holds police officers to a higher standard than just about anyone else. When they don't meet it, there is a tremendous sense of disappointment and in many cases, anger. In this case, so many motorists have had their cars seized by the very agency that she represents that it is more than understandable that they're howling for blood when she committed the same act. That said, she's going to get hammered not only by the courts, but probably by charges under the Police Services Act as well. She made a very bad decision and will pay dearly for it. I think that's more than sufficient. Maybe either in the Provincial Offences Court or the Disciplinary Hearing she can explain just what in the heck she was thinking.

She's a Detective-Constable and not part of the Highway Safety Division.


tdrive2
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:49 pm

by: tdrive2 on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:56 am

Oh okay so she was a detective-constable not on call and happened to get pulled over by a highway safety division officer doing speed enforcement then the officer called in to see if she was on call or on duty, then decided to give her the ticket?

Interesting though you rarely hear of other officers fining others. Is it still scheduled for march 24th?

I find around the GTA the highway safety division guys seem to go pretty fast to. It really bugs me when i see the officers who are supposed to enforce laws disobey them.

Today on the QEW i saw an officer who was upset the left lane wasnt moving fast enough so he pulls over into the right lane to gun it past some trucks and didnt even have his lights on. He just wanted to go a bit faster than all the ones going 115. Sure he could have needed to do it for many reasons. But it annoys me and others. That officer knows your not supposed to pass on the right as the HTA says.

He should know they are the ones that enforce the HTA. A couple weeks ago i watched a highway safety division officer on 2 lane highway with a posted limit of 90. She was going 105-120 the whole time as everyone else followed her. She had no lights on and appeared to be driving back towards her detachment.

I mean i don't know what to say. She wasnt doing anything dangerous. Just how does she feel when she gives someone a ticket for doing the same thing she just did?


User avatar
Squishy
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:45 am
Location: Orillia
Contact:

by: Squishy on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:04 am

tdrive2 wrote:...
That officer knows your not supposed to pass on the right as the HTA says.
...
What? Section 150 specifically says you can.
         Image


tdrive2
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:49 pm

by: tdrive2 on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:07 am

But can't you get a ticket for passing on the right aswell?

That whole section is very confusing. The HTA is quite confusing sometimes. If not i believe that 172 defines racing as changing lanes faster then the flow of traffic to advance over the natural or normal flow of traffic.

So this can be interpreted many ways.

Regardless this is the problem with alot of this. It's generally understood you pass on the left and move to the right to let others pass.

Im not worried about what he did. What worries me is all the other cars that saw that. They think its normal behavior now. Now they to think he if they wont move out of the way i can just weave to the right around the trucks to pass him.

Which of course if people do this it becomes dangerous.

You cant post a limit of 100 km/h but if the police themselves don't believe in it and drive it how can you expect the public to do the same?
Last edited by tdrive2 on Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:16 am, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Squishy
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:45 am
Location: Orillia
Contact:

by: Squishy on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:09 am

Not that I know of. Which section would that be in violation of?

It might draw the attention of an officer who then tickets you for speeding.
         Image


User avatar
Squishy
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:45 am
Location: Orillia
Contact:

by: Squishy on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:43 am

The part of s. 172 you referenced states, "...repeatedly changing lanes in close proximity to other vehicles so as to advance through the ordinary flow of traffic while driving at a rate of speed that is a marked departure from the lawful rate of speed."

So it would be an unsafe lane change anyways, but repeatedly doing so in order to speed will get you charged under s. 172 instead of s. 154.

You mentioned passing to the right of trucks - does that mean some trucks were travelling in the centre lane while the right lane was clear? Or were there trucks in the right lane and the officer passed them on the shoulder? In the latter case, it would be "passing off roadway" (s. 150 (2)) but I'm pretty sure an officer can do so if on a call, lights or not.
         Image


tdrive2
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:49 pm

by: tdrive2 on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:51 am

By all means to get to an emergency what ever way is the fastest way is the best way. The faster he gets there could mean a live saved.

But an officer just driving or going somewhere not on call so to say or at the end of a shift has no more priority then other traffic on the road.

No he was in the left lane then went in the middle behind a truck got annoyed both were to slow so he just floored it into the right lane (3 lane highway on qew) to pass them all.

No lights or anything. I mean it wasn't dangerous or anything. But if he does it sets a bad example. Can you imagine if everyone who wanted to go faster did this? What a mess.

These people tailgate. There is a ton of them. The tailgating is one thing. Boy oh boy look out when all these people give up on getting that left lane hog out of the way they just start swerving lanes to pass them.

But when an officer does this it sets a bad example. Just as officers driving 20-30 over the MAXIMUM posted speed limit.

I realize alot of the HTA doesn't apply to an officer on call or lights on or w.e. They need to attend an emergency or crash on the road. So be it.

But i am not talking about that. I am referring to just driving. Going for a break. Just patrol. Going to Tim hortons to get 12 dozen boston cream you get the idea...

What he did was uncalled for it was mid day traffic no construction or traffic jam. In that situation if he was on emergency the lights would have worked alot better.

One thing i must agree with what hwybear said before was late at night or with really light traffic sometimes its better to leave your lights off because when you race up behind them they might just move over as opposed to seeing a cop and slaming on the breaks....




User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

by: hwybear on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:26 am

Squishy wrote: Or were there trucks in the right lane and the officer passed them on the shoulder? In the latter case, it would be "passing off roadway" (s. 150 (2)) but I'm pretty sure an officer can do so if on a call, lights or not.
For anyone, Sect 150 does not apply either on a "paved" shoulder! Fail to drive in a marked lane does...FYI
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
BelSlySTi
Member
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:35 am

by: BelSlySTi on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:35 am

tdrive2 wrote:Is the court date still March 24th.

Im hoping they throw the book at this unethical officer.

Do as you expect others to do, not what you can get away with by abusing your authority.

I hope they give her the full deal. 10 000 $ fine stuck with the charges and the whole works.
I hope she gets off 100%, just like Const. Lloyd Tapp!
I never read anything else about the other "Damn Street Racer" Const. Michael Deyell.
[img]http://i328.photobucket.com/albums/l352/toastedwhitebread/Untitled-TrueColor-03.jpg[/img]


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:38 pm
Location: Stratford, Ontario

by: Bookm on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:35 am

I know Drivers Ed still teaches kids not to pass on the right, but it's actually quite legal and necessary due to left-lane slugs. I think passing on the right is illegal on the German Autobahn though (could be wrong).

It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside when I see a marked cruiser driving at "sensible" speed. It shows me that some out there realize the speed limit is just a number on a sign and doesn't necessarily make it the most practical speed to drive at all times.


User avatar
FiReSTaRT
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 371
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:01 pm
Location: GTA

by: FiReSTaRT on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:20 am

Passing on the right is illegal in Germany because hogging the left lane is both illegal and immoral over there. Drivers are taught proper lane discipline in Europe. Over here, hogging the left lane may be illegal, but it's not considered immoral and it's definitely not being enforced.
What kind of a man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
Location: Toronto

Moderator

by: Radar Identified on
Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:51 am

It seems as though most European countries engineer their road, traffic and safety systems to try to keep the traffic moving. Blocking the passing lane is the antithesis of keeping traffic moving. Here in North America, traffic systems and driver education is focused on trying to make traffic stop as often as possible and, when it does move, to try to make it move as slowly as possible. This, I think, is why hogging the left lane is not viewed with tremendous disdain on this side of the Atlantic.

I really wonder why the left lane hogs make the effort to cross so many lanes of traffic, particularly in Toronto, to get into that lane. I really would like to get inside their heads and figure out what they're thinking, because there is absolutely no logical reason to be there unless you're overtaking other vehicles, or traffic is stop-and-go.


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics

Return to “General Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests