My son was charged with failure to wear seatbelt. The officer observed him driving by from about 20 meters away. Given that the officer allegedly didn't see the seatbelt. Is this evidence ? My point would be that evidence requires you to actually see something, not seeing something is not evidence ? Dave
My son was charged with failure to wear seatbelt.
The officer observed him driving by from about 20 meters away. Given that the officer allegedly didn't see the seatbelt. Is this evidence ? My point would be that evidence requires you to actually see something, not seeing something is not evidence ?
the officer could have "seen" that the seat belt buckle was next to your son's head..... or that he was trying to put it on when he noticed the cop....
the officer could have "seen" that the seat belt buckle was next to your son's head..... or that he was trying to put it on when he noticed the cop....
I have disclosure, no mention of seeing the seatbelt latch. Looked at that site, going with officers ability to see. As it turns out the officer "pulled him over" in our driveway so no reason to have his seatbelt on there.
I have disclosure, no mention of seeing the seatbelt latch. Looked at that site, going with officers ability to see. As it turns out the officer "pulled him over" in our driveway so no reason to have his seatbelt on there.
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt".
davec wrote:
Given that the officer allegedly didn't see the seatbelt. Is this evidence ? My point would be that evidence requires you to actually see something, not seeing something is not evidence ?
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt".
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt". So this is considered evidence ? There are so many things he does not see. I would think evidence would be he saw the seatbelt unlatched.
hwybear wrote:
davec wrote:
Given that the officer allegedly didn't see the seatbelt. Is this evidence ? My point would be that evidence requires you to actually see something, not seeing something is not evidence ?
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt".
So this is considered evidence ? There are so many things he does not see. I would think evidence would be he saw the seatbelt unlatched.
He alleges that he did not see the seatbelt about 1km away from our driveway. He followed my son to our driveway. Did not pull him over, rather once my son had parked he pulled up to the curb by our driveway. At this point I would think there is no reason for my son to have his seatbelt on. He is parked in a driveway. Which is private property and the HTA does not apply.
OPS Copper wrote:
That is unless he saw him not wearing his seatbelt on the road as STOPPED him in the driveway..
ops
He alleges that he did not see the seatbelt about 1km away from our driveway. He followed my son to our driveway. Did not pull him over, rather once my son had parked he pulled up to the curb by our driveway. At this point I would think there is no reason for my son to have his seatbelt on. He is parked in a driveway. Which is private property and the HTA does not apply.
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt". So this is considered evidence ? There are so many things he does not see. I would think evidence would be he saw the seatbelt unlatched. I rarely have the seatbelt unlatched as evidence as that is not easy to see. It is way easier to explain that no portion of the seat belt assembly was observed diagonal across the upper torso of the driver. Just b/c someone leaves the hwy (such as pulling into a convenience store, mall, gas station etc... ) does not make the offence no longer valid, otherwise everyone would just drive off the hwy.
davec wrote:
hwybear wrote:
davec wrote:
Given that the officer allegedly didn't see the seatbelt. Is this evidence ? My point would be that evidence requires you to actually see something, not seeing something is not evidence ?
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt".
So this is considered evidence ? There are so many things he does not see. I would think evidence would be he saw the seatbelt unlatched.
I rarely have the seatbelt unlatched as evidence as that is not easy to see. It is way easier to explain that no portion of the seat belt assembly was observed diagonal across the upper torso of the driver.
Just b/c someone leaves the hwy (such as pulling into a convenience store, mall, gas station etc... ) does not make the offence no longer valid, otherwise everyone would just drive off the hwy.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
So this is considered evidence ? There are so many things he does not see. I would think evidence would be he saw the seatbelt unlatched. I rarely have the seatbelt unlatched as evidence as that is not easy to see. It is way easier to explain that no portion of the seat belt assembly was observed diagonal across the upper torso of the driver. Just b/c someone leaves the hwy (such as pulling into a convenience store, mall, gas station etc... ) does not make the offence no longer valid, otherwise everyone would just drive off the hwy. Yes, but I would think someone driving by you at a distance of 20 meters makes it difficult to see the diagonal strap if the strap is the same colour as your shirt. Now if you stopped them and were 2 feet away, that is different. Yes I agree about leaving the highway, but it is not expected for someone to have their seatbelt fastened in their driveway. On that note, is it even legal for the officer to come on our property without permission ?
hwybear wrote:
davec wrote:
hwybear wrote:
The officer did not see something... "no use of a seatbelt".
So this is considered evidence ? There are so many things he does not see. I would think evidence would be he saw the seatbelt unlatched.
I rarely have the seatbelt unlatched as evidence as that is not easy to see. It is way easier to explain that no portion of the seat belt assembly was observed diagonal across the upper torso of the driver.
Just b/c someone leaves the hwy (such as pulling into a convenience store, mall, gas station etc... ) does not make the offence no longer valid, otherwise everyone would just drive off the hwy.
Yes, but I would think someone driving by you at a distance of 20 meters makes it difficult to see the diagonal strap if the strap is the same colour as your shirt. Now if you stopped them and were 2 feet away, that is different.
Yes I agree about leaving the highway, but it is not expected for someone to have their seatbelt fastened in their driveway.
On that note, is it even legal for the officer to come on our property without permission ?
It is actually quite easy to see some one not wearing a seatbelt...even from 20 meters. yes the police can come onto your property with out permission. He is in lawful execution of his duties. gs
It is actually quite easy to see some one not wearing a seatbelt...even from 20 meters.
yes the police can come onto your property with out permission. He is in lawful execution of his duties.
Officer was a no show charges withdrawn. I think this is more common now that we have all these agents. Agents deal with most of the cases, and when they do they negotiate. Of course now that I think about it, it's in their best interest to negotiate. If they embarass the prosecutor their future negotiations will be prejudiced. So it would be rare for a charge to go to trial.
Officer was a no show charges withdrawn.
I think this is more common now that we have all these agents. Agents deal with most of the cases, and when they do they negotiate. Of course now that I think about it, it's in their best interest to negotiate. If they embarass the prosecutor their future negotiations will be prejudiced. So it would be rare for a charge to go to trial.
I have a lot of issues with the idea that speed measuring devices like radar and lidar guns are using computer generated simulations to test themselves that they are working properly. The manufacturer is making a claim that a device can test itself. Where's the proof that it works?
I was pulled over a couple days ago going down a steep incline on my way to Cobourg. In order to get up a hill in my vehicle, I have to go at least 90 or it gets stuck between gears and then when I was going down the hill I wasn't riding my brake or touching the gas, it just gained speed. When I…
Question, mrsbobajob, a while ago, went to a sleep went to a sleep clinics, due to snoring, not sure if sleep apnea. Now someone told her that if she does have SA, her insurance needs to know and it will go on her license. So she didnt go to pick up her report.
I hope I can paint the picture with the accuracy that the truth deserves. I have no intention of just beating a ticket.. but more like beating a really unfair ticket. You decide!
I had entered Canada after a short trip downsouth through Detroit on my way to Toronto. Not being equipped with a GPS…
alright well last night (march 19th) at 12:55 am i had recieved 2 tickets the first was failing to stop at a stop sign (i did a rolling stop) and it was dated the 19th the second ticket that i got at the exact same time was dated the 18th. The second one was because i had a blood alcohol level of…
I received a speeding ticket for 15 over in York Region. The officer issued me a ticket for someone else[wrong DL info on ticket] but for correct charge and amount. The ticket was not hand written but computer generated. I am concerned how to proceed with this as well as if the officer issued my…
i was in a road traffic accident on friday. a guy pulled out of a side road onto a main highway in front of me. i hit him in the middle of the road but was swerving left to hit him on the front and not cause a major accident. i was charged with failing to drive in a marked lane and he was charged…
i have a g2 license which was suspended for driving without a g1 driver for 30 days and my insurance cancel me . after i receive my letter to remove suspend, i got in an accident and now receive a notice to go to the police station
I was issued a Summons to Defendant, Section 7.1.b, and now I got to appear in court. Where could I find information on set fine amounts or the maximum punishment? Is it normal to be dragged to court for plate not properly displayed? After all, it is not a moving violation, and I wasnt endangering…