Latest case on 78.1(1) - driving with hand held device

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

User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Latest case on 78.1(1) - driving with hand held device

Unread post by Simon Borys on

http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


Moose
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined:

Unread post by Moose on

Thank you for posting this. Well documented decision which articulates how the courts are treating this offence.


OPS Copper
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 355
Joined:

Unread post by OPS Copper on

If the decision went the other way how do you think drivers would react to having the device seized and sent away to determine if it is capable of sending or receiving and then held as evidence for later trial.

Just a thought.

OPS


User avatar
FyreStorm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 262
Joined:
Location: The Valley

Posting Awards

Unread post by FyreStorm on

I'm hearing (Traffic Safety Committee) is proposing fine increasing and device seizure (a la Stunt - Impound) and demerit points...apparently no one is obeying the law...so it's gonna hurt more...


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on

I think cell phone seizures would be problematic on many levels. I know the idea was proposed by the Police Chiefs Association in British Columbia but rejected by their Attorney General. First, there would be the whole privacy issue. The Courts (especially in Ontario) have been strongly favouring police requiring a warrant to perform anything more than a cursory search of a person’s cell phone in criminal matters. I think people quite rightfully have an expectation of privacy regarding their phone’s contents, and it would be problematic granting police a warrantless search authority for what’s a relatively minor Provincial offence. I’m not sure how well most police services could even keep up with the demand to search and/or analyze cell phones. I know my service has about a 3 month turn around period for analysis of such devices relating to Criminal matters, so I can’t even imagine the backlog if such analysis was required for HTA matters.

I think even a seizure simply to condone the act (i.e. no analysis, get it back in 24 hours) could be problematic from a public safety standpoint. For many people their cellular phone is their sole telecommunications device. People could quite rightfully argue they've lost their ability to contact family, work or even 9-1-1 without their device.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

make it mandatory for all manufacturers of vehicles to install a Bluetooth system from this point forward in all makes/models would be a good start, somehow include the device to rest/sit on a sensor built into an enclosed docking station to also prevent texting




Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


Post Reply

Return to “General Talk”