Hi all, I'm totally new here and I need some help.

I have a trial date in the next 2 weeks and I want to prepare in fighting my ticket.

I got ticketed back in Sept. 2015 and my trial date is in June 2016.

I got disclosure with the officer's details.

They also gave me dashboard cam which they call "evidence" but there's no evidence of speeding at all (not showing the officer's speed or any such detail). The video just shows some cars passing in front of the officer.

I actually don't think I was speeding at the time

-I was being cautious driving because it was my first time going that route because I just moved into a different house

-My driver's licence still had old address (because the night before was the first night in the new address but I didn't actually plan to sleep there, I was too exhausted to go back to the old place)

-I was going downhill when the officer radar gunned me saying I was going 74 in a 50.

-I saw other cars driving past me like I was strolling and they were racing (the dashboard cam unfortunately does not show that, so I don't think I can bring this up in court).

-I have two other convictions (speeding) back in 2014.

Where can I get some knowledge on basic terminology for the court and/or what things can I bring up to win?

Post your disclosure, then people can chime in.

argyll wrote:

Post your disclosure, then people can chime in.

What are you looking for? It's a few pages long... The highlights are pretty much included in the message above...

Scan and post the officers notes (blank out any personal details). The officers notes are what he is going to testify. If we can read his notes then we can tell you if everything they need to convict you is in there or not.

And here is some info on self-representation:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7039.html

jsherk wrote:

Scan and post the officers notes (blank out any personal details). The officers notes are what he is going to testify. If we can read his notes then we can tell you if everything they need to convict you is in there or not.

And here is some info on self-representation:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7039.html

OK, here's what he says:

-------------------------------------------------------

Location and set up description:

Operating Marked Police Cruisers #xxx on XXXXX Court, in the Regional Municipality of York. Situated facing XXXX with clear view of East and West Bound Traffic, in order to enforce the posted 50km/h speed limit. XXXX Street travels XXX/XXX, 2 through lanes in each direction.

Radar and Radar test info:

Personally tested the XXX radar unit, serial number XXX before and after the offence, at XXX hrs and XXX hrs, in accordance to the manufacturer's specifications, and it was found to be working properly as a result of those tests. The writer is trained / qualified to operate radar unit.

Motor Vehicle Observations:

Observed a XXX motor vehicle XXX bound that appeared to be travelling at a speed higher than the posted limit, at approximately 75 km/h.

Had a clear view of the motor vehicle that was travelling in XXX on XXX Street.

There were no obstructions between the motor vehicle and the radar. Radar pointed at motor vehicle, activated radar unit and obtained a speed reading of 74km/h in the 50km/h zone. The motor vehicle was approximately halfway down the hill XXX on XXX Street when this measurement was taken. The observed reading was consistent with my earlier observations.

The motor vehicle was followed without losing sight of it and pulled over using lights and sirens on XXX Road.

Documents Provided:

Upon stopping the motor vehicle I spoke to the driver, explained reason for pulling him over, and demanded that he surrender his drivers licence, ownership and insurance. All three documents were provided during the t-stop.

ID Method:

The driver was identified with a valid photo Ontario drivers licence with the following information: <omitted>

Prior Convictions:

<2 prior convictions for speeding>

Conclusion:

Subsequent to the investigation, the driver was served with an Offence Notice for speeding at 74km/h in a 50km/zone.

-------------------------------------------------------

Those are his notes. There's also dashboard cam showing the other cars and myself driving in front of the cruiser, I'd eyeball it roughly at the same speed.

What can I do? Thank you.

Video is irrelevent here unless you think there is something specific in it that would help your case but it does not sound like it.

The officers notes are reallly good and looks like everything is there that needs to be for a conviction.

So if the officer gets on the stand and says everything above and then you get on the stand and say "I don't think I was speeding because I was being cautious and other cars were passing me" who do you think the Justice of the Peace is going to believe?

So unless you question the officer on cross-examination and get him to admit that there were other cars coming down the hill and passing you, I think you have a "slim to none" chance of beating this.

The two other areas you could question officer on would be independent recollection of events and the operation of the radar unit, but unless you are an expert at cross-examination you probably will not be succesful with these areas either.

So if you want to learn more about how trials work, this is a great opportunity, but do not expect to win. You could also meet with the prosecutor just before trial and ask if they will drop it down to 15 over if you plead guilty as another option.

The officers notes would appear to have everything required for a conviction. The radar was tested before and after, a speeding reading obtained and identity confirmed.

In short as jsherk said, there's no easy defence to the charge. You could either force a trial to test your luck/gain some experience, or take a plea deal to lessen the fine.

jsherk wrote:

Video is irrelevent here unless you think there is something specific in it that would help your case but it does not sound like it.

The officers notes are reallly good and looks like everything is there that needs to be for a conviction.

So if the officer gets on the stand and says everything above and then you get on the stand and say "I don't think I was speeding because I was being cautious and other cars were passing me" who do you think the Justice of the Peace is going to believe?

So unless you question the officer on cross-examination and get him to admit that there were other cars coming down the hill and passing you, I think you have a "slim to none" chance of beating this.

The two other areas you could question officer on would be independent recollection of events and the operation of the radar unit, but unless you are an expert at cross-examination you probably will not be succesful with these areas either.

So if you want to learn more about how trials work, this is a great opportunity, but do not expect to win. You could also meet with the prosecutor just before trial and ask if they will drop it down to 15 over if you plead guilty as another option.

I see, very insightful and helpful. Thank you for that.

I still want to fight this ticket with all I can.

Is there a way I can shake the credibility of the officer?

Is there a way to point out that if other cars were going same speed and the officer admits this, then I wasn't speeding and I do not deserve this ticket?

Do I have any options at all, or is this just going to be, as you said, a loss but experience gain for me?

Thank you.

Stanton wrote:

The officers notes would appear to have everything required for a conviction. The radar was tested before and after, a speeding reading obtained and identity confirmed.

In short as jsherk said, there's no easy defence to the charge. You could either force a trial to test your luck/gain some experience, or take a plea deal to lessen the fine.

That's very sad. There has to be a way to beat this. Does anything come to mind? I'd really appreciate it... Thank you...

I am a big advocate of self-representation and of fighting every ticket that you get. Unfortunately, you can't win them all.

In this case, I honestly beleive the best case scenario is that you show up for court and the prosecutor tells you they are dropping the charge because the officer did not show up. If the officer shows up, I really do not think you can beat it.

Even if you lose, there is still lots to learn about how the system works by fighting it.

jsherk wrote:

In this case, I honestly beleive the best case scenario is that you show up for court and the prosecutor tells you they are dropping the charge because the officer did not show up.

Even if you lose, there is still lots to learn about how the system works by fighting it.

If recent post's/replies mean anything, officers always show up, but could it happen? sure

is it worth resting your defense on that slim chance, I wouldn't.

Get a brief,

Also OP stated he's had 2 prior speeding tickets 2 years ago only but they will have that and doubt they'll show any lenience.

I also suspect with 2 on his record a 3rd will make him un-insurable in this world

You've had 2 prior speeding tickets in 2.5 years, your basically a serial speeder/offender.

Get a brief, you've done this before, your not new to this.

ThunderSoul wrote:

Hi all, I'm totally new here and I need some help.

-I have two other convictions (speeding) back in 2014.

Where can I get some knowledge on basic terminology for the court and/or what things can I bring up to win?

bobajob wrote:

You've had 2 prior speeding tickets in 2.5 years, your basically a serial speeder/offender.

Get a brief, you've done this before, your not new to this.

ThunderSoul wrote:

Hi all, I'm totally new here and I need some help.

-I have two other convictions (speeding) back in 2014.

Where can I get some knowledge on basic terminology for the court and/or what things can I bring up to win?

Yes I am new to it. Please do not post ignorance or your hateful opinion. Thank you.

jsherk wrote:

I am a big advocate of self-representation and of fighting every ticket that you get. Unfortunately, you can't win them all.

In this case, I honestly beleive the best case scenario is that you show up for court and the prosecutor tells you they are dropping the charge because the officer did not show up. If the officer shows up, I really do not think you can beat it.

Even if you lose, there is still lots to learn about how the system works by fighting it.

OK... sounds good... I guess I just have to show up and do my best. I always have an appeal to make it last a little longer before I pay the fine, right?

Do you happen to know how long appeals usually take to be reviewed and concluded?

Thank you...

If you decide to appeal, you still have to pay the fine first and the conviction will show up on your record until you win the appeal.

I think there is some other form you can request so that you do not have to pay the fine until after the appeal, so check for that one as well.

And the chances of the officer not showing up are very slim, but it is a remote possibility.