Can we file for a stay for not disclosing all of these items? thanks
As for an FOI request, you have to go to the agency itself and fill out some forms. Be prepared to pay for it though, it's not free like disclosure.
Thanks for the link. Yes, that is helpful if I were to go FOI way. Problem is, the police have 30 days to respond to the request and the prosecution waited till the trail date was less than a month away to say 'no' . I saw somewhere that the prosecution and the courts are required to help lay people with the process. I don't have it handy right now but will post it later. This prosecutor was anything but and I suspect yours was the same. Did you look at the option to ask for stay on those basis and incomplete disclosure?
As for your Lidar, I think you might have something there. I saw a post somewhere on radar compliance with Industry Canada. Again, don't have the link to the post handy but will post later. Did you check if your device is listed here? http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/h_00029.html
Did the laser blind you? interesting..unfortunately if those writing the standards decided that this is acceptable you're out of luck. Law is law and justice is justice, let's not confuse the two;)
I still haven't decided on the exact sequence of defence strategies for myself but I will be fighting tooth and nail, that is certain. This is the first time I am taking a close look at our legal system and what I see is so pathetic that I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
Just consider: the police officer who gave you the ticket is paid by your tax dollars. The prosecutor and the judge are paid by your tax dollars. The court clerk, premises, stationary, etc is paid by your tax dollars. The taxes they pay come from their pay which you paid for so in effect you pay their taxes. And here you are, fighting your own tax dollars on your vacation days because the courts are not flexible enough to allow you time off from the very job which you need to pay taxes which allow them to prosecute you. Talking of digging your own grave;)
Thanks for the ic link. I tried to search industry canada but couldn't find this lidar. if this device is being sold in canada it does not automatically mean that it is approved by IC. i know this is not a dollar store item, but there are thousands of items being sold at canadian stores they are not approved by any canadian standard or they meet canada requirements.
I am also less than 30 days away from my trial so FOI is not an option for me right now. I am thinking about filing a motion for Stay I am still more than 15 days away from trial. The other thing i was thinking that I should request a stay just before plea. I have seen a case law where JP granted a stay on the day of trial before pleading. How about you?
well laser did not blind me but depending on its class it can leave some long term effects on my body. He might have shot my head with the laser. Do i not have a right to ask how much someone hurt me with a laser and i think JP should understand this. These governments running on our taxes are suppose to make things safer for tax payer (although they are only concerned about the taxes nothing else)
I agree with you on standard decision. thats why our case and arguments has to be completely different otherwise we will get the same standard decision. Its my first time as well to try to fight a speeding ticket in great detail and i will exhaust all my options too in this case. I was not speeding and i knew he was standing there but i still got ticket.
what do you think about the speed stops the police conduct at the end of every month to meet their monthly quotas? How can we use it as an argument? You will never see these speed stop through the month. but as soon as it is 28-30th of the month, they are out there to issue 100-200 tickets catching every possible driver and making their own numbers.
I remember typing a reply but I guess I forgot to hit the submit button because it ain't here! I'll try a shorter version. Here is a better link to IC http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/sitt/reltel/src ... o?lang=eng, just type in manufacturer name, e.g. decatur and presto, all certified equipment for that company is displayed. I haven't heard of requesting a stay motion just before the plea without having at least Form 4F submitted. Seeing that you're more than 15 days away I think you should file away, it costs nothing. Ticket combat has the details here http://www.ticketcombat.com/step4/paperwork.php but make sure to go to http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/forms/civil/04f/ to get the latest form as the one he has is dated 2007. The fax numbers are different on the newest one but everything else seems the same so you can safely use the filled out sample ticketcombat provides. Another thing I'll be looking at is conformity with NHTSA as Ontario laws refer to it. Weird isn't it? I wonder what kind of gaps I'll find there. Canadian radar manuals are a barebone version of the US and European version, basically no requirements at all as far as testing, maintenance, tracking history. Tuning forks non existent. Whoever worked on this made sure challenging the accuracy of radar's speed reading based on the manual is made impossible. I'll let you know what I find.
I reviewed the NHTSA as well, I didn't find anything there that can be used against a speeding case. Not sure what you are thinking about. But as far as Lidar, for the best interest of public interest, this must be proved a compliant and legal devise and it must be legally proved that the laser used in Lidar is safe and in compliance with Canadian laser regulations. any thoughts ?
Regarding the officer not showing up. The way I see it, if he is a no-show, the prosecutor won't make you argue your stay motion because even if it is refused the next step will be the trial and she'll have to withdraw the charges so what's the point? She wouldn't want to waste her time and I'm sure the JP wouldn't be happy about such an approach either. True, your preparation for the stay motion would have been for nothing in that case but I'd think that's a small price to pay if it saves you from going to trial in case the officer does show up.
Yes, I also think law enforcement devices should be certified. This is not some ebay electronic for personal use but an instrument used to serve the legal system. But, no guarantees the JP will think so. So, is your lidar on the IC list? Does the manual have an IC # listed?
Re NHTSA, there is something called Provincial Adequacy Standard AI-013 which unfortunately I cannot find a copy of on any govt site but which is referred to several individual police boards such as brantford http://www.brantfordpolice.ca/documents ... evices.pdf where it states that they must "comply with the current Model Minimum Performance Specifications for Police Traffic Radar Devices DOT HS 808-069 and/or the current Model Minimum Performance Specifications for Lidar Speed Measurement Devices DOT HS 809 239" (Seems in 2012 that was replaced by DOT HS 809-812 and DOT HS 809-239). The AI-013 is supposed to be covered in Ontario's Policing Standards manual but the according to the Ontario Police College, as of 2004 those are only distributed on CD and the 2000 version available online stops at AI-011. I think I will abandon this for now but if need be I will ask for an adjournment to obtain this info. The regulations regarding radars are shrouded in secrecy, not open like in the US. Quite convenient I think.
Unless the judge is not willing to accept any technical argument.
Any thoughts or ideas on this? http://www.ticketcombat.com/step3/lookaround.php The same scenario applies to me as well. But this doesn't seems much helpful to me as the laser is very pointed with almost no divergence like radar. the downhill road is somewhat helpful depending on how accurately the officer kept the laser dot on the car. any opinion is highly appreciated.
I think AI-13 is a useful document except is expired one. Can this be used to argue to disclose the latest version of this document as the court and prosecution are suppose to help lay person to prepare for their trial instead of creating obstacles and particularly if some information is not available publicly.
any thoughts on this advisory by health canada. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/ad ... 02-eng.php These devises suppose to be compliance with RED act. They must prove it in the best interest of general public.
Not sure if you like or not, can I come to see your trial or if you would be interested to come see mine.??????
Interesting about the laser being accurate. There is surprisingly little official info, ok, make that nonexistent info, on radar accuracy. Here is a link, that states (very bottom) that there was a ruling in 1996 barring the use of a laser over 1000 feet because there is a divergence. http://www.radarbusters.com/mistakesarticle.cfm . Did you hear of the radar clocking a palm tree? State v. Aquilera, No. 711-1015, 48 Fla http://stmaryslawjournal.org/pdfs/Cox_II.pdf
You're an engineer you say? I have a question for you then: Radar uses a microwave beam. The way I understand the beam will get wider with distance and a radar with a 12 degree beam width will end up being ~40m wide 200m away which is several lanes of traffic. How can the officer tell which car he's capturing? The hill should also pose an issue since the beam travels in a straight line. I too read the ticketcombat link you sent and I am working on that very scenario for my case. I only researched radar but if the distance was short you would you have a case in examining the reaction time?
Your health link is interesting and I would print it and show it in court although I still don't think the JP will link that advisory with your ticket because the fact that the laser is a health hazard doesn't mean it registered your speed incorrectly. Also, the advisory was issued in June 2012 and I assume your ticket was issued before that. You may want to take the police to court if you were hurt by the laser but that would be a separate case. Again, imho only.
For certain and accurate reading, the distance and angle (divergence) needs to be very minimal. Any object, bridge, railway line, powerlines will cause interference and doubt the readings. I omitted one item from the above formula to keep it simple, so calculation is 10-15 cm higher (the size of the radar aperture) . You should go back to the site and take all the measurement and distances from where the cop was standing to all the object in the area like bridge, powerlines, railways, etc. If the fall within the calculated range they are causing interference, means unreliable reading.
Doppler effect of Radar will produce different readings for different kind of objects for example plastic car (Honda pilot) versus big all metal car (like Hummer) also different size like a difference between a small car like smart or a big truck or a bus.
- Similar Topics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests