Hello friends, long-time lurker on this site, like to thank you all for the great info. Anyways, I have a trial date on Wednesday of this week, I think I have a pretty solid defense lined up. But when I recieved the officer's notes regarding my offense, the prosecutor's office also provided me with the notes on the offence of someone else who got ticketed after me. The notes include the woman's full name, home address, driver's license number, vehicle and plate number. I note that the prosecutor did make a point of blocking all of the other notes, except for my case and the woman after me. Strange no? I was wondering if this would be grounds for dismissal, since it is a clear breach of privacy. Let me know your thought's please, thanks friends.
Hello friends,
long-time lurker on this site, like to thank you all for the great info.
Anyways, I have a trial date on Wednesday of this week, I think I have a pretty solid defense lined up.
But when I recieved the officer's notes regarding my offense, the prosecutor's office also provided me with the notes on the offence of someone else who got ticketed after me. The notes include the woman's full name, home address, driver's license number, vehicle and plate number. I note that the prosecutor did make a point of blocking all of the other notes, except for my case and the woman after me. Strange no?
I was wondering if this would be grounds for dismissal, since it is a clear breach of privacy.
Let me know your thought's please, thanks friends.
The woman who's information was leaked would probably have grounds to file a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner, but this shouldn't effect your case one way or the other.
The woman who's information was leaked would probably have grounds to file a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner, but this shouldn't effect your case one way or the other.
Hi guys, going in for my trial on Wednesday, just putting final touches on my defense. The OPP officer who was the charging officer in my case, was recently charged with two infractions causing a collision. Failure to stop at a redlight, and emergency vehicle proceed without caution. Should I use this information to attack the character and therefore better judgement of the officer's ability to assess traffic infractions/saftey in general? I mean you wouldn't trust an Financial Planner who himself loses money, or a Doctor who misdiagnoses routine health issues. What do you think?
Hi guys,
going in for my trial on Wednesday, just putting final touches on my defense.
The OPP officer who was the charging officer in my case, was recently charged with two infractions causing a collision. Failure to stop at a redlight, and emergency vehicle proceed without caution. Should I use this information to attack the character and therefore better judgement of the officer's ability to assess traffic infractions/saftey in general?
I mean you wouldn't trust an Financial Planner who himself loses money, or a Doctor who misdiagnoses routine health issues.
I would hazard a guess that most police officers at some point in their lives have been involved in an accident or been at the receiving end of a traffic ticket. It certainly doesnt nullify their observations or credibility in Court. If it did, I think thered be very few officers left to conduct traffic enforcement. For the officers charges to somehow be relevant at your trial, they would either have to be directly related to your offence (i.e. he crashed into you trying to pull you over) or show some type of deceit or obstruction on the officers part (i.e. prior conviction for perjury). There is case law from the Supreme Court regarding the Crowns duty to disclose disciplinary records of misconduct by officers in criminal matters (R v. McNeil) which may be worth a read if youre curious on the subject. Personally I think if you try to broach the subject, the Justice of the Peace will quickly stop you. You also run the risk of simply looking like you were trying to slander the officer.
I would hazard a guess that most police officers at some point in their lives have been involved in an accident or been at the receiving end of a traffic ticket. It certainly doesnt nullify their observations or credibility in Court. If it did, I think thered be very few officers left to conduct traffic enforcement.
For the officers charges to somehow be relevant at your trial, they would either have to be directly related to your offence (i.e. he crashed into you trying to pull you over) or show some type of deceit or obstruction on the officers part (i.e. prior conviction for perjury).
There is case law from the Supreme Court regarding the Crowns duty to disclose disciplinary records of misconduct by officers in criminal matters (R v. McNeil) which may be worth a read if youre curious on the subject.
Personally I think if you try to broach the subject, the Justice of the Peace will quickly stop you. You also run the risk of simply looking like you were trying to slander the officer.
I would go ahead with the trial. Just bring the discloser of the woman they sent you. I would just wait until your name is called. See what they do (likely) drop it. You did not receive proper disclosier. Worst you get is another couple of months.(to deal with it) Cheers Viper1
A_Wallis wrote:
Hello friends,
long-time lurker on this site, like to thank you all for the great info.
Anyways, I have a trial date on Wednesday of this week, I think I have a pretty solid defense lined up.
But when I recieved the officer's notes regarding my offense, the prosecutor's office also provided me with the notes on the offence of someone else who got ticketed after me. The notes include the woman's full name, home address, driver's license number, vehicle and plate number. I note that the prosecutor did make a point of blocking all of the other notes, except for my case and the woman after me. Strange no?
I was wondering if this would be grounds for dismissal, since it is a clear breach of privacy.
Let me know your thought's please, thanks friends.
I would go ahead with the trial.
Just bring the discloser of the woman they sent you.
I would just wait until your name is called.
See what they do (likely) drop it.
You did not receive proper disclosier.
Worst you get is another couple of months.(to deal with it)
Cheers
Viper1
"hang onto your chair when reading my posts
use at your own risk"
I would go ahead with the trial. Just bring the discloser of the woman they sent you. I would just wait until your name is called. See what they do (likely) drop it. You did not receive proper disclosier. Worst you get is another couple of months.(to deal with it) Cheers Viper1 why is it not proper disclosure? the OP got the disclosure and then some :wink: unless this is a witness to the event?
viper1 wrote:
A_Wallis wrote:
But when I recieved the officer's notes regarding my offense, the prosecutor's office also provided me with the notes on the offence of someone else who s.
I would go ahead with the trial.
Just bring the discloser of the woman they sent you.
I would just wait until your name is called.
See what they do (likely) drop it.
You did not receive proper disclosier.
Worst you get is another couple of months.(to deal with it)
Cheers
Viper1
why is it not proper disclosure? the OP got the disclosure and then some
unless this is a witness to the event?
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The OP had to prepare to defend it. They are going to use evidence from other driver.(as disclosed) They have to prepare for the evidence as/ per disclosier. Cheers Viper1
The OP had to prepare to defend it.
They are going to use evidence from other driver.(as disclosed)
They have to prepare for the evidence as/ per disclosier.
Cheers
Viper1
"hang onto your chair when reading my posts
use at your own risk"
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…