Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Your first step is to get the permission of the charged person to even take this to court. Without that, there's nothing that you can do.

AI-013 is a Provincial Standard. It's the same for all agencies in Ontario. You just have to find the current one.

I just had a quick look through the NHTSA standard and I couldn't find anything that indicates that tuning forks must be included and used in operator testing.
The only thing I saw was that when a manufacturer submits a device for testing it must be accompanied by them.

1. Haven't used tuning forks for years and I certainly don't miss them. Check case law on "tuning forks."
2. I say "most" because I don't know anyone elses practices or training programs. It would be rather arrogant of me to assume that we are all perfect. More than reading the manual is required in Ontario. Again.... caselaw.....
3.a There is no ...

Police speed measuring devices will not pick up the vibration of a bridge or railway line.

Some interference from electronic devices may occur if you point the speed measuring device directly at them. It's simply a matter of moving the device.

Modern police speed measuring devices internally eliminate electromagnetic interference (EMI) and are ...

Do a forum search on entrapment. I believe this was covered in a prior post.

"Any object, bridge, railway line, powerlines will cause interference and doubt the readings." Not true. Some of these MAY cause interference under some circumstances. However, interference is not additive to the reading it just cuts down on the range at which the officer may pick up the vehicle. I've never seen a stationary object like a bridge or ...

You may want to do a search on Tuning Forks on the Canlii website. There are numerous cases including appeals which hold up the testing procedures used here in Ontario. I woudn't say that the Ontario versions are "stripped down" at all. They never even come with tuning forks. The bottom line when it comes to most radar is that if the officer does ...

I wouldn`t get too caught up in the NHTSA Specifications. They are simply what is used to produce the IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police) Conforming Product List. The IACP produces a list of both LIDAR and speed measuring devices that are in compliance with those specifications. These lists are available online.

You can change your plea to guilty and pay the 49 over anytime up until the start of the trial. This is also the point at which the prosecutor may request that the speed be "amended up" Not quite sure how backlogged the courts in Ottawa are for a traial date though. Have you considerd what to do if they give you a date before November 27?

Are they ever slow on the news. That case is from June.

It's likely that any device purchased in Canada for speed measurement has conformed to IC standards or they wouldn't be allowed in the country to begin with. I wouldn't spend too much time on this.

The only way to avoid the suspension is to be found not guilty.

Not likely. All they have to do is look at the original offence notice and even if there is a clerical error and the officer isn't in court, the prosecution will likely request and adjournment.

The 24 hr suspension is an automaitic roadside suspension. If you are convicted of the novice driver b.a.c above zero, you will be suspended by the MTO for a further 30 days.
I'm surprised that the officer let you off with the provincial offences if you blew a fail.