Search found 2654 matches

What audio recording?

Sorry, I really don't have much to go on here. Is there another thread you've posted to on this topic?

Technically it sounds like your odds are pretty good for winning.

I disagree. Until he's got disclosure of the officer's notes, we don't know that.

I'd skip paralegals as they lack training in trial advocacy

Not exactly. For example:

https://www.sheridancollege.ca/academics/programs-and-courses/paralegal.aspx

... The program emphasizes ...

The second and more important issue is that the officer who alleges I was speeding did not catch up to my car until I was parked at home and had exited the vehicle. He also lost sight of my vehicle several times as I turned down several residential streets to get home.

You weren't trying to lose him by any chance, were you?

Do I have any ...

If you say so. Just for the record - I'm not a paralegal. I only give advice on here. When I say I've been involved in helping traffic tickets - that's been on here.

Wow, you're really defensive and angry, aren't you?

Neither iFly55 or I said you are legally obligated to go on to the curb. However, where there's nowhere else to go, that's what I would do, and it's safe. Your enraged challenge just made me shake my head.

Your posts, and your bellicose responses here with exaggeration and hyperbole, seem to ...

That's easily dealt with: Go pay your tickets, and that should lift your suspension. Once that's done (and you've confirmed that your license suspension has been lifted), go renew your insurance. Sure, it will be more expensive, but you won't know how much until you do it. And you certainly can't drive while you're suspended or without insurance.

bobajob wrote:HERE, that I don't know

It's illegal here, too. You must maintain a minimum following distance of 150 metres.

You can have the JP charge the delay to the Prosecutor... but in the case of a November to May timeline, that's not going to be enough for an 11B.

Besides... the cop reduced it to 15 over. You are aware that they can raise it back to the original speed at trial, correct?

You are right in the sense that the correct thing to do is to pull to the curb in almost all cases... HOWEVER...

Um yeah driving on NON roads i.e. actual curbs is against the law.

PASSING off the road is illegal. Pulling the vehicle on to the curb and stopping until the fire truck or ambulance passes you is not illegal in a situation like this ...

They still shouldn't rear end you.

No one on here claimed it was okay for emergency vehicles to slam into others.

It's not ILLEGAL to drive in the left lane - you can't even get a ticket for simply being in a left lane otherwise.

You can absolutely get ticketed for driving in the left lane if you are either moving slower than the speed of ...

Germany:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02Ak1eIyj3M

For the most part, the drivers left a wide open channel. That would never happen here. "This is MY lane dammit!" Also note there was no rubbernecking by drivers on the other side of the Autobahn staring at the Feuerwehr (firefighters) or Polizei (police).

Not sure how low they can go with it. That depends on the JP you get, or the deal you strike with the Prosecutor, etc. I'm not sure you need a lawyer, but definitely a paralegal. If you do get a lawyer, make doubly sure he/she specializes in traffic offences. If you show that in the mean time you've registered, insured and plated the vehicle, etc ...

Doesn't seem like there's any case for "careless driving" based on this evidence, but how do I fight it?

I totally disagree. The case is fully made out for careless driving: You hit another vehicle, because (by your own admission) you kept driving forward without being able to fully see the road. They don't need a gigantic pile of evidence to ...

Option 2 is you meet with the Prosecutor ahead of any trial date, and you try to resolve it. It's basically the "meeting before trial" without having a trial scheduled. Not really sure what the outcome will be, usually if you show them it has been fixed, they'll often offer you something less. Some of the more lenient Prosecutors have just dropped ...

Halsy: I merged this in to one topic so we can find everything related to your discussion in one place. Easier to keep track of things that way.

OK lets say I have no car, no insurance.

1)IF my wife has a car fully insured in her name and I drive it. obviously, husband/wife living in the same house, she does/doesnt need to inform her insurance.
Say I have an accident, we are covered (from what you are saying) except, the STRIKE, will go against HER insurance record?

So to clarify ...

Nope. The witness is enough.

Despite what the newspapers and rumours say, most of the time the cops do show up. So plan on the cop being there.

bobajob wrote:so how where you even driving the car with no insurance?

He was using his sister's car with her insurance. The vehicle was insured so he's ok.

Just to clarify, you gave the cop your old certification paper?

You can fight the ticket. In this case, because you did have a properly validated permit, the Prosecutor might drop the charge. Just show them the updated paperwork and say that you gave the cop the wrong paperwork, but it was valid. In a lot of cases, that should do it...

If I were you I'd agree to it, but only if the JP notes that the delay is charged to the Prosecutor and not to you. This could, depending on how much of a delay you have, lead to an 11B for you down the road (check out Courts & Procedure section for the 11B stuff). Have you obtained disclosure for your case yet?

What was your handle back then, since your name "foreveraquota" has only one post?

Second - this forum is NOT for bashing police, or anyone else for that matter... unless they started it by being insulting or abusive. Quite a few people have been slapped with warnings or banned for referring to speeders as "idiots" and other colourful expressions ...

I was pulled over for going through a "local traffic" sign. When the constable asked me why I did that, I told him that I was working 1.5 km away from that "local Traffic" sign. He charged me for going through a closed highway but I'm not even sure if he got the right section. 134 (3)?

Actually based on your description, you were pulled over and ...

If nothing else, you could plea-bargain to Follow Too Closely, or if you're a bit luckier the Prosecutor could very well agree to "Fail to Turn Left to Avoid Collision," which is even less serious. You DON'T want the Careless Driving conviction. If the other driver was uninjured, they'll be more likely to accept a plea to a lower charge.

Even without an escort, I don't think there's an officer who would be caught dead (pardon the pun) pulling over cars in a funeral procession who are safely going through red lights. It is an absolute shame that well meaning mourners escorting their loved ones to their internment couldn't simply hand the ticket to a funeral home so it can be ...

Yes, if there was no police escort... then there was no legal basis for anyone to enter against the red. The HTA doesn't provide an exception for funeral processions without a police escort. At that point you're looking at a sympathy plea...

I'm liking this version of it better, i.e. the "upper speed limit" is the 120, as opposed to in the UK< where the already 70 was the upper limit

Ah ok, that would explain a fair bit.

To be fair, I don't know if Ontario will follow Quebec's proposal, although if Quebec does go ahead and it is successful, along with BC's higher limits and some ...

You could file a complaint, not really sure if it will go anywhere though. But the big thing is, you came away with a much lower fine and your insurance company would look more favourably on 20 over versus 42 over. So, IMO it was worth it.

Well, 20 over is better than 42. Not bad.

And yes you are right, the trucks are governed at 105.

Does anyone know if there is a hassle-free mechanism to withdraw the charge if the vehicle was part of a funeral procession?

I'm assuming the procession was being escorted by the cops? If so, the police should be able to issue a letter saying the vehicles were under escort and the police were directing them through the red light. Otherwise, the ...

The long and short of it is, we'll have to see how this one plays out. The provision is there now, it may be used or it may not. Quebec was going to test variable speed limits, which was actually a disguised way of raising them, because the upper limit in variable zones was supposed to be 120 km/h versus their current 100 km/h. They just haven't ...