Search found 1065 matches

Yes, you're quite right. I stand corrected. I hadn't been keeping up with these cases.

You would actually be looking for a paralegal, not a lawyer. If you were thinking that you can't afford a lawyer at their rates, you might want to check how much a paralegal would charge you to take your case. It should not be as much as a lawyer.

With respect to the fine, $2000 is the statutory minimum for the offence of racing under Section 172 ...

Your chances of winning are based on the merits of your particular case and the evidence the officer has to present in court. You acknowledge the facts in issue and that you are guilty...so that says something.

If you want to exercise the option to plead guilty with an explanation you can make submissions to the JP as to the fine. The JP will ask ...

No, the set fine is set by the Court for the province. But the set fine is only applicable if you choose to plead guilty. If you take it to a trail there is no set fine, at that point the maximum of $500 as set by the Provincial Offences Act applies, unless another amount is specified in the particular section. When a conviction is obtained the ...

Depends on your jurisdiction and your JP, I think. Some are anal, wanting everything to be perfect or they'll quash it. But, if you fight it and it goes to a trail, the crown can ask for an amendment to the certificate. This is often allowed if the error is not something that has prejudiced your ability to make a defence to the charge.

It would ...

What exactly are you charged with? Act and section?

Sounds like a great example of piss poor police work. An uncautioned statement, which it sounds like is his only evidence, is not admissible in court.

How did he measure your alleged speed then? Pacing?

Did he read you a caution before he took your statement advising you that you were not required to provide him with a statement and that anything you say can be used against you in court?

Depends on your jurisdiction. Ask at the courthouse.

If you obtain disclosure first you can see what he wrote in his notes. That will give you an idea of what he will testify to in court. Then you can make a more informed decision of what you want to bring up if you decide to invoke your right to a trial.

No, I believe that just applies to the plates. And for that to be true, you can't still own the old car that the plates used to be on.

hwybear wrote:Push your local MPP to let us have proper unmarked cars for this....as soon as a marked car is near....everyone usually becomes angels.

Agreed, brother!

The speed sign is legislated ...the sign offence is pled to quite often in court, rather than a speed....saves the driver demerit points

I agree that the crown can offer this in court if the defendant agrees to amend a certificate for speeding, but I don't think it's proper for an officer to lay that charge on the road. Maybe that's just my ...

Thanks for posting this! I watched the whole thing, it was great!

I love that some, if not all, of these intersections had red light cameras and these tools were getting caught. I especially like the guy who went through the red in the lane right next to the sheriff's cruiser

I've never heard of a disobey sign ticket for speeding...I don't think that will fly, but maybe in his jurisdiction.

With respect to the tint, he's not required to measure it, since there are no specifications listed in the HTA as to how dark tints can be. If he says they were too dark and he can articulate how is view of the interior was ...

As with most laws, it comes down to discretion. Any law can become absurd if taken to extreme.

Consider assault for example. It is defined as "any unwanted physical contact". This means that if somebody is pushing past me on the subway to get off at their stop and I didn't "want" to be touched they could be guilty of assault. The actus reus is ...

The problem with that is that people are still only concerned with the maximum. If the range was 100-120, people would treat 120 as the max and then go 30 over that. I don't see any added benefit to creating a range, since a maximum implies that you can go anything less than that and we don't really have a problem on roads in Ontario with people ...

Check out my new blog post to find out!

http://simonborys.wordpress.com/2010/05 ... -required/

The question is: Can the officer prove which way the screen was facing? Because if it was facing directly towards the passenger or turned more counter clockwise I would argue that the view angle on the computer is less that the angle at which the driver could actually see anything on the screen and thus does not meet the definition of "visible ...

Haha, thanks

Don't beat yourself up speculating about it. Who knows, maybe his original intent was a murder/suicide but you treating him nice diverted him from killing someone else. We'll never know but the point is your actions just as likely had a positive effect on the situation as they did a negative effect.

The important thing is, as always, you went home ...

There is no requirement that a person be issued a personal notice of suspension, either by phone or physically by an officer. The MTO sends a letter to the address on the licence automatically after it becomes suspended and for the purposes of being charged with driving under suspension, you are deemed to be served notice of the suspension via the ...

The city or region public works handles signs. I'd start there.

No problem!

It means that the charge was withdrawn for whatever reason, probably because the officer didn't show or the crown wasn't prepared to proceed for some other reason. It's like it never happened except now you owe the agent his fee!

New post up about my own day in court. I'm sure lots of you will have opinions on this one!

http://simonborys.wordpress.com

Is anybody interested in CVSA or commercial motor vehicle stuff? This was my specialty in policing. I can write some articles about weights, measures, documents, etc, if there's an audience for it.

There's always a chance to win your case in court. The first step is to request disclosure. The second step is to speak with the prosecutor about a possible plea deal. The third step is, of course, a trial.

You could request disclosure for the ticket and see if he made proper notes about pacing you. If not, then it might be difficult for him to prove your speed in court.