Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Follow up if you're so inclined. If trial comes and they still haven't provided disclosure, and you've made reasonable (i.e. several) attempts to obtain it, then you ask for an adjournment and get the reasons "on the record". Make sure the JP understands that this delay is the crown's fault, not yours (even though you're the one asking for the ...

The answer to that depends on who the prosecutor is. There's no way to say definitively what they will be like because everybody's different.

Not discarded, it's accepted and given whatever weight it's due, based on its merits. Which, as you've described it, sounds like none.

GIVEN 3 TICKETS -- 2 of em 325$ EACH and 3 points EACH

Looks to me like you were only given 2 tickets, since one was marked void - presumably the officer changed his mind on that one? At any rate you aren't being charged with no insurance. And the no licence charge has no points associated with it.

With respect to a defence for the red light ...

Unless an error prejudices your ability to make full answer and defence to the charge, it is not likely to be considered fatal.

The offence must be amended to something that is still supported by the events. For example, you couldn't plead a careless rear end collision to a parking offence because that's not supported by the events.

Also, with respect to the disclosure you will not likely get a stay of proceedings because you received the disclosure late or not at all ...

The witness box on the ticket is for when the crown needs a witness to prove the charge. It it's used when there are defence witnesses. As to losing sight of you, that is a problem for proving the charge only in so far as it prevents the officer from establishing who was driving at the time of the offence (in your case when the vehicle was being ...

From what you've described she has a defence to the charges - she wasn't driving. The difficulty for you will be how to prove that. Obviously you and her can both testify, but the officer presumably has some evidence for believing that she was, in fact, driving.

As a side note, regarding the impaired, she could have been potentially charged with ...

The section seems awkwardly worded around whether you can seize the vehicle and licence without laying a charge. Although it seems counter intuitive to do this without an accompanying charge, that appears to be exactly what the section allows you to do and I'm not aware of anything else in statute or common law which would prevent you from doing ...

It doesn't matter where you are or what you're doing, the law is the same: IF traffic can be affected, you must signal. Whether traffic could be affected in the situation you described is a question of fact and it depends on whether the officer charging in that situation could articulate how traffic was affected.

1) Officer doesn't have to show you the device. Read this: http://simonborys.wordpress.com/2010/04 ... the-radar/

2 & 3) Not relevant unless perhaps he lost sight of your vehicle sometime after clocking your speed and before pulling you over.

A number of people have posted on this forum recently stating that the officer told them they "had to" give them a ticket. I've replied to enough of these posts that I thought it would be worth it to write a blog post on this topic. You can read it below if you're interested.

http://simonborys.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/does-a-police-officer-ever ...

In my opinion a charter argument here would not succeed. Even if the reason you were stopped was the result of a mistake by a third party, it doesn't transform the stop into an arbitrary detention under s. 9. The officer was acting in good faith in the course of his duty to enforce the HTA.

Did you have a valid licence at the time?

You have no liability under the highway traffic act for any of his actions, nor the consequences of his actions (i.e. the fines). There are several charges of allowing something to happen, under the highway traffic act (like allowing a person to drive without insurance, allowing a person to drive without a licence, etc), but if you are not charged ...