Ontario Highway Traffic Act

I wouldn't read anything into the lack of careless driving charge. I'm not saying the OP is at fault, but the charge is appropriate for the allegations.

Contact the court, as it varies from region to region. Typically first attendance meetings need to be scheduled on a date before the trial.

You probably don't have much to lose by going to trial. Your husband will simply need to present his version of event and hopefully convince the JP that the light was amber when he entered the intersection.

Typically poor weather conditions are not considered an excuse and you're expected to drive for the conditions. The problem in your circumstance is that you were aware of the conditions, it wasn't something unknown or unexpected, like a sudden patch of black ice on a clear road.

There are no set rules, but police are supposed to constantly weigh the benefit of apprehending the offender versus the risk to public safety. Typically the more serious the offence, the more likely police are to pursue.

The charge can be withdrawn if there is reason.

Your question is pretty general. I'd recommend just reading through the forum, see what worked for different people.

Basically with speeding, you need to raise reasonable doubt that the offence took place. You can't really justify the offence itself.

Yes, you probably would be arrested.

Once an officer has read the breath demand, youre required by law to provide a suitable sample of your breath. Police only require a reasonable suspicion to make such a demand (a pretty low threshold), not absolute certainty. As long as the officer can articulate in Court what gave him the suspicion you may ...

I haven't seen a handheld radar unit with an LED display for years. Still the norm for the moving radar mounted in cruisers, but any handheld unit I can think of has an LCD display. I've never seen a Genesis VPD with an LED display. They have a red LED to illuminate the display at night, but the display itself is LCD.

Some criminal convictions can impact travel outside of Canada, but not regular Provincial offences such as yours.

The Youth Criminal Justice Act (while geared for criminal offences) would also disagree with the notion that youth be charged "equally". Police/Crowns are to find diversions when appropriate verus proceeding through the Courts with charges. The law feels youth are less accountable for their actions and warnings are more warranted.

Careless driving is pretty much the standard charge in rear end accidents. I would not use snow tires as a defence. If you're aware your tires perform poorly in the rain, it's up to you to ensure there's sufficient room for you to stop, regardless of the conditions.

If you plan on fighting the charge outright, I'd seek legal representation. If not ...

Everyone who knows they're going to blow over suddenly develops asthma.

OP is forum short form for original poster.

1) Courts have ruled random stops are allowed to check for sobriety, such as RIDE checkpoints. Officers only require reasonable suspicion person has been drinking to conduct roadside test. An odour of alcohol or admission of consumption would be sufficient grounds for this test. If the driver appears impaired, officers should NOT conduct the test ...