Ontario Highway Traffic Act

I wish I had a Mercedes and lived in California where the laws are stupid.

I wish I could afford a new Mercedes every six months, even if I did have to plate it.

That subsection would only be applicable if you were charged under section 145, not 144.

If you were found guilty, you would have to show some type of error on the part of the Justice of the Peace at trial. You'd have to order a transcript of the trial at your expense, review it and see if there were any errors. Probably best to speak with whoever represented you and see if they believe there were any errors on which you could appeal ...

Absolutely not true.

The HTA allows police to stop and check the documentation of any vehicle. His actual reasoning to pull you over sounds pretty obvious anyways, the expired plate sticker.

Dont assume if the officer noticed your plate hed pull you over right away. They frequently check plates on their computer system to see if the car is stolen ...

1) No, as it's irrelevant to the charge.
2) It's a highway traffic act charge, a provincial offence. There are no demerit points, but it's a traffic ticket.
3) They may withdraw the charge, but it's by no means guaranteed. Quite likely they'll offer you a significantly reduced fine in exchange for a guilty plea.

That section states the following:

No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway unless,
(a) there exists a currently validated permit for the vehicle

In other words, it's the driver's responsibility to ensure the plate is valid. While there are some things the owner is responsible for (such as ensuring the vehicle is insured), your charge ...

If the officer found out you had no insurance, he could still charge you with the offence. Unlike most HTA offences, they have 3 years to lay the charge from the time of the offence.

As Simon said, it's probably not likely they'd become aware, but if you decided to fight the charge, there is a chance the officer would contact your provider to see ...

Also, does the case automatically get thrown out if both officers don't show up? Or is this something I have to point out?

Not necessarily. While both officers would be required for the trial, the Crown can request an adjournment to a different date if they fail to show. The busier the jurisdiction, the more likely it is they'll simply withdraw ...

Insurance companies typically look at any and all convictions, so the documentation offence wouldnt be considered any more or less serious than the prohibited turn. Both would typically be considered minor offences and result in a minor rate increase if any. It varies from one provider to the next, so check your policy and contact your provider.

I'd try for a plea deal, plead guilty to one offence and get the other withdrawn.

Can I make a By-Law (Prohibited Right Turn) Argument?
Can I plead to reduce it to a non-moving violation?

1) Possibly, if Windsor even has a bylaw covering such an offence. Not all municipalities do.
2) I'm not sure what you mean by a non moving violation. Insurance companies look at ALL convictions, they don't classify them as moving vs non ...

1) I don't believe there is any way to shorten/revoke a suspension unless it was given in error.
2) You would have to contact your insurance provider directly and ask, as it varies greatly between providers and policies.

I personally don't think that sounds reasonable. It's the Crown's duty to provide disclosure, not send you around town looking for it. The Crown should be obtaining a copy of the manual anyway since there will obviously be future disclosure requests for it with other cases.

Unfortunately red light cameras only take photographs of vehicles entering the intersection on a red light. If you entered on a green (as you allege) or amber (as the officer alleges) there would be no photo evidence.

I would certainly request disclosure to see what evidence the officer has in his notes. If you present your case well, I think ...

I believe its a very generic short form wording that covers all the offences under that section. When your charges are actually read aloud in Court, the specific charge wording could possibly be more detailed as to what the allegation is.

In your case though, wouldnt stunt driving be the correct term anyhow? I thought you were being accused of ...