Search found 2111 matches

Probably best he hires a paralegal for this type of offence. From what I've heard, plea deals are frequently offered to the speeding, and the stunt driving is dropped. Still, 80 over would be one heck of a speeding fine, $900+.

The officer should have seized your licence since you had BAC above zero and served you a notice of suspension, not sure why he didn't. I guess he doesn't really have to by law, but he should have for liability reasons if nothing else. Just be aware that it's possible your licence could still have been suspended even if the officer forgot to seize ...

Your speeding fine may be somewhat higher if found guilty at Court since set fines (what's on your ticket) are less then Court fines. For 36 over you'd be looking at a total fine of $317 ($252 fine, $60 surcharge, $5 court fee). Sometimes they stick with the set fine, but no guarantee.

Paralegal costs will depend on services provided. If you ...

Agree with Radar Identified. I used to live right around there, the left turn signal only illuminates when southbound traffic has a red light. It does NOT turn off when the streetcars stop, since it's there to help you make safe turns 24 hours a day.

Edit: And I'll add that any type of lawsuit would be pointless at this time. As stated above, the ...

The date on your summons is simply for a first appearance, not a trial. You can advise the Court if you wish to plead guilty or not guilty on that date. If you decide to plead not guilty, another date will be set for the actual trial.

If it was a regular ticket without a signature, it would probably be considered invalid and withdrawn. A summons on the other hand isn't an actual charging document, so errors on it aren't considered fatal. Some people have argued that the summons itself isn't valid without a signature, but they can be easily corrected (with a corrective summons ...

As Simon said, there is no way to avoid the points upon conviction. Some jurisdictions do however have bylaws pertaining to motorists and stop signs. In such jurisdictions the Crown will sometimes allow a plea deal to the bylaw offence instead of the Highway Traffic Act, since it typically carries a lower fine and no demerit points. You'd have to ...

I was forwarded the following article, thought it was interesting.

Youre headed home or to the mall or rushing to pick up the kids and you see flashing lights behind you. You look down and realize, too late, youre speeding. And youre about to be nailed for it. There are a million theories on the best thing to say or do when you roll down your ...

You're correct in that it's not a fatal error, but certainly works to your advantage if there's a trial. It's difficult to say what to do with the ticket. There are probably some prosecutors that if advised of the error would simply withdraw the charge, while others would amend the charge at trial. I'd ask for disclosure and see what the officer's ...

Again, it's an absolute liability offence. Absolute liability offences mean there is NO justification for committing the offence short of necessity. Necessity means you have to show the Courts that the only reason you committed the offence was that you were in immediate peril with no other options (e.g. being chased by someone with a gun).

Nobody can give you the odds of beating any particular ticket since that depends on many factors.

Just be aware of the following with speeding tickets:
1) It's an absolute liability offence, which basically means there is no excuse for committing the offence. To fight the charge you have to argue reasonable doubt, i.e. you never committed the ...

If you can truly articulate that the officer had no grounds to arrest you, then the search could be deemed unlawful and therefore the evidence would be inadmissible. The officer would not need your consent to search however once you were under arrest. Also keep in mind that if the officer had reasonable grounds to arrest you, the search is still ...

There is no set fine, so unfortunately a summons/court date is required. Were all your licences from the same jurisdiction? I.e. your current licence along with past expired ones? I'm under the impression the spirit of the law is to prevent people from using various licences from various jurisdictions or with slight name variations. Unless you were ...

Police and doctors must attend the same school for penmanship, doctors for their prescriptions and police for their tickets.

How accurately is the laser speeding device?

The device itself, if properly tested and used, is extremely accurate. Any type of false reading would most likely be due to operator error.

Most laser devices have a targeting sight, and cast a very narrow beam. Compared to radar, it's much easier to target select vehicles.

It's pretty hard to ...

If the officer testified and gave the incorrect vehicle colour, it could help somewhat in raising reasonable doubt, but I don't think that one mistake would be enough on its own. I think it would also be somewhat dependent on how off the vehicle color was. If your car is a dark blue and he said black, easily explainable. Florescent orange and he ...

No, you can request disclosure without attending a first attendance meeting. Still, might not hurt to have a meeting and see if the Crown will offer you a plea deal. If the evidence is strong, a plea deal may be in your best interest. If you're adamant about fighting the charge outright a paralegal may be recommended.

diehard wrote:

Radar Identified wrote:Yes, it is like a red light camera ticket. The owner cannot get demerit points if the plate is all that's reported.

And also no conviction, thus no insurance hikes... right?

Correct.

The answer is because most officers (at least in my experience) don't know how to properly inspect a bike's muffler to determine if it is improper and they need to do something more than just say it was loud in order to get a conviction for improper muffler.

Agreed. I'd also throw in that for many officers, enforcement time can be limited, so ...

Is it just me or on almost all your comments you are in favor of the police, to just plead guilty..
My responses are based on my own experiences and observations, and what I believe to be the most likely outcome in Court. I think if you read through my other posts you'll see I very rarely recommend people simply plead guilty to any and every ...

Signs are covered under the Highway Traffic Act, Regulation 615

Link: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/rro-1990-reg-615/latest/rro-1990-reg-615.html

The KM/H tabs on speed limit signs are optional, and they're still valid without it. Also, to the best of my understanding, there is no requirement to give advance notice of a speed limit change ...

If the fine is the main issue, you may be better off pleading guilty with an explanation or seeking a plea deal with the Crown. For your charge, I would imagine a JP would be willing to offer you a reduced fine with time to pay if you articulate your financial situation. Your offence was brief, did not put other motorists at danger and no accident ...

Ok, fair enough, what should be my actions then? Ask for a first attendance and see if they drop a demerit or 2 and a decrease in the fine? Is it worth $400 to hire a traffic ticket specialist for this? Thanks

That's really hard to say. It depends how much of an impact the conviction would actually have on you. Certain serious charges like ...

There is no obligation for the police to stop anyone and you can't use the fact that other people were speeding as a defence. The fact that you were going significantly faster than the other vehicles probably explains why they chose to stop you.

If you don't think you deserve the full fine you can try and plead guilty with an explanation and see if the Justice of the Peace agrees.

I personally disagree. If they felt it was safe for you to simply slow down they would have put up a yield sign. Stop means stop and you either did or you didn't.

Can you explain this ABSOLUTE LIABILITY more? A simplified explanation for absolute liability offences is that you can't defend the act itself in Court. In other words it doesn't matter why you were speeding, just that you were.


Is there no argument you can make? Is there a good way to attack the officers credibility? Is there a way to ask ...

The Ontario Highway Law also says the speeding ticket range is 16km to 29km, since the officer told me that the 2 cars a head of me were going 58 that's 2 kms over what the legal amount to get a ticket, is this information good enough to possibly have a good case?

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. You can get a speeding ticket for simply ...

It's probably not illegal, but it really depends. Simon wrote a really good post on this very topic on his blog: http://simonborys.wordpress.com/2010/12 ... adar-trap/

I don't see how the Crown's actions are prejudicial. If there wasn't enough time to hear your motion, then that's just the reality of how backlogged our Court system is. I'm assuming the JP would have had to grant the request and you were likely given the opportunity to speak to the request. How does this prevent you from having a fair trial? All ...

If your ticket wasn't already reduced, there is a very good chance the Crown will offer you a plea deal to 15 over. Quite likely you'd have an opportunity to review disclosure before having to accept a plea deal, assuming the Crown even has disclosure on your first attendance date.

There isn't much you can fight speeding tickets on since they're ...