Search found 358 matches

whaddyaknow wrote:Off topic, but anyone driving through West Virginia should be aware that 80 mph or higher is considered reckless there, and comes with a minimum 5 day jail term....

Good to know! If I ever again drive the so-called Summer Route, I'll keep that in mind.

If you decide to plead not guilty to the speeding charge, the officer's notes will show you were driving 83 and the crown will amend the charge to 83 in a 60. You do NOT want that. The limit at the time you were pulled over was 60. Even if the sign were to be replaced two minutes later showing it as a 100 zone, 60 was in effect at the time the ...

A few years ago, I was driving home from Florida with my father. My mother, wife and kids had flown home because of pressing schedules, so I offered to drive home with my dad (I had the flexibility to do that in those days). I was pulled over by a state trooper in West Virginia for driving somewhere around 80 mph in what I thought was a 70-mph zone ...

argyll wrote:FOV

LMAO!!!!!

I'm not even going to speculate on this one, as it's way outside my sphere of experience. But I did want to say, having seen the photo of how the truck and your car became intertwined, I'm glad you're okay.

It's about time! Those of you who are my vintage or older will remember the days when mailed trial requests were the norm. Then some genius had the bright idea of making things less convenient for defendants. I know some jurisdictions, such as Barrie, are accepting disclosure requests by e-mail. The last one I did was by fax; that's not so bad.

Tickets while you were waiting to pay? That's crazy Toronto parking enforcement officers are like vultures. All those two guys had to do was look to the nearest machines (one in each direction) to see if there was anyone there. They don't care. They just punch a few buttons and the machine spits out a ticket. They're notorious for ticketing every ...

Well good for you and, to be honest, shame on the officer. If you are going to lay a charge then it should proceed...otherwise you're just wasting everyone's time and giving you grief for no reason. I don't disagree. Part of me actually thinks he had no notes. He sped away from the shoulder before I'd even restarted my car. Unless he typed them ...

That would be entirely up to the discretion of the officer or prosecutor. Unfortunately, the parking enforcement officers in Toronto are notorious for appearing out of nowhere to write tickets. I've received two tickets while standing at the machine paying for my parking! There's no obligation to give you a grace period. As you correctly pointed ...

You mailed in your request? I didn't think Newmarket accepted mail-in requests. I know I've had to go there in person whenever I've needed to request a trial.

For now, do nothing. When you get your trial date, you can request disclosure. Disclosure will include the officer's notes and any other evidence the Crown intends to use against you. When ...

Yup! Thanks.

When I gave my name to the Prosecutor, she pulled out the court copies of the trial notices and paperwork. Under the date stamped notation that I had requested disclosure, I saw the handwritten notation "Unanswered WDx2." Madam Prosecutor told me the Officer had not responded to the court's request (he didn't show up either), so she would be ...

You do have a point. I guess it doesn't hurt to try.

Thanks, Argyll and ShrekTek. I have no intention to proceed tomorrow (because of my right to make a full answer and defence) unless the officer's notes show something so wonderfully in my favour that I think I can beat both charges. I've used the full answer and defence argument in the past when disclosure has been handed to me on the spot. I just ...

When I go tomorrow for the trial that won't happen, I presume the Prosecutor will suggest I meet with the officer to look at his notes. If I look at the notes, is that considered disclosure? Am I then obligated to photograph or take notes of what the officer has so I have a copy? Or is the Crown still required to provide actual copies of the ...

Our colleagues have given you excellent advice. I agree that it's highly unlikely you'll manage to have the charge reduced any further. Your best-case scenario is either a reduced fine or more time to pay. The JP cannot change the demerit points; those are applied by MTO upon a conviction. Given that it is now mid-July, it's also unlikely your ...

I was responding to a lights and sirens call with a rookie who was doing the driving. En route, the call was cancelled so we canned the lights. Right ahead was a Tim Hortons and the rookie said he wanted a coffee. I made him drive past and we doubled back because what would people think if we were thundering along with lights and sirens and then ...

We're finally seeing more and more UK- or European-style roundabouts here. Hooray! Fewer stop signs where they just aren't needed.

I think you've summarized the issue well, Argyll. And it's a shame that the officers who do things like put their lights on momentarily just because they don't want to wait at a red light make officers like you look ...

Wow! Has this thread ever gone off the rails!

I haven't had a ton of tickets in my lifetime, but, like most drivers, I have had some. Some I've simply paid. I've fought most of them because that's my right. Even when I've known I've been guilty, it's still up to the Crown to prove it. I won the last one when the Crown still hadn't provided ...

To me it's more of a honey-versus-vinegar thing. If I need to show that an officer may have erred, mistaken a fact, etc., I'd rather do so by asking a series of questions that bring into doubt the reliability of the evidence than by slamming the officer personally.

I agree that it sucks that I can't use the fact the officer was driving 135 against him, but it is what it is. I'll have to see what's in the disclosure before I decide what to do.

If you can prove, through photos, video or otherwise, that the signs are not spaced properly, you could have a case for having them declared of no effect. The problem is if a 60 km/h zone is declared non-enforceable, a JP could turn around and say the limit defaults to 50 km/h, not the previous 80.

I could be wrong with the section/subsection, but I have seen a prosecutor offer Fail to Proceed in lieu of an improper or prohibited turn. It's also possible some of the designations/short forms have changed; I couldn't find a simple "Fail to Proceed" when I searched yesterday.

Don't worry; I've thought of all those angles. I'm just not going to speculate until I've seen the disclosure.

One alternate offence that doesn't carry points is Fail to Proceed. I believe it's subsection 144 (12). I've seen this used a few times in place of Disobey Sign or Improper Turn.

Thanks, Speedtaxed. I have a bunch of other questions I'm prepared to ask as well. There's no way I'd ask Q2, though. That shows irresponsibility and suggests I was speeding.

What I plan to use in my favour on both charges is the officer's ability to identify a car in his rearview mirror (as in your Q5), particularly 15 minutes after sunrise in ...

I finally heard from the Prosecutors office. My trial is Monday and I had requested disclosure in a timely manner. After several messages, someone called me today to say the office still has not received disclosure from the officer. She went on to say that, unless I hear something further, I should still show up for my trial Monday and the ...

First of all, well done!

I've heard cases of Justices of the Peace or Judges being reprimanded and disciplined. I think it's up to you to file a complaint, though, to begin the process.

I had a similar situation ten years ago, except the light was yellow and I was too close to the intersection to stop safely. The other driver is 100% at fault, no question.

Unfortunately for your case, Peel and York Regions are adjacent. It's the upper-tier municipality that matters.