Search found 888 matches

There's a check mark by the box. I doubt you're going to get it thrown out for that.

Yes, that's normal.

Your chances of re-opening a ticket that you paid are pretty much nil.

Sidebar....it's stuff like this that just burns me up. People are negative about police because of the huge impact a ticket has on them financially. It is nothing to do with the fine but the increased insurance premiums. How on earth does not having your friend's insurance slip ...

Yes, plea bargains can be made right up to the trial starting and even during a trial (more common in criminal cases). Having said that there isn't really any other offence that a mobile phone ticket can be bargained down to.

Personally, and it is just my opinion, I would have bitten her arm off. Your wife clearly did not stay in her lane as she hit a lamp post which presumably wasn't in her lane. The fact that she was driving correctly up until she left her lane and hit the pole is not the point in question. Normal driving does not involve striking an imoveable object ...

Indeed. Criminal court, they happen all the time. I've never come across one in a Provincial Court setting.

It's always to joy of case law. One can find cases to support both sides of an argument. The worst we ever discussed at work was whether a police officer could be disturbed criminally....masses of case law on both sides. But I digress.......

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2007/2007oncj343/2007oncj343.html

This quotes the case to which you refer in para 15 but also has a Supreme Court decision at para 12 which would appear to contradict the ruling.

I've been involved with trials when a lesser offence conviction has been the outcome but it has been because of a mid trial bargain ...

Check the provisions of the Off Road Vehicle Act which permit some road movement. I think the addition of the blade is a red herring.

If you feel someone is too close to you then the correct response is to gradually slow down and change lanes where possible.

Your opinion about being tailgated by a cruiser will not be a successful defence.

No, your trial is for the offence that you are charged with. It's all or nothing for the Prosecution.

A Warn should have no effect on your insurance. Just don't go getting a bunch of them !

Engaging in a conversation can assist in the officer's assessment as to your level of sobriety.

Ynotp: Hmm why do you think so? When he followed me I was driving in the same lane without switching because I did get nervous as to why he's right behind me.

If you are replying to my message.... you know you are a law abiding citizen getting pulled over for a 'minor' traffic issues; the copper has no idea who you are. I always ran computer ...

As is the fact he didn't pull you over right away. He was likely running checks on your vehicle and the registered owner to gives him an idea of who he might be dealing with.

If the JP has said they don't believe they are relevant it isn't likely they will sign a subpoena for them.

230 km a day, every day......I hope you have someone else paying for the fuel !!

Merry Christmas

But that doesn't say 'for offences committed by drivers of motor vehicles'.

I would suggest your utterance about going 10 km/hr over the speed limit is going to sink you. Yes, you can hold a voir dire but these type of comments are almost exclusively admitted.

I do think you got screwed by having the adjournment count against you though.

Same to you bobajob

But unlikely it would be that long. After 30 days the police need a summons which is much more work. If you last 30-40 days you're likely to be OK.

Ticket every time where I was.

Probation orders can be seen in other provinces.

I would suspect that your contrition by stopping and apologising would prevent the bus driver from making a formal complaint. They are rightly very protective of their wards but hopefully understand that everyone makes mistakes.

" that JPs really don't care what police officers do"

That is NOT what I said. But you have my point of view so no need to flog a dead horse.

I think you hit the nail on the head Zatota with your last sentence. Your issue is with the actions of the officer and if so then it is your right to make a complaint about him. But the JP won't care and will shut you down very very quickly which is only going to make you pissed off with life. I've seen it so many times. The court is only ...

The issue is the date that the notes were made. The error from disclosure is that the date wasn't included, but there would have been a date. What sometimes happens is an officer writes the date at the start of the shift and then makes pages of notes. My best practice was to photocopy the date page and then attach it to the actual incident notes ...

I'm still confused as to what you are going to be claiming was the JP's error in law. Is it just that the officer may have been speeding and therefore all the evidence should be thrown out ? This is an argument that only comes into play for the most egregious breeches such as an unauthorised search of a dwelling or wiretap.

I think this is not ...

But you will be pitting google maps and a commercial dash cam against a law enforcement radar or laser speed measuring device. I don't anticipate a good outcome for you, I'm afraid.

HUGELY uncommon. You would have had to do something to make yourself very memorable indeed. OTD is bang on that the officer may well have shredded the ticket already which does leave you in the lurch a wee bit but is better than having the ticket correct !

I'm still confused as to what you are going to be claiming was the JP's error in law. Is it just that the officer may have been speeding and therefore all the evidence should be thrown out ? This is an argument that only comes into play for the most egregious breeches such as an unauthorised search of a dwelling or wiretap.