Ontario Highway Traffic Act

I very much doubt it. The Criwn's office knows the same as you when the court date is. You could always reply to the email pointing out the date discrepancy.

So you think 81 in a 50 is fine. What about 90.....or 100 ? 120 ?

You clearly haven't read enough of my posts. I agree there are fishing holes (that's what we call them) that get cops quota tickets (there are no quotas but it looks better on your assessment if you get more tickets) and that frustrated the hell out of me.

What also frustrated me are those who say that all cops are parasites. There are many many ...

No you can't appeal if you win. That's ridiculous.

I've just showed this to two family members and two friends all of who are quite left wing and suspicious of the police. The consensus was that police should nedd to be re-trained and maintenance records are relevant but that your maths argument was splitting hairs. They said that of course if the math showed you weren't going 300 kms an hour if ...

Not really HTA !

But you have to have knowledge that something is stolen to make out the mens rea element of the offence. Having said that, if something is too good to be reasonable then that can work against you. But yes, if you are found to have something stolen then you have to give it up and your only recourse is to sue the person who sold it ...

Depends on the quality of the report, the seriousness and frequency of the offence, the evidence available and workload pressures.

A verbal report for a one time incident might get a warning phone call to the RO...but might not. The likelihood of a civilian witness being the only witness and being successful for the crown is very very slim ...

Yes plus someone in the trunk, beating oncoming traffic at a new green light etc. Over 50 is just one of the criteria.

So everyone should be allowed to speed all they want and only be charged when they hit something?

I am not affiliated with any "Freeman on the Land" group, but simple answer to your question is yes as that is what the common law says that our country is supposedly formed on.

I'm completely surprised by that response. Just so I'm clear, you're ...

That is back to your Freeman on the Land nonsense I'm afraid. So everyone should be allowed to speed all they want and only be charged when they hit something ?

I do agree that some tickets are fishing hole type tickets where there is little public benefit derived from their application but to say that no-one should be charged unless they hurt ...

Insurance wise you'd be better off taking the +40 if they'd drop the other. It's not the fine that matters but the insurance hike.

That's pretty harsh. I would have expected an offer of +29 and the other is dropped.

Because after that it will be something else. Of course if we didn't want to waste the courts time people could just admit to what they did and save the fights for when they actually didn't commit the offence they are accused of !

Novel concept I know.

I dont think the dust will help you. If it was so bad then the device simply wouldn't give a reading. I think you'd have to come up with some testimony to show it does rather than just an unsubstantiated could. But then again I'm not the judge on the day.

Credibility again ? Really ??