Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Your sons explanation of the situation will not help him in my opinion. If the lead car sped up as well then there should of been room to drop back in behind that car. Most likely these cars were probably all going at least 80 or faster in the first place, so passing was a bad idea.

The court date on June 27 is a SUMMONS date and not his trial ...

So the good news is that there is no mention of the higher speed in the officers notes. If you go to trilal and LOSE and the officer testified to a higher original speed, then they can amend it up to the higher speed. But since the officers notes only mention the 108 in a 60 (and not the higher speed), this means there is nothing for you to lose by ...

Even somebody who is extremely skilled at cross-examination of witnesses on the stand, would probably not be able to discredit the officers testimony with anything you have said.

If bylaw offences do not go on your driving record then they will not affect insurance at all, and that is great news!

You can call and try to speak to prosecutor. If they will not speak to you, then your best bet is just to plead not guilty and request a trial, because at the trial date you will be able to speak to prosecutor before the trial starts anyways.

So the officers notes appear complete and that means it will be near impossible to beat if you take it to trial.

The officer reduced it to 15 over which is 0 demerit (although this can still cause your insurance to increase as insurance does not care about demerits).

If you go to trial and LOSE, then they raise it back up to the original 131 in a ...

The warning will NOT affect your insurance at all. But as a side note, the sticker is NOT required to be on the back of your ownership, only on the plate itself. Many police officers do not know this for some reason, but if you did get a ticket for no sticker on ownership, then it is an easy one to beat.

As far as bylaw offences go, some ...

Most of the time they will not try to increase it beyond the original amount unless there is some reason. So some reason might be that you have had several of these tickets and they want to try and teach you a lesson. But simply fighting the ticket in court is not a good enough reason for them to raise it up. In fact if you tell the JP about all ...

Yes you can change. Early resolution is just a first step towards trial. If you do an early resolution meeting and do not like what is offered, then you can say to prosecutor "I would like to set a trial date and get disclosure" and they will do that.

Prosecutor for Midland is in Barrie, so you would have to contact the Barrie Prosecutors office to find out if they can do Option 2 via phone. If you go to trial, that would take place in Penetanguishene.

The ticket iteself is almost impossible to beat unless the officer does not show up for court (which is very rare these days).

I doubt the ...

The charge is against the OWNER of the vehicle not the driver, so there are no demerits and no insurance increases to worry about.

Your story would not help you at all getting out of the ticket... you would still be found guilty.

The JP was not there? That seems strange that they would withdraw and not reschedule. Or do you mean the officer was not there?

Anyways congratulations on the win!

Basically they are supposed to test it at the beginning of their shift and at the end of their shift. But it could be they tested it just before your ticket and just after your ticket as well.

At your first trial date, you will not get the ticket dropped for lack of disclosure. The JP will order prosecutor to get you missing disclosure and set another trial date.

Where is the trial?

First of all note that the can NOT raise the speed back up to the original rate until the trial starts AND the officer has testified that you were going the higher speed (it should be in the notes what your original speed was officer clocked you at). If you lose the trial, then they will amend it back up to the whatever the ...

Well there are not really any good ones that I know of that will help. And I have read a LOT of them!

The problem in Ontario is that the courts have decided that the officer only needs to say "I am a qualified operator" and that "I beleive the radar was working correctly at the time". Since there is no statuatory requirement for training or ...