Search found 1722 matches

I have used email with my last few disclosure requests, and received it just fine. Much easier than having to go pick it up.

If you don't get it, make sure to send 2nd and third requests with correct email address. I use free online fax service to send requests and then print email confirmation to prove I sent them which is much cheaper and faster ...

First of all NEVER lie to the police, otherwise you can be charged with something like Public Mischief.

Your response should be "I have no comment, now please go away because I am under no legal obligation to answer any of your questions or to even talk to you."

Read the ALL the links at the topic I referenced above.

Most people do not ...

Read this post:
http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1765.html

1. Until you get disclosure from the officer, you will not know "how sure" he was that you were the car. Definitely something you could question him on in cross examination at a trial.
2. Again you won't know until you get disclosure.
3. When I have provided an email address in my disclosure request, I have been sent the disclosure by email.

Not ...

I personally am against AMP's but if BC's are being challenged at the SCC level, then that may turn out in favor of AMPs.


SCC Denies Canadians Right to Strong Presumption of Innocence

July 31, 2015 - Supreme Court of Canada Denies Canadians Right to Strong Presumption of Innocence

Toronto, ON.—In an unfortunate setback for the Charter rights ...

So this is when I would make a Second Disclosure Request and simply state that you received a copy of the officers notes, but they are mostly illegible and you would like a typed copy that includes the meaning of any shortforms used.

Heynow999 wrote:For example I admitted to talking on my cell phone in the belief that being co-operative and friendly would save me some tickets. ( it does not)

Generally, you should never talk to police:
http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7032.html

Remember that in this case, the only witness is the other driver. So you do NOT have to answer ANY questions the police ask you, otherwise you will incriminate yourself.

The general rule is NEVER TALK TO POLICE, which would appear to apply in your situation.
http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7032.html

I would NOT got to the police ...

Yes officer can give you a summons for speeding within 6 months of the offense.

Trial dates in Orillia will probably be within 3 to 4 months of when you request it... Smaller cities/towns do not have the backlog like Toronto so you tend to get a quick trial date. They also schedule the trial dates based on the officers work schedule so 99.9% of ...

Well as with all government run departments, nothing is quick. Best bet is to call and ask if they received your mailed in response and then ask how long to get an response from them.

I think 49 over is the best deal you will get. But if it was me, I would still want to opt for disclosure before I agreed to the 49 over charge, so you could still ask about it.

As far as I am aware you can not get reimbursed for your transcript costs, legal fees, your time or anything else you can think of, even if you win!

This is how our great canadian justice system works --> Do you want justice? Then you need to be able to pay for it!

Here is some information on representing yourself: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7039.html

So I would choose NOT GUILTY option and ask for TRIAL with Officer present.

Once you get Notice of Trial, request disclosure. Request copy of officers notes and the manual for any speed measuring devices used and any audio/video recordings.

Once you get disclosure then you will have better idea of what their case against you is. It would be a lot ...

Did they use radar/lidar or did they pace you or how did they measure your speed?

Has anybody successfully objected to an officer using their notes to refresh their memory?

What kind of arguments can be made for this?

Thanks

@bobajob - $30 per month x 12 months = $360 x 3 years = $1,080 + speeding ticket fine is what it cost you.

I see everybody's point, so I withdraw my advice to plead not guilty and suggest you listen to everybody else.

I suggest you choose the NOT GUILTY option with a TRIAL with the Officer present.

Once you get your trial date, request disclosure (officers notes and copy of radar/lidar manual).

Once you get disclosure then you can decide whether to fight it further or not. If the officers notes say you were doing 115 in a 50 then if you take the 15 over to ...

Another good Careless reference I found basically says the courts have frequently dealt with the legal question of when does a temporary lack of attention become careless and it is decided that momentary inattention is excusable:

R. v. Richards, 2009 ONCJ 651 on Canlii http://canlii.ca/t/27sj1 says:

[16] In R. v. Beauchamp (1953), 16 C.R. 270 ...

Also, read this topic http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7122.html

It's starts out talking about Follow Too Close but gets into some Careless Driving discussion. On the first page, in the 12th post down, I posted a couple links related to careless driving that you should read.

Your insurance could go up even if the charge had 0 demerit points, so don't fall into that trap of beliveing that 0 demerits is a good thing. Of course 0 demerits is better than 3 demerits (especially for G2) but my point is that demerit points have nothing to do with insurance increases.

What were you charged with (charge and section number ...

When was the original date of infraction?

What is the date the summons was issued?

Call the clerk of the court on day number 9 and ask them if the ticket has been filed yet... that's the only way.

The officer has 7 days to file the ticket with the clerk, so it can take a couple weeks before it shows up on the pay ticket site.

I would suggest you choose the NOT GUILTY with a TRIAL with the officer present.

Once you get a trial date, then request disclosure.

Once you get disclosure, then you can decide whether to pay it or fight it.

There ...

Just as another thought, the only witnesses will be you and the other driver.

So if the other driver does not show up to court then do NOT testify against yourself and the charge should be dropped.

If the other driver does show up, then the prosecutor will ask them a bunch of questions about what happened to try and establish their case against ...

The issue with Following Too Close is whether you were too close or not for your speed. So I don't think yield or stop really matters. If you come to a full stop yourself and then waited for the other vehicle to start moving and did not move yourself until it was X number of feet away, then this is good because it proves there was seperation and ...

@iFly55 - That is good case law... I think that is the one I had read before as well.

@thisiskat - So with the above case law and your own testimony, I think it would be hard to prove following too closely as you were at a stop (which all cars are close together at a stop) and then were going less than 10 km/h at the time of collision (especially ...

I just happened across this, so here is an article about Careless Driving if it goes that far:
http://www.trafficticketparalegal.com/e ... standings/

And also R v Hollyoake 2010 ONCJ 578:
http://www.wejustwin.ca/wp-content/uplo ... CJ-578.pdf

Well that is good and bad!

The good news is the prosecutor even told you not to plead guilty. Get a trial date and then request disclosure and then you should be able to get off with a little research. There is some case law that I read (don't know it off the top of my head) that says exactly that a rear end collision is not necessarily following ...