Search found 324 matches

If the guy who hit you was charged with speeding, there must have been an officer there at the scene to measure the speed of that vehicle...if that is so, he is likely a witness to the crash...re reading your post, you say the cops showed up a few minutes later as the station was close by...if that is so, how did they get a speed on the first guy?

"Thing I'd like to know is how I could be charged and not even know about it till I received that short notice summons." That what the summons is, it is to inform you of the charge...The summons will contain your information, what the charge is, what act and section number, and when and where you are to appear for court...Ya, that was short notice ...

And to clarify: All patrol speeds are obtained through the radar, with or without the v.i.p. plugged in...

Defence of necessity will not fly on this...there were other available options...

If the cop charged the first guy in line, that person would simply state it wasn't him speeding, it was someone behind him...the second and third guy will also say that...but the OP was the last, and there was no one behind him to pin the blame on...the cop will say it was the lone motor vehicle in the radar beam at the time of the readings, that ...

Decatur, you are correct: the patrol speed is established by the radar beam leaving the antenna and striking off stationary objects such as the ground in front of the cruiser...with shadowing, the patrol speed on the cruiser is established off the back of a moving truck, going in the same direction. The cruiser must be going faster than the truck ...

There would have to be something extremely wrong with the case to have it tossed out before a trial. You did not list any details of the stop, is there something about this that makes you believe it should be thrown out?

I did...but then you kept on stating: "So maybe I was not clear before, but I certainly can not find anything that tells me I need to have three copies of all the case laws. Anybody know where it says we must or even should do this?" Which leads me to believe you were not going to give in so easily...


_________________

Let's just say for the sake of argument that in the end it is not a statutory requirement for you to have 3 copies...one of the big things the courts like is that all parties get along and act in a pleasant manner...would it hurt you, or anyone else to have the 3 copies? the monetary loss to you would be minimal and it would help things move along ...

They should have it for you before the trial, not at the time for trial. If you have not received it far enough in advance as to be able to go over it and prepare a proper defence, you can ask for an adjournment...How much time before would be a question for the JP to make a determination on...2 days, 1 week, 3 weeks? each JP is different...

You can request disclosure any time after a charge has been laid...others on this site would have you believe you have to wait until you have requested a trial...not so...

If you want to see it yourself, research it yourself...you cannot go into court and expect the prosecutor or the JP to educate you...when it is time for the trial, it is time for the trial, they are not going to waste valuable court time to educate the uneducated...the courts may assist an unrepresented person a little but that will only be in a ...

I bet the officer's notes will not say anything about seeing the driver plugging the phone in...the officer will have it written that they observed the phone in the driver's hand...so if the notes don't say anything about seeing the driver plugging it in, don't do the happy dance quite yet...In order to use the adjusting the wire excuse, you will ...

The only lesser option for the prosecutor is to perhaps lower the fine, but with you working, that is unlikely...as stated, the prosecutor and the Justice of the Peace have no say about points or suspensions, that is the sole jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation...

And for the record...the patrol speed on the radar IS established by the radar unit itslef, not by the cars speedometer or the V.I.P. (portal, not protocol)

"How does the average person who can not afford a Supreme Court challenge stand up for everybody else and these court rulings recognized?" You said Supreme Court...not Ontario Court of Appeal...

1 copy for JP, 1 copy for prosecutor, 1 copy for accused...they need the full print out of the case law so it may be read in its entirety. Only using small portions of the cases law does not give the court a complete picture.

There is no way any speeding charge will make it up to the Supreme Court...The Supreme Court gets to pick and choose what cases it will hear, a speeding charge would be so for down the list it likely would never get heard at that level. There would have to be something so big within that speeding charge that the outcome would have an effect on the ...

"IF you are speeding and someone is on your tail then YOU BRAKE" ... Really? So you take a chance of getting rear ended, or the guy slams on his brakes, loses control, and a big accident happens...Not good advice there...

jsherk, on 07 September you said to Harpreet Singh :50 or more over is a SERIOUS offence for insurance purposes (as it is racing/stunt driving). Speeding at 49 over is only a MINOR offence for insurance purposes. I would do early resolution and ask prosecutor if they will drop to Speeding 49 over and then take that". As well, you left out your ...

Yes that is proper use of the radar...the window may reduce the effective range of the radar but not the accuracy...the JP may not be happy with you for making a late request for an adjournment but they likely will...that delay will count against you, not the prosecution...

Unless there is a sign saying you can't cross a solid line at a particular spot, you can.

A bike is a vehicle, no matter where it is...what lane it is in does not make it a vehicle...
The person making the turn has to make sure it can be done in safety.

I'm curious, why won't he win this trial because the cops were there?

Yes bobajob, you are correct...the key word is "independent" witness...No one said you could not bring your witness along to testify, infact you should...a Justice of the Peace will give more weight to the testimony of an independent person than to one who is not...

They did not take a statement from your girlfriend as she was not an independent witness...had nothing to do with race...if there was a person standing on the sidewalk, who had no connection to either vehicle involved, a statement would have been taken from that person...

Some tow dolly's have plates but most don't. I have never heard of a driver getting a ticket for not having a plated tow dolly. I am sure the vehicle being towed by the dolly does not need to be plated. A trailer does not require insurance on it as the insurance coverage will come from the towing unit. The whole 1360Kg thing is usually in reference ...

If you have a clean record otherwise, there is a good chance the prosecutor will offer a plea deal to a less speed and take it from a stunting/race charge to a straight speeding charge. A conviction for stunting is a really bad thing on your record, your insurance rates will go through the roof, not to mention the pile of points you will get as ...

I disagree...the towed car is not a trailer...As per the definition of "trailer" in the Highway Traffic Act:
"trailer means a vehicle that is at any time drawn upon a highway by a motor vehicle, except an implement of husbandry, a mobile home another motor vehicle or any device or apparatous not designed to transport persons or property..." You can ...

Markus, I agree...if an officer saw only one plate on the car, and noticed it was an Ontario plated car, which needs 2 plates, and the plate was run and came back as expired val tag but noticed a valid val tag on it, that needs to be investigated...perhaps it was an A.L.P.R. (Automatic Licence Plate Reader) cruiser which runs plates automatically ...