Admin asked me to comment on this thread (sorry I'm a little late with it). First Attendance (FA) is not an alternative to choosing one of the options on your ticket. You must always request a trial. THEN you can negotiate a settlement at FA or before your trial. FA is not offered in every jurisdiction and the ones that do offer it may not offer it for every charge (i.e. FA for speeding but not for parking tickets). Some places you have to schedule the FA, others you just go and line up. Arriving early to your court date (at least 30 minutes in advance) you will be able to talk to the prosecut...

Got the ruling today. The ticket was quashed.

As this was a first level OCJ ruling, it isn't binding so you don't necessarily need the case law to make the same argument. I have to check with the defendant tonight to see if she's OK with me plastering her name all over the internet.

Anyone can make the same argument in court. The argument is a little complicated and I'll be updating my site within the next week to explain how to make it (with or without case reference).

I took a different take on Morton's report of the case (Good job finding it Bel!). He noted that there must be some form of mental element (mens rea) to warrant imprisonment. We've seen previous cases where the justices ruled 172 was a strict liability charge open to a due diligence defence. This case goes the other way by stating that IF the only element to the charge is excessive speed, there is no mental element (intention) and no possibility of raising a due diligence defence. Therefore it's an absolute liability charge AND that violate s.7 if the penalty includes the possibility of impris...

I'll second that. As long as you pay one of the amounts, that should be OK. However, under s.111 of the POA you can avoid paying the fine by entering into a recognizance (you have to get a justice to agree to it which is a separate court appearance).

hwybear wrote:

m4gician wrote: 3) Highlighting that I have not received a manual that states the proper use of radar gun.

don't think you will ever see that, it is a copyright document. To my understanding each crown has the manual for viewing purposes only and you can attend a look it over.

You cannot deny access to or a copy of the manual on the basis of copyright, see IPC ORDER MO-2016 and s. 32.1(1) of the Copyright Act

It must be a regional thing. I've seen the MTO letters in the mail and I know of people who have been stopped on the road but I have never heard of an officer actually coming to your door to find you.

I'll disagree with all of the above. A speed limit sign is just that: here's the speed limit on this part of the street. The only exception is the speed reduced when lights flashing sign which sometimes is placed around schools. Community safety zones are in effect during certain hours, days and months of the year. The by-law will state when. The sign goes up but won't state the times. Just because there is a sign doesn't mean it's a 24/7 thing. Finally who goes to school for 2 hours in the morning and two in the afternoon? It's most likely the daycare drop off hours that allow special parking...

hwybear wrote:89% of the time is served personally by officer "X"

For a licence suspension for non-payment of a fine??? I've never heard of an officer looking you up to serve you personally. Normally it's a letter in the mail from MTO!

As you are making reference to them, you can submit them. Case law is not evidence so you don't give them a letter (e.g. defence exhibit A), you just hand them over. If you want to be "fancy", the rule for civil/criminal procedures outline creating binders in which you put all your material under well marked tabs. You hand over 2 copies (one for the Crown and one for the justice) of the binder at the beginning of your argument and then refer to the tabs as your argument progresses. For example: Tab 1: Your factum Tab 2: case law - R. v. Bob Tab 3: case law - R. v. Mary Tab 4: copy of...

torontoeh, I'm entering this thread for the "discussion" and I AM NOT suggesting you take a different approach to what everyone else has recommended. They are very knowledgeable and their recommendation is the easiest path to resolving a complex issue. Now the discussion. Pre-172 street racing and pre- Kanda , Ontario ruled that speeding was an absolute liability offence in London (City) v. Polewsky, 2005 . Specifically they examined whether defaulting on a fine raised the possibility of imprisonment. The court concluded that the default proceedings under s69 to suspend a licence wer...

You can use either lane. But beware that if you see a green arrow indication, then separate rules apply for turning on a red. See this discussion . HTA 141 Right turn at intersection (2) Where a driver or operator of a vehicle intends to turn to the right into an intersecting highway, he or she shall, where the highway on which he or she is driving has marked lanes for traffic, approach the intersection within the right-hand lane or, where it has no such marked lanes, by keeping immediately to the left of the right curb or edge of the roadway and he or she shall make the right turn by entering...

Still waiting. A decision was due in August BUT the justice forgot his notes on his kitchen table. (I can't make this stuff up!!!) So the matter is adjourned till end of September.

But I've already noticed that they are starting to use the new forms so the loophole window is closing even if no one has managed to go through.

I'm not saying cyclists are saints. Basically anyone with balance can ride a "vehicle" on the roads with the little training they got from their early childhood. And I have NEVER seen a bicycle in compliance with the Act at night. I've had more than my fair share of close calls, especially making a right turn at any downtown intersection. better yet...wait in line for theatre tickets, but someone just walks to the front of the line past many patrons b/c there is room to do so The difference is that you and the bike are not going to the same destination so they are not butting in line...

Here's my big city take on it. OK the cyclist should not have gone on the sidewalk, that was wrong. But the other part which frustrated you is actually the way it's supposed to be! You have to share the road and yes he's supposed to slide up beside you. Rather than thinking, ugh I've got to pass this guy again, you should think this guy doesn't pay insurance, gas, car payments, pollute the environment, he's staying healthy AND he's keeping up with me! It puts the whole I need a car thing into perspective. Don't get frustrated when a bike keeps up or overtakes you. Torontonians (except the cycl...