Search found 556 matches

Given what you have on your plate I would hire representation to handle this for you. If the case against you is strong then they will plead it down for you. If it is weak they'll get it withdrawn.

Police are allowed to stop you at any time to check if your documents are in order. They weren't, you got the summons.

The sign you saw is a regulatory sign that means "speed changes ahead". The new speed applies when at the point that you see a sign that says "BEGINS" or when the default speed limit (absence of any visible signs in a certain distance) applies. Unless things have changed recently there is no transition zone. When the sign indicates that limit ...

Whatever the outcome, do yourself a huge favour and do not even think about driving under suspension. The compared to what you are facing the penalties for driving while suspended are huge, both from the additional suspension and insurance ramifications.

Before trial you could ask for a reduced charge that does not involve a suspension. Otherwise, if the stakes are so high and you are not prepared for trial you could ask for an adjournment so that you can hire someone to represent you. Be prepared to hear NO but anything is possible.

If you want help you would do better to give a step by step description of what happened when you went for trial.

While I understand people wanting an early resolution so they don't have to worry, I think it is harmful overall. Your post sounds like a testimonial written by a prosecutor. The early resolution option is a good business decision for the government and like any business it depends on decent customer service. As you probably already know, you could ...

When it comes to court the officer is just a witness. The prosecutor will ask them pointed questions that if left unchecked will prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They are trained to collect evidence and testify making it an unfair fight for the unrepresented average citizen. It all boils down to credibility and your ability to present ...

You got a Community Legal Aid to come for a minor traffic ticket? Looks like Windsor is the place to be.

According to the letter they were auxiliary officers. The driver recalls seeing them from way down the road and says they were standing on the corner but did not see a car or a measurement device. According to her, she always drives at or about the limit.

I came across a letter mailed to a family member from the local police station stating that a car displaying plates registered to them was seen going 7 kph over the limit. It states that they should make sure that whoever is driving the car, does so more carefully and that no other action is necessary.

I am thinking this is a great way to make ...

If you are sure that you did stop and they have a video it will exonerate you so ask them to play it.

Request disclosure when you get your trial date and see what it has. Likely the only witness that can convict you is the other driver and they may not show up or if they do show up may give inconsistent testimony that may not support a conviction. Remember you do not have to testify and incriminate yourself.

This is one of those situations where the law doesn't seem to jive with common decency. You can pretty much sue anyone for any reasonable loss. If I have this right she is suing his estate not his parents, his estate is currently worthless. Perhaps if the parents sue successfully and the damages are awarded to the estate of the deceased then the ...

There are some people that no matter how severe the consequences of their actions might be will still do stupid things. Some of them kill people, some steal, some will drive 85 over the limit. I don't see any reason for tangents here, this is about the law as it's written and applied not morality. We may not like what they are accused of but they ...

Though I do not condone speeding if someone had the time and money to challenge the law (especially the extrajudicial sanctions) that occur prior to trial I'm willing to bet that this law would not survive a charter challenge.

Nope. It has already been done. Two judges independently ruled that the law was unconstitutional because it carries the ...

At best it was a very weak approach to the case. Even if it were read as a 5 there is conflicting case law about the total payable being fatal. A JP questioning a person's intelligence is not unheard of and often merited. You can appeal the decision if you want, there are many levels of appeal....is it worth it? Maybe you should argue that the POA ...

Are you the boss now? 5 tickets and a promotion.... Yes you can be charged for up to 6 months. Not giving authorization is a possible defense to which the prosecutor will ask why you did not secure the keys and plates in a place unauthorized people who normally drive your vehicles could not get access to them.

No CVOR to record the charges to should result in this being treated as a standard vehicle owner ticket. If you can show you have remedied the issues that caused you to get ticketed usually they will drop most of the charges in exchange for one guilty plea. So if I were the boss I would apply for a CVOR, get the annual inspection done, and fix the ...

Were they written to the CVOR? If so they will appear on the CVOR abstract. As long as the vehicle completion sticker is greater than 4500 you will treated like a commercial vehicle.

I do not think you will find reliable information here for BC courts and procedures.

You and everyone else on the road travelling in that direction were obliged to proceed with caution (slow down) and move over one lane if it could be safely done. If something can be safely done may be up for debate but did you make any effort to proceed with caution? If you testify that you saw the lights flashing 1 km away but could not ...

Though I do not condone speeding if someone had the time and money to challenge the law (especially the extrajudicial sanctions) that occur prior to trial I'm willing to bet that this law would not survive a charter challenge.

There is absolutely no justification for what you did. Your best outcome is going to be if you hire a professional to represent you.

If they are legally parked then I would suggest you talk to your neighbours about your concerns and see if they might rearrange who parks on the blvd.
If that doesn't work out then I am afraid there is nothing you can do but accept it.

Is it by chance a commercial pick up truck? Most towns don't allow you to park commercial vehicles in residential areas.

I hate to burst your bubble here but Speeding 75km/hr in posted 60km/hr zone is not a fatal error. If it said speeding 60km/hr in posted 75km/hr zone you'd be in business.

You paid the fine 10 years ago as well? Were you told you needed to take part in the back on track program? The ignition interlock condition is placed on your licence once your suspension is over for a specified period of time. If your license expired that long ago and never renewed you will have to start over and go through the graduated licensing ...

I agree that the charge is the same and the kph over the limit is only relevant for the purpose of the fine. In fatal error land there is no trial or evidence presented and it's all about the paperwork (certificate of offence) being complete and regular on its face for a default conviction.

Taxi, Bus, Train, Streetcar, Subway, Boat, Bicycle, Walk, Horseback, Dog Sled...