Using Laser Downhill And Through Tinted Windows A Violation?

According to TicketCombat.com: "The radar or laser (lidar) gun has to be on the same vector as your direction of travel." http://www.ticketcombat.com/step3/lookaround.php

Can anyone expand on this, case law or some other reference would be great.

My friend was coming down hill on a bridge on Brimley and 401. The bridge bends down a bit and isn't perfectly straight. We think the police officer was standing at the foot of the bridge with the laser gun. We think he shot through his tinted car windows too.

Because the bridge bends down and is not a perfect vector, it doesn't matter where the police officer was standing, which is great! But the manual doesn't say it's a violation using the laser on cars coming down hill or "you must be on the same vector as the target car." The manual only says to test the laser gun horizontally and vertically.

So how should my friend go about this? Also, do we need blueprints of the bridge to prove the bridge is not a vector or is taking photos of the bridge good enough?

Thanks!

I believe most laser devices can be used through glass without issue. It can significantly reduce the range of the device, but not the accuracy.

Im regards to your link, Im really not sure what the author actually means. I think hes simply referring to the fact that its more difficult for police to accurately target a vehicle on a road with bends, dips, obstructions, etc. The fact that you were going downhill wouldnt negate the reading. Worst case it creates a minor cosine effect, which always benefits the offender by showing a slightly lower speed.

As Stanton pointed out, a slight bend in the road would benefit the driver anyways.

Thanks for the replies, I thought I was on to something

Another question: does an officer serving under 11 Division have authority to set up a speed trap in 12 Division's neighbourhood boundaries?

Is the officer still within his jurisdiction if he's operating a speed trap outside of his 11 Division neighbourhood boundaries, but still within the city?

Thanks!

notxcopper wrote:Another question: does an officer serving under 11 Division have authority to set up a speed trap in 12 Division's neighbourhood boundaries?

Is the officer still within his jurisdiction if he's operating a speed trap outside of his 11 Division neighbourhood boundaries, but still within the city?

I found out today that they moved the speed limit sign down the road about 300 meters.

What happens now? Is the case dismissed?

Is the charge for violating the speed limit sign in the old position still valid? Does one continue the good fight?

If the speed limit sign in the old position is invalid, how does one go about the charge? Does one tell the justice before the trial begins about the new sign position? Or wait until it's your turn to mount a defence?

Thanks for all the help!

The spot where the ticket is alleged is important. The court may not have jurisdiction if "say" you were driving from vaughn to toronto.

Maybe the boundary comes into effect?

If they screw up that stuff it is almost auto dismissed.

You do need to point it out before they can amend it though.

Object before they read the charge.

Best of luck

Cheers

Viper1

notxcopper wrote:I found out today that they moved the speed limit sign down the road about 300 meters.

What happens now? Is the case dismissed?

Is the charge for violating the speed limit sign in the old position still valid? Does one continue the good fight?

If the speed limit sign in the old position is invalid, how does one go about the charge? Does one tell the justice before the trial begins about the new sign position? Or wait until it's your turn to mount a defence?

It doesn't change anything. You'll continue to defend yourself as if the sign were still there. Just because it moved doesn't make it "invalid". You have no argument on whether or not the sign was properly displayed other than its since been relocated, which doesn't prove anything.

bend wrote:

notxcopper wrote:I found out today that they moved the speed limit sign down the road about 300 meters.

What happens now? Is the case dismissed?

Is the charge for violating the speed limit sign in the old position still valid? Does one continue the good fight?

If the speed limit sign in the old position is invalid, how does one go about the charge? Does one tell the justice before the trial begins about the new sign position? Or wait until it's your turn to mount a defence?

It doesn't change anything. You'll continue to defend yourself as if the sign were still there. Just because it moved doesn't make it "invalid". You have no argument on whether or not the sign was properly displayed other than its since been relocated, which doesn't prove anything.

If the boundary changed it would mean something.

It sounds as if OP was on boarder.

I think each area has jurisdiction and it needs to be established to convict.

If OP passed a boarder or just sign was moved to proper spot I am not sure but I will bet you a beer he wins if he takes it to trial.

lol.

Cheers

Viper1

BTW was your friend going Northbound on Brimley Rd? Streetview: http://goo.gl/zq6uOZ

IMO there would be no jurisdiction issue there, it's all City of Toronto for at least a 2km radius. Lets just say that 50 km/hr sign was not there, the Highway Traffic Act would default the speed limit to 50 km/hr anyway.

North of the 401, it's all 43 division.

Similar Brimley/401 story on this board: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic5589.html

Dashcam: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4qYsmB ... F1R1k/edit

My understanding of the Provincial Offences Act is that Courts can deal with matters from adjoining Regions. So if a Toronto officer charged someone in Peel or York, Toronto Courts should still have jurisdiction.

29. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a proceeding in respect of an offence shall be heard and determined by the Ontario Court of Justice sitting in the county or district in which the offence occurred or in the area specified in the transfer agreement made under Part X. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 4, s. 1 (35).

Idem

(2) A proceeding in respect of an offence may be heard and determined in a county or district that adjoins that in which the offence occurred if,

(a) the court holds sittings in a place reasonably proximate to the place where the offence occurred; and

(b) the place of sitting referred to in clause (a) is named in the summons or offence notice.

iFly55 wrote:BTW was your friend going Northbound on Brimley Rd? Streetview: http://goo.gl/zq6uOZ

IMO there would be no jurisdiction issue there, it's all City of Toronto for at least a 2km radius. Lets just say that 50 km/hr sign was not there, the Highway Traffic Act would default the speed limit to 50 km/hr anyway.

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/divisions/map.php

North of the 401, it's all 43 division.

Similar Brimley/401 story on this board: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic5589.html

Dashcam: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4qYsmB ... F1R1k/edit

Yup, that's the same spot

Just to clarify, technically my friend was north of the 401 which is 42 Division's boundary. The last posted speed limit was 60, which was near Ellemere.

bend wrote: It doesn't change anything. You'll continue to defend yourself as if the sign were still there. Just because it moved doesn't make it "invalid". You have no argument on whether or not the sign was properly displayed other than its since been relocated, which doesn't prove anything.

Will examining the speed limit by-laws reveal potential issues with the speed limit sign location.

Thanks all!