Search found 324 matches

I don't think the officer needs to justify what they were doing in that area...it will certainly not be anything that could be used in a defence...You do have the right to disclosure, including the video, if any, but that is all...

The curve in the road may actually lower your speed. The speed is more accurate the more straight on it is...the curve will never give a false high reading...and the headlight argument is no good either...

82(6) does not apply...that is for an officer who wants a vehicle to attend for an inspection and such...
The officer had the driver attempt to show the emergency brake was working 3 times...apparently it failed all 3 attempts...The officer does not need to be certified...the inspection report was not provided as the officer is not, in all ...

There is close to a 100% chance you will be offered a lesser charge...

Unless I am wrong, the charge comes from the parking brake not working properly...it will be a hard sell in court to have the JP believe the parking brake was checked during the pre trip inspection and found to be working properly and later in the day it was not working...let me kick a hornets nest here...Even if the driver did a proper pre trip ...

Most people have cameras on their phones, a picture or two will do quite fine in court, or the officer can take the document back to the office to photocopy or have the cmv attend the nearest inspection station for an inspection where there will be a photocopier, all of which depends on the location of the stop and other factors...I am aware of the ...

Yes, that is why the officer should not have taken the log page, as it need to be turned into the Carrier...Officer was probably thinking of rules of evidence and seizing it to be able to produce it later in court if needed...again, the officer should have copied it and left the original with the driver...For now, if I were you, I would get the ...

It recognizes a sweep error as it is happening and won't display a reading...it will then get another reading on the other part of the vehicle, if the next readings are in agreement it will display the reading...

No, it is not my personal theory...one lidar reading is compared to the one before it...there needs to be a few readings in agreement to produce a valid reading...if there is a sweep error the difference in the readings would be noted and tossed out (by the lidar)...just dumbing it down a bit...

I doubt there is anything on the ministry site about that...more of a procedural thing, there is nothing in law that says they can't seize it, they just shouldn't seize it...if you are looking to beat the charge because the officer took that page it won't work...

I do not know what the field of vision will be...there may be sweep error if the lidar was being moved while getting a reading...the average of least squares will guard against the sweep errors...sweep errors is more common when hitting the side of a big target such as a tractor trailer, taking a shot along the long box trailer...if the lidar hit ...

Either way, officer shouldn't have taken the log page or the inspection page (if they are separate)

Bottom line on this one, as I see it: Very good notes, officer is an operator and trainer, looking at badge # I will guess this person has years of experience, the technical arguments being raised are not good...with his training and experience things like how wide is the beam, sweep error or visibility at night can be easily explained...I say talk ...

The officer can use the regular sight or flip the other one over if they want the 8X magnification...operator preference

Well, if you look at the disclosure notes you will see that the lidar used was the Laser Atlanta Speed Laser which does, in fact, have it...

No...just proper procedure...nothing in law...if you dropped in to any mto scale and asked any of the officers they would tell you they don't seize them, even if there was a log book violation they don't seize them, they do take lots of photocopies though...I suppose you could track down the officer and ask him for it back as you need to keep it in ...

At 300m a motor vehicle shows up very well in the sight...at that distance the operator would be using the 8X magnification sight...Depending on the lighting situation of where the alleged offence took place, the officer may well have been able to see clearly enough to get a good shot...was there good ambient light from street lights or was it down ...

They are not suppose to take any copy of the log book...they can make copies if they need, but they are not suppose to take copies with them...

Instead of paying a paralegal, just talk to the prosecutor yourself, for free, find out what their position is...if you don't like what they have to say and decide you want a trial, then talk to a paralegal...others will tell you to plead not guilty, request disclosure first, then talk to the prosecutor...

There is no reason not to give a cvir on scene by a certified inspector...they can be done by hand written form or computer generated, either way, the driver can be, and should be, given a copy on scene...and I did not forget you don't have to be a certified inspector to test the parking brake...

And the prosecutor could ask the JP to amend the ticket back up to the original speed so then you would be into points if convicted...

Sounds to me like it was for an improper braking system...if it was an inspection done by a qualified cmv inspector, the driver would have been given a copy of an inspection report...

No fooling...I would love to know when and where this trial is going to be...

144(12) has to do with green lights...I can't see a prosecutor taking that one...

That makes perfect sense...May I ask what the major defect was?

Original post says (11), not (3), so yes 2 cvor points...

Thanks for the schooling!

No points on the driver's licence...3 CVOR points to the company

Before you do that...perhaps a meeting with the prosecutor would be to your benefit, unlike what another poster stated...
If you ask the prosecutor for a deal of pleading guilty to Disobey Sign Section 182(2) there are only 2 points instead of 3 for the Stop Sign charge...it is a minor saving I know, however, if points are a concern in your world ...

Why is there an automatic suspension for G1 G2 drivers, it is only 3 points...the automatic 30 day suspensions kick in at 4 points; is there something I am missing in the cell phone section? I am not seeing where is specifically says there is an automatic suspension for this specific offence? I can't find anything to that effect in the section or ...