144 km/h in a 90 need help

I was driving on the highway passing a transport truck doing about 110 km/h we came up to the 300 meter sign that you get when the lane is going to close. I had plenty of time to finish passing him, but i guess the driver of the transport truck was having a bad day and decided to cut me off honking his horn like a maniac forcing me into the oncoming lane, so i decided to press on the gas and finish passing him. As i was done passing him there was a cop right there and clocked me doing 54 over. She pulled me over and right away told me my car was being impounded and liscence suspended for 7 days. She didn't let me explain myself and wouldn't listen to anything i had to say. I need some help!! dont know if i should fight it head on and plead not guilty or get a lawer or how this is all going to work. I feel like this would of never happened if the transport driver wouldn't of cut me off and if the officer would of heard what i had to say then maybe the other driver would of been pulled over and could of explained why he cut me off when he could clearly see that I had time to continue passing him safely.

It is a serious charge and you should not take it lightly. You may have something here. Get disclosure and seek advise from paralegal or lawyer.

I would definitely seek professional help (paralegal, lawyer) for this charge.

As for the chances in court, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that there must be some sort of fault on the part of the defendant in order to be convicted of stunt driving. If you took reasonable steps to avoid driving more than 50 km/h over the limit, you could be found not guilty of stunt driving. You could be convicted of speeding 50 km/h over, but that does not carry the minimum $2000 fine, etc. What you may be interested in is this paragraph by Justice Doherty of the Ontario Court of Appeal in the R. v. Raham case, which is what I was referring to:

[49] I do not think that it can be said that driving over the speed limit, regardless of how much over the speed limit, will necessarily preclude a finding that an individual took all reasonable steps to avoid driving at 50 km per hour or more over the reasonable limit. For example, a driver, acting reasonably, may be proceeding somewhat over the speed limit in the passing lane of a multi-lane highway. That driver may find that he has no reasonable choice but to accelerate in order to avoid being hit by a vehicle that is approaching from behind. If that driver were to go more than 50 km per hour over the speed limit for the two or three seconds needed to get around traffic so that he could pull out of the passing lane and out of the way of the oncoming vehicle, I think a trier of fact could conclude that the driver was exercising all reasonable care to avoid driving at 50 km per hour or more over the speed limit.

Sound like that may apply to your situation?

Anyway... if I were in your shoes, I would still get a paralegal or a lawyer. Making the argument in court on your own could prove very difficult. You want to make sure that this is done right.