alex1002 wrote:

You need to get a very good paralegal for this case. Most of them can reduce it to 149km/h still get 4 points but alot better then 6 points

Not for 85 over. The Crown's policy at this time is to prosecute the stunt driving charges as such.

ynotp wrote:

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 possibility of incarceration for an absolute liability offence. The Crown then appealed, and the appeal was successful. See http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decision ... CA0206.htm.

diabolis wrote:

ynotp wrote:

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 possibility of incarceration for an absolute liability offence. The Crown then appealed, and the appeal was successful. See http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decision ... CA0206.htm.

This ruling indicates in paragraph 11 that the roadside suspension and the 7 day impound were not an issue in the appeal.

ynotp wrote:

diabolis wrote:

ynotp wrote:

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 possibility of incarceration for an absolute liability offence. The Crown then appealed, and the appeal was successful. See http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decision ... CA0206.htm.

This ruling indicates in paragraph 11 that the roadside suspension and the 7 day impound were not an issue in the appeal.

Ah - sorry, I oversaw the "especially extrajudicial sanctions" part. While they haven't been challenged, I suspect that the only debatable issue would be the seizure of the vehicle as opposed to the licence suspension. The argument for the licence suspension would likely be similar to the one accompanying a DUI or placing a defendant (for any other alleged crime) in custody prior to trial. Although guilt has yet to be proven, the law does provide for extrajudicial sanctions prior to trial.

Having said that, the seizure of the vehicle for seven days would indeed seem superfluous and punitive, as the immediate risk presented by the irresponsible driver has already been mitigated by the suspension of his/her licence. In this regard I also think that a charter challenge may be successful.

I suspect that it hasn't happened yet simply because the cost of the vehicle impound is the least of your worries if you have been charged with stunt driving, and that if you're later acquitted at trial, the cost to hire an attorney to challenge the impound would not be insignificant (especially for someone that has already spent several thousand $ to get their vehicle back and to hire a defense attorney).

JohnDeere wrote:

Also worth mentioning, for such a gross amount over the limit, I would bet that the crown seeks jail time during sentencing, even if first time.

I agree with you on this guy being robbed by the insurance companies.... But jail time? Get a grip.

hawaii wrote:

JohnDeere wrote:

Also worth mentioning, for such a gross amount over the limit, I would bet that the crown seeks jail time during sentencing, even if first time.

I agree with you on this guy being robbed by the insurance companies.... But jail time? Get a grip.

For 85 over, yes. I know of someone that was clocked doing 65 over on the 404 and he got a $5K fine, six month suspension (which is what the crown had asked for) and the judge wanted to impose a two week jail sentence on top for such a "gross" violation of the speed limit. At 85 over, you really are taking your chances if you plead not guilty and lose at trial. I think there was someone else here that mentioned the same thing happened to them. I guess it depends on the judge. The law certainly allows for it.

There are better ways of holding very high speeders to account .

Locking them up is beyond STUPID ! Prison should be reserved for the real criminals in society .

Community service , loss of license , speed regulator , etc .

Why is jail time such a bad thing in this case? 85 over is extremely fast. Almost double the posted speed limit. He showed no regard for his life or the others on the highway. I bet he wasn't driving a Ferrari or some other vehicle designed for such high speed travel (not that is really makes any difference) which makes it extremely dangerous. 1 week (even 1 day) in jail would probably be a good lesson. its not going to give him a criminal record.

For something this serious, get an actual lawyer. Fighting a speeding ticket by yourself is one thing, fighting a stunt driving charge is way more serious and should require professional help.

Also, to all the people saying no way you can beat this - it appears you guys are just on this site to shame other people rather than help. He can challenge the LASER/RADAR the same way normal speeding tickets do and win, he doesn't need fatal errors or what not - there's a lot of technicalities involved in every ticket...

Why are you guys even on this website if you're just going to give negative AND false info?

Sonic wrote:

For something this serious, get an actual lawyer. Fighting a speeding ticket by yourself is one thing, fighting a stunt driving charge is way more serious and should require professional help.

Also, to all the people saying no way you can beat this - it appears you guys are just on this site to shame other people rather than help. He can challenge the LASER/RADAR the same way normal speeding tickets do and win, he doesn't need fatal errors or what not - there's a lot of technicalities involved in every ticket...

Why are you guys even on this website if you're just going to give negative AND false info?

No representation is going to fight this ticket all the way to a trial with some bogus lidar defense. It's simply a matter of coming out of the court house with the least amount of damage possible.

nothing false has been said sonic. most of the fatal errors cannot be used in this case because he received a court summons not a ticket. sure there are lots of things you can fight a laser/rader evidence on, but lets face it, 90% of the time there is nothing wrong with it. ontario courts do not place the kind of emphasis US courts do on calibration ect. ontario cops just need to click a button to say that the machine is "good." unless the machine failed its second test of the shift, its going to hold in court.

JohnDeere wrote:

Why is jail time such a bad thing in this case? 85 over is extremely fast. Almost double the posted speed limit. He showed no regard for his life or the others on the highway. I bet he wasn't driving a Ferrari or some other vehicle designed for such high speed travel (not that is really makes any difference) which makes it extremely dangerous. 1 week (even 1 day) in jail would probably be a good lesson. its not going to give him a criminal record.

An elite driver can easily do 185 on the 401 at night with out endangering anyone's life. Not all drivers are created equal. I would feel more comfortable as a passenger with an elite driver at night (empty roads) going 190 KM/H than with an incompetent driver doing 80 !

Why is it that cops are not checked for their excessive high speeds ? Would a cop get jail time if he did this ? Who is there to enforce the law when they break the speed limits by 100 for no valid reason ?

There are alot of criminals running around committing heinous acts and they never spend a second in jails . Instead we lock up someone who 'may' be an exemplary citizen with no criminal history .

It's a game of going for the lowest hanging fruit. Unfortunately, buddy got caught. He will be punished severely , unless a miracle happens.

GOD is merciful the law is not !

Police are trained in pursuit driving. The vast vast vast majority of other drivers have no high speed training. What would you like, a special sticker for people who have taken special training so they can drive faster than everyone else ?

Your desire to make a post saying that jail time is unnecessary or inappropriate for this offence turned into a puerile anti-police rant and your message was lost.

[quote="argyll"]Police are trained in pursuit driving. The vast vast vast majority of other drivers have no high speed training. What would you like, a special sticker for people who have taken special training so they can drive faster than everyone else ?

Why not ? Let's offer very special training to everyone. Do you know how much good that would do ? Let's go a step further and mandate retesting all licensed drivers to much higher standards. Subsequent to this, bump up the speed limits on all interstates .

Most 'accidents' happen at lower speeds and are caused by the poorest of drivers. There is a study out there which shows those who have the least speeding convictions cause the most accidents.

There was an article where a Durham off duty cop in a personal vehicle caught going 60 + over the limit (if memory serves me right) in a jurisdiction different than his own . The cop who clocked him did not issue a citation . Would the regular citizen who pays for the roads, cops, and everything else get the same break ? In the end this story did make it to the news and the cop was charged . Not sure if anything came of it , however I would not be surprised if he received further courtesies at the court level.

You are assumptions about me are unfounded & invalid. I am however anti-hypocrite . I am completely against double standards.

"Why is it that cops are not checked for their excessive high speeds ?"

.........that's plural and suggests it's a common place occurrence

"a Durham off duty cop in a personal vehicle caught going 60 + over the limit"

...........that's one case

Stop jumping to conclusions.

Back to the issue at hand as opposed to the unsubstantiated cop bashing, I certainly have dealt with more low speed collisions than high speed ones but that would be because most collisions are intersection related and there's much more of those on low-speed roads. Plus the consequences of a collision at high speed rise exponentially.

I am all for more driving training though although it would be a brave (and soon to be defeated) politician that would suggest it.