The initial trial was a ticket for 20km over in a 50km/hr zone. Officer claimed radar lock at 250 metres and lone vehicle in the beam. I thought officer bumped speed and asked to see radar gun. My request was denied because of "safety concerns". We were pulled over in school unloading zone. I called the officer out and called him a f'ing liar claiming that I knew he didn't have me at 70km/hr and asked again. Officer replied he didn't have to prove anything to me and justice would see it his way.
I went home and researched officer Van Breda on Can Law. Found case "R v. Mori 2012 ONSC 3433" where judge concluded the following:
[Section 81] What unfortunately happened as a result of a weak investigation is that the police attempted to justify their actions by fabricating evidence at trial. Det. Sgt. Van Breda attempted to mislead the court about having information before the arrest that the driver of the Toyota was an Asian male..." I read the whole case and it was obvious evidence fabrication.
The day before trial on my way home at night I positioned my car where I knew Van Breda was with his radar gun. Turned headlights on in direction radar gun would've been pointing and went 90 metres down the road. Took a picture in direction of where my car was and headlight beams didn't show.
Needless to say I absolutely destroyed the officer on cross-examination the following day. I set him up by badgering him about not showing my radar gun and asking why. He said it was a safety issue and I stated school unloading zone and if it was safe for the kids to get out there it would be safe for me as well. I'm sure you guys can see the crushing right coming. I asked Van Breda if he had ever fabricated evidence at a trial to gain a conviction. He responded never. I read the "R. V. Mori" case. There were people in court laughing. I asked for an immediate dismissal since officer was sole witness and wasn't credible. Justice asked if I had a print-out of case. I claimed I didn't but thought he only needed the case reference to look it up. Justice stated he wouldn't do that. I asked him if he thought I would be lying about something so verifiable. Justice claimed he didn't think I was lying but I must proceed.
I testified to my innocence and talked about how I knew the officer was fabricating evidence and how it took me 5 minutes to find the R. V. Mori case. Submitted photographic evidence of night time photo along with google evidence with GPS coordinate calculations showing claimed line of sight was impossible. Prosecutor asked me if I was an expert at radar evidence and beams. I claimed no but if my headlights couldn't penetrate the crest of the hill and headlights disperse rather than converge like radar beams a radar beam would have been blocked by the hill at a distance of 90 metres and the officer therefore couldn't have observed me as lone vehicle in the beam with radar lock at 250 metres with claimed line of sight at 500 metres.
Justice ruled that he believed line of sight was close to 90 metres from my evidence submissions but that officer was credible and just made a bad estimate. Told Justice I would be appealing. Being off by a factor of more than 2.5 was more than just an estimation error. That would be like me claiming that I am 15 feet when I am really closer to 6 feet. Officers deal with distance estimates all the time and it was in the context of Van Breda's past history of evidence fabrication and lying to the court.
What I found concerning was that I had to pay $400 in transcript fees to get justice that is non-refundable. Even in the (pre-) appeal hearing the Judge refused to dismiss the case. I stated we know the officer's name and have a ruling showing another judge found Van Breda to be an evidence fabricator. All the judge had to do was look up the case and dismiss based on the sole witness not having any credibility instead or ordering transcripts at $400 and going through the appeal process.
Other questions abound. Why is Van Breda still an officer if he has proven himself to be an evidence fabricator as determined by a judge? How will the justice, who botched the ruling according to the manager of prosecutions and is older than the hills, be reprimanded? He obviously has no balls or intelligence to do what is right and just backs corrupt cops. The justice system as it stands is really grossly incompetent and corrupt at least at the lower levels.
This is how our great justice system works in this great country (*sarcasm*).
All statements made are my opinion only.