Automotive

Ask me anything about fighting your traffic ticket (Speeding, Parking, etc.)

Newbie
Nov 5, 2014
4 posts
1 upvote
Hamilton
Hello Everyone,

I have a court case tomorrow for an illegal left turn at certain hours of the day.

I did not see the no left turn sign as it was blocked a traffic island sign 5 metres in front of it. By the time I saw the no left turn sign, I was already full in the turn lane. At the time, there was a lot of traffic on the other lanes and it was unsafe to leave the left turn lane. I decided to turn under safe conditions but an officer caught me right after turning.

The weather conditions of that day was light showers and overcast.

If anyone could please give me any advice on how I should proceed this in court. It would be very much appreciated.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
8228 posts
4921 upvotes
Edmonton
BennyBonBon wrote:
Feb 18th, 2019 3:13 pm
Hello Everyone,

I have a court case tomorrow for an illegal left turn at certain hours of the day.

I did not see the no left turn sign as it was blocked a traffic island sign 5 metres in front of it. By the time I saw the no left turn sign, I was already full in the turn lane. At the time, there was a lot of traffic on the other lanes and it was unsafe to leave the left turn lane. I decided to turn under safe conditions but an officer caught me right after turning.

The weather conditions of that day was light showers and overcast.

If anyone could please give me any advice on how I should proceed this in court. It would be very much appreciated.
Did you get disclosure on your case? Did you get any pictures of the "blocked" sign situation?

Right now, you haven't given any information that would give you a defense, really. So you can go to court and see if you can work out a deal, but it will still mean a conviction, which still means a potential impact to your insurance. You can also refuse a deal and hope the cop doesn't show up. If you want to try to defend yourself, you would probably have to prove that the "no left turn" sign was truly blocked, but if you didn't get a picture, you'll have to get the cop to testify that it wasn't visible. You could try getting him to admit that he didn't verify that it was visible, and then you'd have to testify that it wasn't, perhaps. But without pictures, it becomes a "he said/she said", and the cop's testimony usually wins in those cases.

C
Newbie
Feb 18, 2019
1 posts
Hey guys I got a ticket and I have a meeting soon to discuss it

It was on the DVP. Toronto. And it was for pass on right not in safety. Such a stupid ticket since everyone in Toronto rides the left lanes on the freeway.. I was told to try to get it turned into a bylaw ticket. I'm not sure what else to say exactly but some help would be really appreciated.

Thanks everyone.
Newbie
User avatar
Jan 1, 2018
33 posts
19 upvotes
Hey guys I got a ticket and I have a meeting soon to discuss it

It was on the DVP. Toronto. And it was for pass on right not in safety. Such a stupid ticket since everyone in Toronto rides the left lanes on the freeway.. I was told to try to get it turned into a bylaw ticket. I'm not sure what else to say exactly but some help would be really appreciated.

I haven't gotten disclosure or any evidence of things. It's not the actual court date but just a meeting.

Thanks everyone
I'm 29
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
8228 posts
4921 upvotes
Edmonton
iLiedAboutMyAge wrote:
Feb 19th, 2019 1:20 pm
Hey guys I got a ticket and I have a meeting soon to discuss it

It was on the DVP. Toronto. And it was for pass on right not in safety. Such a stupid ticket since everyone in Toronto rides the left lanes on the freeway.. I was told to try to get it turned into a bylaw ticket. I'm not sure what else to say exactly but some help would be really appreciated.

I haven't gotten disclosure or any evidence of things. It's not the actual court date but just a meeting.

Thanks everyone
You should ask whoever "told you to try to try to get it turned into a bylaw ticket" how you should approach it. You can try to negotiate it down, but most likely, at best you'll be trading down from one moving violation to another. It will still be a conviction on your record. You might get less demerits, you might get less of a fine, but it will still impact your insurance the same.

There's no magic phrase to get you a reduction. Go in there, be polite and respectful, promise you've learned your lesson and will never do it again, and see what you can work out.

C
Newbie
Apr 6, 2015
22 posts
12 upvotes
Toronto, on
hello everyone,

i got a Red Light Camera Ticket in Toronto by camera. I wonder if someone can confirm that the early resolution option (meet with prosecutor) and plea guilty will not impact my insurance premium. That seems to be true based on the other thread but there are people saying the opposite thing. Apologize for the newbie question. First ticket in life!
Newbie
Feb 19, 2019
2 posts
Hello,

I received a speeding ticket driving westbound on the 401 in the Napanee area. I was driving in the left lane and about 30-40m in front of me was a police vehicle driving in the right lane. Upon noticing that it was a police vehicle, I checked my speedometer and the needle was in between 115-120 km/h. About 1km later I was level with the police vehicle and once I had passed him, he immediately pulled behind me and pulled me over. The first thing he said to me was, "What's the rush Mr. 135?" At this point I was perplexed because I did not think I was going that fast based on when I looked at my speedometer. I told him that I was driving to Toronto and did not think that I was speeding but apologized if I was. He then said that he would be be back with my ticket. I was charged with going 135km/h in a posted 100km/h.

My first problem is that the officer did not provide me any information as to how he determined my speed. It was an incredibly vague conversation. I know that he doesn't have to tell me, but it makes my situation all the more difficult. When I went to my Early Resolution Hearing to meet with the prosecutor, he told me he could only bump the charge down to 120km/h and 3 points, to which I rejected because I still did not have any evidence against me that I was in fact going 135. I have been given a trial date in early May and requested disclosure. I informed the prosecutor that I can't accept the deal because I didn't think I was speeding and I wasn't provided with any information about how my speed was measured, at which point he told me that Genesis II was used.

My second problem is that there are posted signs all over the 401 stating, "Slower traffic keep right." The officer in the right lane was the only car in front of me for some distance so I was gauging my speed in the left lane based off of his. So by passing him, I did not feel I was committing any offence. I didn't blow by him or anything, I knew he was a police vehicle so I passed him with caution. I have driven the 401 between Kingston and Toronto 100's of times and feel comfortable in saying that there is no way I was travelling more than 10km/h faster than him (and even that is being generous). So if I were clocked at 135, the officer in the right lane must have been going 125, which is why i feel it's unfair to be given a ticket for going 35 over and that the ticket wasn't at least brought down. I don't actually want to say this for fear of sounding arrogant because the officer is significantly older than I am and will probably bring up that he is actually trained to visually estimate speed and I am not.

I know that this sounds incredibly subjective and a, "you had to be there moment," but can this be a substantial argument in my defence? Is it possible to question the officers speed in a trial and state that by passing him with caution I did not feel I was committing an offence? Furthermore, I plan on contesting the use of his radar and if it was calibrated properly because, again, based on my speedometer, I was not going that fast. Does anyone have experience in the use of Genesis II radar use in moving police vehicles and how accurate they are? Are police officers consistent in calibrating them properly? I apologize for the long winded post I just want to be as elaborate as possible to receive solid advise. This is my first speeding ticket on the 401. I had another speeding conviction back in 2016 for going 80 in a 60.
Newbie
Feb 20, 2019
5 posts
TL;DR - I asked for disclosure and for the officer's notes to be typed, and was given two contradictory sets of the officer's typed notes (one prepared by him, one prepared by the crown). The crown says his notes say the officer was traveling South, the officer says his notes say he was traveling North. Is this a silver bullet for my defense? If so, what should my motion be, and when should I present it?

I'm a first timer in court. I'm really nervous about this.

I have a speeding ticket for 28 over the limit in Alberta. My trial is on the 22nd (tomorrow, Friday).

The officer's notes were hard to read, almost non-stop abbreviations and hard to read words, so in disclosure I asked for them to be clarified and abbreviations explained, and for the make and model of the radar unit.

The crown prosecutor sent me typed notes, describing me traveling northbound and the officer traveling southbound (towards each other), at a distance of at 400m from an intersection (plus the distance the officer was from the intersection on his side).

The crown then forwarded my request for the radar model to the officer, who replied, and then the crown forwarded his reply to me. He didn't just give the make and model of the radar, he wrote his interpretation of his notes too. In his notes, he describes his vehicle traveling Northbound (both vehicles Northbound), contrary to what the prosecutor sent me.

Am I likely to succeed in some kind of motion to dismiss the charges based on the crown's typed interpretation of the officer's notes, and the officer's typed interpretation of their own notes giving opposite directions the officer's vehicle was supposedly traveling?

If so, when should I make that motion, and how? What do I say, and what is that called?

Do I approach the crown before the trial and point that out?
Do I make the motion as the case is called but before the crown begins?
Do I wait until cross-examination of the officer?
Do I wait until the crown has rested their case?

Do I have to make a case based on the inconsistency of the two note interpretations and can't (or shouldn't) make a direct motion to dismiss (or stay, or, some other term I don't know of)?

(Or is the judge likely to just roll their eyes and tell me that it's obviously a typo?)

How do I otherwise prepare for the 3 situations all at the same time?:
1 - Officer and I are headed towards each other.
2 - Officer and I are headed in the same direction, Officer is behind me.
3 - Officer and I are headed in the same direction, Officer is ahead of me.

What if the officer claims on the stand one of the situations that didn't happen?

Also, I don't have Alberta case law, but, at 400+ meters (500+ in time for the officer to stop on his side of the intersection), that's 1650 feet away, in-line, (not perpendicular, arrow-straight road) that the officer claims he accurately estimated my speed (within 3%) before activating his Radar. Does anyone know of some literature or scientific studies to demonstrate that this is beyond human ability? (The officer likely had his radar sweeping, beeped some vehicle, then pulled over the next vehicle he saw, then said he "estimated speed at..." prior to engaging the radar). I don't know about Alberta Case law to pull up any limitations like I know they have in other jurisdictions about any distances in excess of 1000 feet requiring expert testimony, nor of any police procedure requiring that he estimate speed before activating radar... so I might have to build that from scratch.

I have some other sundry items to bring up if a motion to dismiss does not work:

1 - The officer wrote the intersection wrong (rd 275 instead of 284, for example), and the scribbled over it with the correct one. He was parked directly next to the sign. Either his vision is bad or his memory is bad.

2 - It was a hot July day, (officer wrote 21'c), at extreme range there would be mirage distortion on the asphalt from the heated air rising.

3 - The sun was somewhat in his eyes if he was traveling Southbound, and there was a round white silo the same distance away (round buildings scatter light in every direction like a disco ball).

I have bits and pieces to support each of these and some cross-examination and dialog prepared, but I think that I should avoid taking the stand, and rely on undermining the crown's case. I don't know how I might be trapped by the crown, who will have 100,000x as much experience as me in twisting a defendant's words. Is that foolish based on what I've said so far?

And I've left it to the last minute do to it being my first time in court and anxiety.

Any help or advice would be much appreciated. Especially with when it is appropriate (or if) to make a motion to dismiss (or whatever it would be called), based on the two bits of disclosure contradicting each other. A silver bullet would be nice.

Thanks in advance
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
8228 posts
4921 upvotes
Edmonton
RobB84045 wrote:
Feb 21st, 2019 12:10 am
Hello,

I received a speeding ticket driving westbound on the 401 in the Napanee area. I was driving in the left lane and about 30-40m in front of me was a police vehicle driving in the right lane. Upon noticing that it was a police vehicle, I checked my speedometer and the needle was in between 115-120 km/h. About 1km later I was level with the police vehicle and once I had passed him, he immediately pulled behind me and pulled me over. The first thing he said to me was, "What's the rush Mr. 135?" At this point I was perplexed because I did not think I was going that fast based on when I looked at my speedometer. I told him that I was driving to Toronto and did not think that I was speeding but apologized if I was. He then said that he would be be back with my ticket. I was charged with going 135km/h in a posted 100km/h.

My first problem is that the officer did not provide me any information as to how he determined my speed. It was an incredibly vague conversation. I know that he doesn't have to tell me, but it makes my situation all the more difficult. When I went to my Early Resolution Hearing to meet with the prosecutor, he told me he could only bump the charge down to 120km/h and 3 points, to which I rejected because I still did not have any evidence against me that I was in fact going 135. I have been given a trial date in early May and requested disclosure. I informed the prosecutor that I can't accept the deal because I didn't think I was speeding and I wasn't provided with any information about how my speed was measured, at which point he told me that Genesis II was used.

My second problem is that there are posted signs all over the 401 stating, "Slower traffic keep right." The officer in the right lane was the only car in front of me for some distance so I was gauging my speed in the left lane based off of his. So by passing him, I did not feel I was committing any offence. I didn't blow by him or anything, I knew he was a police vehicle so I passed him with caution. I have driven the 401 between Kingston and Toronto 100's of times and feel comfortable in saying that there is no way I was travelling more than 10km/h faster than him (and even that is being generous). So if I were clocked at 135, the officer in the right lane must have been going 125, which is why i feel it's unfair to be given a ticket for going 35 over and that the ticket wasn't at least brought down. I don't actually want to say this for fear of sounding arrogant because the officer is significantly older than I am and will probably bring up that he is actually trained to visually estimate speed and I am not.

I know that this sounds incredibly subjective and a, "you had to be there moment," but can this be a substantial argument in my defence? Is it possible to question the officers speed in a trial and state that by passing him with caution I did not feel I was committing an offence? Furthermore, I plan on contesting the use of his radar and if it was calibrated properly because, again, based on my speedometer, I was not going that fast. Does anyone have experience in the use of Genesis II radar use in moving police vehicles and how accurate they are? Are police officers consistent in calibrating them properly? I apologize for the long winded post I just want to be as elaborate as possible to receive solid advise. This is my first speeding ticket on the 401. I had another speeding conviction back in 2016 for going 80 in a 60.
1) As you identified, the officer didn't have to tell you how he measured you. This point is irrelevant to the case.
2) The speed of the officer is irrelevant. Him being able to visually estimate your speed is irrelevant.

Basically, what matters is that the prosecution proves that you were exceeding the speed limit. That means they have proof of your speed, and they have proof of what the speed limit was where you were tagged. You can attack either of those two points. You can try to attack their calibration and testing procedure, but in order to do that, you'd need to know what the correct procedure is, and you'd have to extract from the officer what they did. And then you'd have to argue how that raises doubt in your speed. Once you get disclosure, you can go from there.

As far as the moving vehicle thing... I'd think it's generally accepted by the JP's doing traffic court that the radar guns are accurate for their purposes. If you're going to argue they're not, you're going to have to provide some sort of expert testimony to discredit the officer's statement that they are accurate. Good luck with that one.

In summary, you might as well have taken the deal the prosecutor offered, unless you want to take your chances in going to court and hoping the officer is a no-show. Because if you go to court as it is now, you'll probably lose.

C
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
8228 posts
4921 upvotes
Edmonton
BadDisclosure wrote:
Feb 21st, 2019 5:35 am
TL;DR - I asked for disclosure and for the officer's notes to be typed, and was given two contradictory sets of the officer's typed notes (one prepared by him, one prepared by the crown). The crown says his notes say the officer was traveling South, the officer says his notes say he was traveling North. Is this a silver bullet for my defense? If so, what should my motion be, and when should I present it?

I'm a first timer in court. I'm really nervous about this.

I have a speeding ticket for 28 over the limit in Alberta. My trial is on the 22nd (tomorrow, Friday).

The officer's notes were hard to read, almost non-stop abbreviations and hard to read words, so in disclosure I asked for them to be clarified and abbreviations explained, and for the make and model of the radar unit.

The crown prosecutor sent me typed notes, describing me traveling northbound and the officer traveling southbound (towards each other), at a distance of at 400m from an intersection (plus the distance the officer was from the intersection on his side).

The crown then forwarded my request for the radar model to the officer, who replied, and then the crown forwarded his reply to me. He didn't just give the make and model of the radar, he wrote his interpretation of his notes too. In his notes, he describes his vehicle traveling Northbound (both vehicles Northbound), contrary to what the prosecutor sent me.

Am I likely to succeed in some kind of motion to dismiss the charges based on the crown's typed interpretation of the officer's notes, and the officer's typed interpretation of their own notes giving opposite directions the officer's vehicle was supposedly traveling?

If so, when should I make that motion, and how? What do I say, and what is that called?

Do I approach the crown before the trial and point that out?
Do I make the motion as the case is called but before the crown begins?
Do I wait until cross-examination of the officer?
Do I wait until the crown has rested their case?

Do I have to make a case based on the inconsistency of the two note interpretations and can't (or shouldn't) make a direct motion to dismiss (or stay, or, some other term I don't know of)?

(Or is the judge likely to just roll their eyes and tell me that it's obviously a typo?)

How do I otherwise prepare for the 3 situations all at the same time?:
1 - Officer and I are headed towards each other.
2 - Officer and I are headed in the same direction, Officer is behind me.
3 - Officer and I are headed in the same direction, Officer is ahead of me.

What if the officer claims on the stand one of the situations that didn't happen?

Also, I don't have Alberta case law, but, at 400+ meters (500+ in time for the officer to stop on his side of the intersection), that's 1650 feet away, in-line, (not perpendicular, arrow-straight road) that the officer claims he accurately estimated my speed (within 3%) before activating his Radar. Does anyone know of some literature or scientific studies to demonstrate that this is beyond human ability? (The officer likely had his radar sweeping, beeped some vehicle, then pulled over the next vehicle he saw, then said he "estimated speed at..." prior to engaging the radar). I don't know about Alberta Case law to pull up any limitations like I know they have in other jurisdictions about any distances in excess of 1000 feet requiring expert testimony, nor of any police procedure requiring that he estimate speed before activating radar... so I might have to build that from scratch.

I have some other sundry items to bring up if a motion to dismiss does not work:

1 - The officer wrote the intersection wrong (rd 275 instead of 284, for example), and the scribbled over it with the correct one. He was parked directly next to the sign. Either his vision is bad or his memory is bad.

2 - It was a hot July day, (officer wrote 21'c), at extreme range there would be mirage distortion on the asphalt from the heated air rising.

3 - The sun was somewhat in his eyes if he was traveling Southbound, and there was a round white silo the same distance away (round buildings scatter light in every direction like a disco ball).

I have bits and pieces to support each of these and some cross-examination and dialog prepared, but I think that I should avoid taking the stand, and rely on undermining the crown's case. I don't know how I might be trapped by the crown, who will have 100,000x as much experience as me in twisting a defendant's words. Is that foolish based on what I've said so far?

And I've left it to the last minute do to it being my first time in court and anxiety.

Any help or advice would be much appreciated. Especially with when it is appropriate (or if) to make a motion to dismiss (or whatever it would be called), based on the two bits of disclosure contradicting each other. A silver bullet would be nice.

Thanks in advance
I don't suspect you're likely to get the case to magically disappear just because of a typo. At best, the JP would likely tell the officer and prosecutor to clarify the notes for you so you can properly defend yourself.

AFAIK, the cop doesn't have to accurately estimate your speed to flip their radar on. They just have to catch you going xxx on the radar gun.

As far as your other points go:
1) Irrelevant. The correct road is there. The officer having to correct it is meaningless.
2) 21 degrees isn't "hot". It's room temperature. And you would have to provide some sort of expert evidence that this would be an issue, in order to raise a reasonable doubt in the radar reading.
3) Irrelevant. "Somewhat" in his eyes means nothing, and even if it was, unless it was blinding him enough that he couldn't read the radar gun, it wouldn't matter.

You can try to discredit the officer's testimony, but you really don't seem to have much of a defense. If you want to try to do that, try to get the officer to state on the stand what you want him to say as part of your examination of the prosecutor's evidence, and then tell the JP that you feel the case should be dismissed because of conflicting evidence or lack of evidence.

C
Newbie
Feb 20, 2019
5 posts
AFAIK, the cop doesn't have to accurately estimate your speed to flip their radar on.
In Ontario, I believe you do. This is so they can say that they know the gun is picking up the correct vehicle. I'm not sure to what degree that would form a defense, and I'm not sure in my jurisdiction. If they fail to do this you can argue the radar was picking up the wrong vehicle.
1) Irrelevant. The correct road is there. The officer having to correct it is meaningless.
The circumstances that lead to an officer making those mistakes in his notes, reflects that he has poor vision or poor memory, which casts the rest of his testimony in doubt. I don't know if that will be convincing, even in part.
2) 21 degrees isn't "hot". It's room temperature. And you would have to provide some sort of expert evidence that this would be an issue, in order to raise a reasonable doubt in the radar reading.
The importance is the difference between air temperature and road temperature. 21 degrees air temperature on a sunny day, means that the black asphalt will be significantly hotter, as it absorbs a higher percentage of the solar energy. This creates hotter air, which rises up from the asphalt and mixes with the room temperature air above. Hotter air is less dense than cooler air (which is why it rises), and thus light traveling through it from less dense air, to more dense air, back and forth, creates chaotic diffraction. That's what a mirage is. The greater the distance, the more of this distortion you're looking through.

I think, at the extreme ranges (1600 feet), it would be difficult to even tell if the vehicle is moving, let alone to accurately gauge its speed.

The distance itself is also an issue because the vehicle that the radar picked up may have pulled off the road before mine arrived, and it's so far away that the officer might not be able to see that.

I don't know if heat distortion affects radar so I won't be arguing that.
3) Irrelevant. "Somewhat" in his eyes means nothing, and even if it was, unless it was blinding him enough that he couldn't read the radar gun, it wouldn't matter.
If the officer misread the sign he was immediately next to because the sun was in his eyes, then he may have also misread the radar he was next to.

But more importantly, if the sun was in his eyes it adds even more difficulty in the confidence that his radar picked up the correct vehicle by the time my vehicle approached.
I don't suspect you're likely to get the case to magically disappear just because of a typo.
It's not an irrelevant typo.

In order for me to make a full and proper defense and be able to gather evidence, I have to know what the officer is claiming the situation is.

If the officer was behind me and detected me speeding, then I have to take photos of the road behind the incident, prepare a defense of where the officer was, where he was coming from, where he was headed, and why he was speeding (else he would never have caught up to me if I was speeding).

If the officer was ahead of me and detected me speeding, then I have to take photos of the road ahead of the incident, prepare a defense of what was visible to the officer in that area, and if it's possible for the radar to pick up the wrong vehicle.

That's a fundamental aspect of being able to prepare my defense, I argue. It's not a typo like minor issues would be, and I specifically had trouble reading the notes and asked them to be clarified.

Whether that would succeed or not, I'm not sure. Thank you for your criticism though.
, and then tell the JP that you feel the case should be dismissed because of conflicting evidence or lack of evidence.
Is that the appropriate motion then? "Your honor at this time I would like to move for dismissal", "On what grounds?", "Conflicting evidence, the officer states he was traveling south but in his typed notes he says he was traveling north."?

Is there a more precise term, or, is "conflicting evidence" the correct term?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
8228 posts
4921 upvotes
Edmonton
BadDisclosure wrote:
Feb 21st, 2019 3:42 pm
In Ontario, I believe you do. This is so they can say that they know the gun is picking up the correct vehicle. I'm not sure to what degree that would form a defense, and I'm not sure in my jurisdiction. If they fail to do this you can argue the radar was picking up the wrong vehicle.



The circumstances that lead to an officer making those mistakes in his notes, reflects that he has poor vision or poor memory, which casts the rest of his testimony in doubt. I don't know if that will be convincing, even in part.



The importance is the difference between air temperature and road temperature. 21 degrees air temperature on a sunny day, means that the black asphalt will be significantly hotter, as it absorbs a higher percentage of the solar energy. This creates hotter air, which rises up from the asphalt and mixes with the room temperature air above. Hotter air is less dense than cooler air (which is why it rises), and thus light traveling through it from less dense air, to more dense air, back and forth, creates chaotic diffraction. That's what a mirage is. The greater the distance, the more of this distortion you're looking through.

I think, at the extreme ranges (1600 feet), it would be difficult to even tell if the vehicle is moving, let alone to accurately gauge its speed.

The distance itself is also an issue because the vehicle that the radar picked up may have pulled off the road before mine arrived, and it's so far away that the officer might not be able to see that.

I don't know if heat distortion affects radar so I won't be arguing that.



If the officer misread the sign he was immediately next to because the sun was in his eyes, then he may have also misread the radar he was next to.

But more importantly, if the sun was in his eyes it adds even more difficulty in the confidence that his radar picked up the correct vehicle by the time my vehicle approached.



It's not an irrelevant typo.

In order for me to make a full and proper defense and be able to gather evidence, I have to know what the officer is claiming the situation is.

If the officer was behind me and detected me speeding, then I have to take photos of the road behind the incident, prepare a defense of where the officer was, where he was coming from, where he was headed, and why he was speeding (else he would never have caught up to me if I was speeding).

If the officer was ahead of me and detected me speeding, then I have to take photos of the road ahead of the incident, prepare a defense of what was visible to the officer in that area, and if it's possible for the radar to pick up the wrong vehicle.

That's a fundamental aspect of being able to prepare my defense, I argue. It's not a typo like minor issues would be, and I specifically had trouble reading the notes and asked them to be clarified.

Whether that would succeed or not, I'm not sure. Thank you for your criticism though.



Is that the appropriate motion then? "Your honor at this time I would like to move for dismissal", "On what grounds?", "Conflicting evidence, the officer states he was traveling south but in his typed notes he says he was traveling north."?

Is there a more precise term, or, is "conflicting evidence" the correct term?
You don't have to convince me or anyone in here about your innocence. You have to convince a JP. And if you can throw enough mud, you might raise some doubt, which is what you want.

As far as Ontario requiring speed estimates, that doesn't seem to be the case anymore, and hasn't been for awhile. JSHerk is one of the frequent posters in there, and they have a reply a few down from the top.
https://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.co ... t7299.html

You can take a look at this trial transcript (from Ontario) to get an idea of how a motion to dismiss was handled. Frankly, I think the JP would cut you slack if you're representing yourself; if you don't know the exact phrase and procedure.
http://maverickslegalservices.ca/pdfs/R ... _Trial.pdf

In particular, read how it wasn't enough to just say "Didn't test properly" (in that case) and they also argued WHY that was relevant. The prosecutor is going to argue why it should be disregarded, and they're trained professionals. So be on your toes.

C
Newbie
Feb 20, 2019
1 posts
Hey Everyone,

Have a court date next week for 4 tickets:

  • Speeding (72 in a 50)
  • Failure to Produce Insurance Card - (only had expired insurance slips on me, it recently expired when I was pulled over)
  • No sticker validation on permit card (that little white sticker that comes with the plate sticker) - (I didn't realize we had to do this at the time)
  • Failure to Produce Valid License (renewed my license literally the day before and only had the temporary license paper, without the valid drivers license photo to go with it)

I have never been in traffic court before and am wondering what to expect, and how I can manage to get reduced, or withdrawn charges for any of these tickets. Will I have this opportunity on the day of the trial?

Notes:
  • I have not had any previous traffic offences prior to this and have been driving for 6 years.
  • I did not request disclosure for the officers notes so it's pretty much too late for that.
  • Time of offence was June 2018
  • I have pretty much all paper work/evidence to provide for the 3 charges other than speeding. What I don't have is the drivers license card that has the 'Valid Photo Only' sticker on it, and the first missing white sticker that would go on the back of my permit.
Please let me know!! Thank you!
Newbie
Feb 20, 2019
2 posts
Hello,

I recieved multiple tickets back in early May 2018. One for doing 107 in a 80 zone and another for a "entire plate not plainly visible" as my plate was bent ( the numbers and "Ontario" are still visible but I bent the plate and tucked it under the grille in the "yours to discover" area as i assumed it had the same affect as those dealer plates.... I never got trouble for it even after several officers clearly saw it at red lights until that day). This is my first time ever that I got pulled over and was my first (and second) ticket. The officer told me to take it to court (after seeing how visibly nervous i got) and they will likely reduce the speeding ticket and throw out the bent plate ticket as long as i provide proof that I unbent the plate.

I applied for trial and got my trial notice in the mail sometime in August 2018. I requested disclosure (using the form york region provides with your offence notice) via email as they stated that I can email the disclosure request in. This was back on Dec. 29 2018 ( certain life events happened that summer and I kinda forgot about the ticket until December). on the instructions part they state it can take up to six weeks for them to process it. its been well beyond those six weeks now and with my trial date on March 27th time is running out. They state that they will call but I have yet to recieve any calls. I was on vacation a few weeks back and my phone was on a different sim for that time but I do believe my carrier keeps track of missed calls when the phone is not on and sends a text so I probably would have been notified (Im not sure if it works if your sim is removed). But anyways, Should I be calling the office tommorow morning to ask if its ready or will that come off as annoying to the court? Sorry this is the first time Ive ever gone to court of any kind let alone get a moving violation.

Also theres low chance I will find anything to form a proper defence from the disclosure but I applied for it anyways because I hear the prosecutor doesn't really give you their best offer before court starts if you show up like you dont really have a defence lined up or anything. I've heard you gotta atleast pretend like you have a defence prepared. Can I still refuse their offer and then plead guilty with an explanation in front of the judge in hopes that i get a better deal? And do they give everyone a deal/plea bargain before the court starts or do you have to ask for it? I deeply regret what I did that day and am hoping the judge might be a bit forgiving and give me a bit of a break ( I dont expect the ticket to get thrown out because that seems impossible if you plead guilty but a significantly lesser charge/less serious offence would be nice)


All I expect right now is for the plate ticket to be dropped and the speeding one to be reduced so it doesn't look as bad on my record . I have a clean record otherwise with my insurance company ( claims and accidents/tickets wise) so I do not think one ticket will affect me much especially since its a bigger company that I already pay quite a bit for. I'm usually very careful when it comes to speeding and do not drive any faster than the flow of traffic but in this case It was on an empty two lane road in the middle of nowhere with no traffic (except for the officer in the unmarked cruiser approaching me coming the other way that I didnt really notice until the last second was actually a police car instead of a normal Taurus). I regret my actions deeply. I am really nervous about this situation (being the first time and all) and was wondering if I can get some advice on what to expect and how to get the best possible outcome with a guilty/guilty with an explanation plea?? I'd love to get it thrown out but it doesnt seem like i have anything that could be used as worthy evidence just yet.

Im not going to bother with a paralegal because Ive heard most of them count getting the fine reduced (which could be as simple as taking the prosecutors first "plead guilty to a lesser charge" offer) while charging more than what the ticket is. I will likely be going myself but dont want to say something that can be used against me or make the court take advantage of me and refuse to lower the fine at all.


Thanks in advance.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
8228 posts
4921 upvotes
Edmonton
MaxPar wrote:
Feb 21st, 2019 10:43 pm
Hey Everyone,

Have a court date next week for 4 tickets:

  • Speeding (72 in a 50)
  • Failure to Produce Insurance Card - (only had expired insurance slips on me, it recently expired when I was pulled over)
  • No sticker validation on permit card (that little white sticker that comes with the plate sticker) - (I didn't realize we had to do this at the time)
  • Failure to Produce Valid License (renewed my license literally the day before and only had the temporary license paper, without the valid drivers license photo to go with it)

I have never been in traffic court before and am wondering what to expect, and how I can manage to get reduced, or withdrawn charges for any of these tickets. Will I have this opportunity on the day of the trial?

Notes:
  • I have not had any previous traffic offences prior to this and have been driving for 6 years.
  • I did not request disclosure for the officers notes so it's pretty much too late for that.
  • Time of offence was June 2018
  • I have pretty much all paper work/evidence to provide for the 3 charges other than speeding. What I don't have is the drivers license card that has the 'Valid Photo Only' sticker on it, and the first missing white sticker that would go on the back of my permit.
Please let me know!! Thank you!
You should be able to do some negotiating down, especially with the paperwork to back up your statements. But you may negotiate those other charges away only by paying full price on the speeding ticket. You are guilty of the other charges (based on what you've said) even if you've taken care of them or had valid documents at the time. It's "fail to PRODUCE", not "Fail to have".

Good luck! If you want to negotiate pre-trial but still don't feel you're getting a good deal, you can probably get an adjournment based on requesting disclosure at the time of the trial. That won't count in your favor in terms of getting a stay based on too long till trial, since it's at your request.

C

Top

Thread Information

There are currently 2 users viewing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)