“Prosecutor Bold Faced Lied In The Court!!”

I went to trial for speeding at 1:30 pm this afternoon. I noticed the police officer didnt show up. The prosecutor offered me a deal. I refused and insisted having a trial. He purposely arranged my case being last called. When I was called, its about 2:45pm. The JP told me that she was not going to have enough time to hear my case, usually a not-guilty plea case would take about 45 minutes, and theres another section of trials were scheduled around 3:00pm. JP was about to adjourned my case. I explained to her that in my case, it would only take me 2 minutes to question the prosecutors witness, and I believed that the prosecutors witness did not show up in the court. JP asked the prosecutor if the police office was there. The prosecutor just TOLD A BOLD FACE LIE at this time. He said the police officer was just stepped out of the court room and in the hallway. I was 10000% sure that the police officer didnt show up at the court the whole afternoon. Eventually and unfortunately, my case got adjourned to later March.

My question is

Is there any action I can take before my next trial date toward the prosecutors outrageous behavior? I hope my case would be dismissed due to the prosecutors lying in court.

The only proof indicates the prosecutor was lying might be the police officers testimony. Is there any way I can request the police officers time log before my next trial date? Or should I ask him directly in the court about the fact during my next trial? ( I am afraid that he might answer he cant remember what exactly his schedule was on a date a month ago.)

Could anybody give me some more experienced opinions? Id greatly appreciated it.

You're assuming the Crown is purposefully lying without any proof. Perhaps the officer had been there all morning on other trial matters and the Crown believed he had truly stepped out. Perhaps the Crown made an honest mistake. Regardless, the Justice of the Peace determined that they didn't have enough time to hear your trial. You may believe you only required 2 minutes to present your case, but even a simple speeding charge can take half an hour on a good day. The officer must be sworn in, present his evidence, be cross examined and then the JP must provide his/her summation and render a verdict.

I think it would be a mistake to try to bring up the Crown's alleged lie in court. It is completely irrelevant to your charge and put you in a bad light. Stick to fighting the actual facts of your charge. You don't have any proof to support your allegation and would probably just end up looking like an ass. If you really have concerns with the Crown's conduct, direct those concerns to their office and file a complaint.

At_Brantford wrote: Is there any way I can request the police officers time log before my next trial date? Or should I ask him directly in the court about the fact during my next trial? ( I am afraid that he might answer he cant remember what exactly his schedule was on a date a month ago.)

The officer will remember his/her schedule a month ago, years ago, by referring to his/her notes to refresh their memory. However what you are looking for (in court room, in hallway, back in court room, outside on telephone, back in court room, on throne etc..) will not be.

Whether the officer was actually present or not does not matter. The JP was going to adjourn if the trial option was pursued, so they would have received an adjournment regardless. It's still a delay that keeps the "11B clock" ticking. Even if the officer was not there, they still could have requested an adjournment due to the officer not being present.

Even if the officer wasn't there, this will not help you. There is no requirement whatsoever for the charge to be quashed immediately if the officer does not show up. Even if the officer admits "yes, I was not there," and you then say "The Prosecutor lied!" the JP will sit back and ask you: "What does this have to do with your alleged exceeding of the posted speed limit?" I don't think you could argue "abuse of process."

Deal with the charge itself. If it's been 13+ months, file an 11B. If not, look over the disclosure and see if there are deficiencies in the officer's notes.

You guys have been very helpful. Thank you very much. Now I realize that the prosecutors honesty is irrelevant to my alleged offence. I thought about a strategy. See if you guys can give me some input.

On my upcoming trial, after I ask the police officer some technical questions around the incident. I want to ask him "We never met before the day you issued me ticket, and I believe you have nothing personal against me, right"?

He will say something like "We never met, and theres nothing personal."

My next question "If you didnt show up on my previous scheduled trial date to act as a witness, you must have an eligible reason. You didnt intentionally try to delay my case, right?"

I hope he can refer to his notes, and give the court the reason why he couldnt show up on that day.

Then I will state to the court the fact that, on my prior trial, the JP asked the prosecutor if the police officer was in the court. The prosecutor clearly and specifically stated to the JP, the police officer was there and just stepped out. Therefore, considering the testimony the officer just made, there could be only one explanation, either the officers credibility is in doubt, or the officers notes are not as reliable as they supposes to be.

If the prosecutors witnesss credibility is in doubt, or the evidence (officers notes) is unreliable. I can ask the JP consider dismiss my case.

How do you guys think???

At_Brantford wrote:How do you guys think???

You're way too focused on what the Crown said that day. I think your idea is a very poor one. The JP probably won't allow you to continue with your questions, and it really shows nothing about the officer's credibility/note accuracy.

If you really want to go to trial, research how to fight a speeding charge. There's lots of information you can question the officer on, radar training, testing, interference, tracking history...

Just stick with the facts in issue. Fishing expeditions waste everyone's time and go nowhere in Court.