Thank you. I'll ask for a will say statement and whatever else Neo asked for in his disclosure request. That translation was very much appreciated.

I have since made my additional disclosure request again requesting a typed copy of hand written notes, as well as the owner's manual for the specifc model of lidar that the officer claimed to have tested prior to his shift.

I asked for a log of all the tickets he has handed out that day as well and anything else that may be useful to me at trial. I will udpate when i get the details.

Just to update, I've filed 6 timely disclosure requests, none of them complete, with the last 3 not being responded to. So what I've done was file a stay application under section 7, I have a court date on Thursday, i'll update how it goes.

One thing is that I have multiple defense strategies.

1) Stay application based on non disclosure

2) Objecting to use of Officer's notes because he does not have independent recollection

3) Highlighting that I have not received a manual that states the proper use of radar gun.

4) Highlighting that the officer did not sufficiently provide information the SPECIFIC model of lidar he used DOES NOT EXIST therefore having a prima face case where if he did not test a gun that does not exist, he did not test it and therefore the JP should have an easy time judging this.

5) If the above doesn't work, i'll talk the officer into circles and get him to describe my car wrong (in his notes he wrote my car was green -- it's black) and I'll have ownership to prove that.

6) Aruging that because I was not provided information and that I missed two days of work at 8 hours each day just to drive to nowhere's ville.

Wish me luck.

good luck

Radar and Lidar are different, don't use both terms at the same time for the speed gun in question. Accuracy counts when you want to defeat the cop and convince the JP.

m4gician wrote:

3) Highlighting that I have not received a manual that states the proper use of radar gun.

don't think you will ever see that, it is a copyright document. To my understanding each crown has the manual for viewing purposes only and you can attend a look it over.

Does Laser Atlanta have the Light or Ultra Light model? (Or I think they spell it Lyte or Ultra Lyte or something like that.) Thought I saw that somewhere.

hwybear wrote:

m4gician wrote:

3) Highlighting that I have not received a manual that states the proper use of radar gun.

don't think you will ever see that, it is a copyright document. To my understanding each crown has the manual for viewing purposes only and you can attend a look it over.

You cannot deny access to or a copy of the manual on the basis of copyright, see IPC ORDER MO-2016 and s. 32.1(1) of the Copyright Act

Radar Identified wrote:

Does Laser Atlanta have the Light or Ultra Light model? (Or I think they spell it Lyte or Ultra Lyte or something like that.) Thought I saw that somewhere.

That's right, i was shot with this once, it's an Ultralyte. Its manual claims to have a "wheather filter" button which allows the speed reading taken in rain, snow or fog.

last (reading) 141(km/hr) at 525.86m (metres)

From what I know, 525 m and beam divergence 3 milliradians, let's see carry the 9, and the beam is 1.575 meters in diameter, or bigger then the frontal area of your car. The officer could have taken the reading from a car around you. Plus at that distance if the beam to targeting dot is out even 0.2 of a degree its a difference 1.82 m at that distance ........Make sure you get confirmation one way or the other whether or not the officer did the alignment check on the gun. In order for the JP to convict you he'll have to have it written down......

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj217.html

Specifically:

[21] Officer Zarrello testified that he "tested" the "laser" device at 8:45 p.m. on June 4, 2006, more than a hour before securing the readings on the "laser" device of the appellants speed at 9:55 p.m. Officer Zarrello had no memory of when or whether he tested the "laser" device after the offence. His notes provided no assistance.

"Q. What time did you test the laser device after the alleged

offence?

A. Sorry, I dont have it marked down in my book what time."

(Transcript February 13, 2007, page 24 lines 20-23)

[22] Did Officer Zarrello use the manufacturers manual as a guide when conducting the test on the laser device?

"Q. So did you use the manual when testing this device?

A. If I have to, yes.

Q. In this particular occasion did you use the manual to test the device?

A. I did not mark it down if I used it or not.

Q. So you said you had an independent recollection. Do you recall using the manual when testing the device?

A. No I dont recall using it."

(Transcript February 13, 2007, page 16, lines 15-23)