I just got a ticket for the above offence. I intend to go to trial and depend my position that I stopped.

I will show that I stopped by saying I actually stopped in a three way stop where the only place to look is left or in front of me. There was no concern about the car in front of me because it cannot turn left towards me so the only place to look is left. Also there was no car in front of me at that time. When I looked left I saw the police car parked waiting. If I did not stop and looked left, I would not have seen the police car. I saw the police car so when I started to move, the police car started to move, followed me and police lights started blinking. I stopped about 200 metres from the stop sign. If I did not stopped in the three way stop sign, I would be farther away than 200 metres. I would bring a map showing where the stop sign is and where I got stopped measuring the distance between the two points. I would also ask for his notes on how he determined that I did not stop. I would also show my driving abstract showing I have no traffic violation in the last three years.

I just want to know if this is a good way to defend this traffic offence and any advise would be greatly appreciated.

Just wonder what city it is.

I don't have an opinion on your defence but you may want to check out ticketcombat.com which has some info on how to fight stop sign ticket.

One thing to check is if there is a white stop bar on the ground and if the cop saw the bar from where he was sitting.

Oakville. Thanks.

Also there is no white stop bar on the road since this is new construction.

Here's my two cents:

During your disclosure request (where you will ask for the officer's notes) ask for an explanation & clarification of the charge. The E & C is trying to see if the Crown figures out that they need to give you a certified copy of the by-law that erected the sign. This is required. If the Crown does not provide you with the information, 15 days in advance of the trial, file a request to stay the trial on the basis of improper disclosure. (And they surprisingly goof this quite frequently.) Then you don't have to go to trial and it's done. They can't just post a sign willy-nilly; there has to be a by-law calling for it.

The officer will testify that he observed you not stop. One thing you can try is to drive to the location that the officer was sitting at when he observed the offence, and see if he had a reasonable view of the intersection. If yes, then see if the Crown offers proper disclosure. If no, then take a photograph with a time-date stamp on it, do some measurements to back it up, etc.

If the officer appears to have had a good view, the Crown gives you proper disclosure, then it might be worthwhile exploring if there are some Oakville municipal by-law infractions you could plead to. Those won't affect your driving or insurance record. The reason I say this is because usually when it's your word versus the officer's, the JP will almost always take the officer's word. That's just my take on it, for what it's worth. Some other members may have additional or better advice.

There is no white bar line on the road. Should'nt he be using the white line and looking at my tires to see if I stopped? Isn't this enough to prove that he has no clear view and no point of reference whether I stopped before the line since there is no line?[/img]

There doesn't need to be a line. If there is no line, you stop before the crosswalk. If there is no crosswalk, you stop before the intersection.

Radar Identified wrote:

. If no, then take a photograph with a time-date stamp on it, do some measurements to back it up, etc. what it's worth. Some other members may have additional or better advice.

A good crown (like ours) gets personal photos tossed from defence all the time.