Driving a city vehicle while on vacation must be perk! I wonder though if the vehicle is impounded or is it in the OPP parking lot for security reasons, like what happened with Habitual Heidi's unmarked car! Jun 30, 2009 09:58 AM Jesse McLean Staff reporter One of Toronto's highest ranking fire officials has been charged with stunt driving after police clocked him driving 150 km/h on Hwy. 401 in a department vehicle. Ontario Provincial Police pulled over Deputy Fire Chief Daryl Fuglerud around 9:30 a.m. Friday, just west of Port Hope. A helicopter patrolling the stretch of highway spotted a red Toyota Highlander travelling 50 kilometres over the speed limit, police said. The Highlander, which belongs to Toronto Fire Services, has been impounded for seven days and the suspect's licence has been suspended for a week. Fuglerud is the department's deputy chief of staff services, administration and communications, and oversees everything from recruitment to payroll, a fire department official said. He is currently on a booked vacation and could not be reached for comment. He is scheduled to appear in court in Cobourg on Aug. 5. http://www.thestar.com/gta/crime/article/658755
Driving a city vehicle while on vacation must be perk!
I wonder though if the vehicle is impounded or is it in the OPP parking lot for security reasons, like what happened with Habitual Heidi's unmarked car!
Jun 30, 2009 09:58 AM
Jesse McLean
Staff reporter
One of Toronto's highest ranking fire officials has been charged with stunt driving after police clocked him driving 150 km/h on Hwy. 401 in a department vehicle.
Ontario Provincial Police pulled over Deputy Fire Chief Daryl Fuglerud around 9:30 a.m. Friday, just west of Port Hope.
A helicopter patrolling the stretch of highway spotted a red Toyota Highlander travelling 50 kilometres over the speed limit, police said.
The Highlander, which belongs to Toronto Fire Services, has been impounded for seven days and the suspect's licence has been suspended for a week.
Fuglerud is the department's deputy chief of staff services, administration and communications, and oversees everything from recruitment to payroll, a fire department official said.
He is currently on a booked vacation and could not be reached for comment. He is scheduled to appear in court in Cobourg on Aug. 5.
I'm glad we're uncovering the REAL problem drivers out there; doctors, police officers, fire chiefs, etc., LOL. Turns out I'm in pretty good company, hehe.
I'm glad we're uncovering the REAL problem drivers out there; doctors, police officers, fire chiefs, etc., LOL. Turns out I'm in pretty good company, hehe.
Dr. Bookm :?: :?: :?: Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Scuze, me. OK I'm done now, snicker.....no, no I'll stop.......gafaw......sorry, really......teehee.......I think you'd look great in the white smock
Bookm wrote:
I'm glad we're uncovering the REAL problem drivers out there; doctors, police officers, fire chiefs, etc., LOL. Turns out I'm in pretty good company, hehe.
Dr. Bookm Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Dr. Bookm :?: :?: :?: Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Scuze, me. OK I'm done now, snicker.....no, no I'll stop.......gafaw......sorry, really......teehee.......I think you'd look great in the white smock don't forget the gloves *snap*
Reflections wrote:
Bookm wrote:
I'm glad we're uncovering the REAL problem drivers out there; doctors, police officers, fire chiefs, etc., LOL. Turns out I'm in pretty good company, hehe.
Dr. Bookm Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
I meant to post that spot in frequent radar spots. I forgot. It is something to see 8-10 people pulled over then drive another mile and still see another cop. It is air radar there. The first time I saw it I didn't think there were that many opp anywhere. Cheers Nadnic
I meant to post that spot in frequent radar spots.
I forgot.
It is something to see 8-10 people pulled over then drive another mile and still see another cop.
It is air radar there.
The first time I saw it I didn't think there were that many opp anywhere.
Cheers
Nadnic
"hang onto your chair when reading my posts
use at your own risk"
And then we would have people crying about favouritism. "Discretion" should be saved for the really, really good excuses (e.g., wife having a baby...explosive diarrhea and rest stop is far away... :shock: ).
And then we would have people crying about favouritism. "Discretion" should be saved for the really, really good excuses (e.g., wife having a baby...explosive diarrhea and rest stop is far away... ).
But that shouldn't matter once the law and the consequences are in the books. I don't know the whole story, but assuming the deputy fire chief had no good reason to be going that fast, then the consequences are set and should not be made more lenient because of his position or use of a department vehicle. It's like how I feel about the speed limit - do it by the book and if it really is unreasonable, public backlash will eventually grow to a point where it will force a change. The "roadside trial" part of 172 is already getting there. Now if "discretion" includes charging for 50 km/h over under Section 128 instead, then I would agree with it - both charges would match the circumstances, and I know of nothing that states the more severe penalty should apply. I know, I know...me, Fantino, big gay wedding. :lol:
Radar Identified wrote:
I agree with cruzmisl. No one was protected or safeguarded by seizing that vehicle. 49 km/h over has serious enough consequences.
But that shouldn't matter once the law and the consequences are in the books. I don't know the whole story, but assuming the deputy fire chief had no good reason to be going that fast, then the consequences are set and should not be made more lenient because of his position or use of a department vehicle. It's like how I feel about the speed limit - do it by the book and if it really is unreasonable, public backlash will eventually grow to a point where it will force a change. The "roadside trial" part of 172 is already getting there. Now if "discretion" includes charging for 50 km/h over under Section 128 instead, then I would agree with it - both charges would match the circumstances, and I know of nothing that states the more severe penalty should apply.
The Officer didn't "have" to do anything. He could have let the guy go, he could have charged under 128, could have written a standard ticket for anything from 0-49km/h over or a myriad of other choices. Instead he takes a "regular" guy who met the magic target and BAM he's screwed. (I could care less he's a firefighter/chief) I wonder if that copper thought about the fire department cutting him out of his cruiser one day.......poorly played IMO. I agree with 172. I think it has a place. Assuming the guy wasn't a tool, apologetic, didn't have a horrible driving record and wasn't endangering the lives of others whats the point? A huge ticket would have been a satisfactory slap on his P P.
The Officer didn't "have" to do anything. He could have let the guy go, he could have charged under 128, could have written a standard ticket for anything from 0-49km/h over or a myriad of other choices. Instead he takes a "regular" guy who met the magic target and BAM he's screwed. (I could care less he's a firefighter/chief)
I wonder if that copper thought about the fire department cutting him out of his cruiser one day.......poorly played IMO.
I agree with 172. I think it has a place. Assuming the guy wasn't a tool, apologetic, didn't have a horrible driving record and wasn't endangering the lives of others whats the point? A huge ticket would have been a satisfactory slap on his P P.
The Officer didn't "have" to do anything. He could have let the guy go, he could have charged under 128, could have written a standard ticket for anything from 0-49km/h over or a myriad of other choices. Instead he takes a "regular" guy who met the magic target and BAM he's screwed. (I could care less he's a firefighter/chief)
S. 128 would have worked in these circumstances and I don't think most of us would've had any problem with the officer using s. 128 instead of s. 172. Nothing about 172 limits or prevents the use of 128. We've even seen one case on this forum where someone was going 155 km/h a few months ago and was charged under s. 128. No roadside trial or impoundment, but severe consequences imposed upon conviction. So, no argument with you on that point. The use of s. 172 should be limited to circumstances where letting the person continue to drive would have clearly put the public in danger. The fact that he was pulled over meant the speeding was stopped. Very few people who get pulled over then get back on the road and resume driving the exact same way. It is "the law," but the intent of 172 was to "safeguard the public," supposedly. To me that seems to imply that it should only be used in limited circumstances, not whenever possible. (I'd rather just see the whole thing scrapped.) Just remember: You said it, not me. :lol:
Squishy wrote:
Now if "discretion" includes charging for 50 km/h over under Section 128 instead, then I would agree with it - both charges would match the circumstances, and I know of nothing that states the more severe penalty should apply.
S. 128 would have worked in these circumstances and I don't think most of us would've had any problem with the officer using s. 128 instead of s. 172. Nothing about 172 limits or prevents the use of 128. We've even seen one case on this forum where someone was going 155 km/h a few months ago and was charged under s. 128. No roadside trial or impoundment, but severe consequences imposed upon conviction. So, no argument with you on that point.
The use of s. 172 should be limited to circumstances where letting the person continue to drive would have clearly put the public in danger. The fact that he was pulled over meant the speeding was stopped. Very few people who get pulled over then get back on the road and resume driving the exact same way. It is "the law," but the intent of 172 was to "safeguard the public," supposedly. To me that seems to imply that it should only be used in limited circumstances, not whenever possible.
Regular guy is synonymous with "average Joe":D In this context though a "regular" guy is anyone with no significant driving offence history and has the appropriate attitude.
Regular guy is synonymous with "average Joe":D
In this context though a "regular" guy is anyone with no significant driving offence history and has the appropriate attitude.
We all know that numerous police agencies around Ontario (and world for that matter) set up speed traps in inconspicuous locations to catch motorists who are speeding.
If you know of any speed traps that are in regular use please post them here for all to know and avoid speeding fines.
Format: Town, Location, Direction, known days of operation (if known).
I received a speeding ticket this past weekend, and although the officer was nice and gave my 6yo a coupon for a free slushy, I want to fight the ticket.
The officer wrote the offence as "95km/h in a posted E0 km/h zone" the "E" being what looks like a written backwards 3. Now I know and you can probably guess he intended to write an 8 but that is not what is there it is an incomplete 8 and…
Need some help as i was given a old version yellow ticket(Form4) with improper left turn by an officer last week, which is old version printed by 2009. Then two days later, the officer found me giving a new version ticket with color green(Form4), printed by 2012. The details on face pages for two tickets are similar, but back sides are different. My question is first yellow ticket is effective or…
I was charged of speeding, but I don't know what the radar Decatur Genesis II Select Directional VIP is? please let me know what kind device is this and if any one have the manual can you give it to please pleaseeeee.
Recently I got a ticket for disobey sign under the HTA. From where I turned on to the street, the sign was visible for less than 10 metres, during which time I was performing safety checks for upcoming turn. ( I'll post full details after I first get some advise. )
What is the best defense for this? I took some digital pictures but my camera does not do .raw photos and at that time I had not…
I was turning left from Creditview into the left lane of Argentia Road (in Missisauga), while a police cruiser driving the opposite direction turning right into the right lane of Argentia Road. As I saw the cruiser turning right into the right lane of Argentia Road, I also turned left into the left lane of Argentia Road. The officer stopped me and told me that I was wrong, I had to wait until…
So I was on my way home, going a solid 120 as usual in the fast lane. Someone decides to cut me off going less than 100. I do a quick double lane change and speed up unknowingly hitting apparently 150. After speeding for a mere 20 seconds, I am pulled over. Cop says he reduced the ticket to 49 over, I was charged $359 for that. Of course, my insurance isn't in my car... I had to take it out…
After doing quite a bit of research, I stumbled across this forum and thought it would be a good idea to get some opinions about the situation that I currently find myself in. Hopefully some of you may have experienced this in the past and can provide me with some guidance for the best course of action. Thank you in advance for all your help. I greatly appreciate it.
I was driving on a two-lane Trans-Canada route where the indicated speed limit was 90 km/h and following a car for about 15 minutes. That car was going between 70 to 80 whenever there was a curve or a hill going up ahead. Passing was either not permitted or not safe in those sections. However, whenever there was an opportunity to pass that car, the driver would increase its speed to about 115…
My elderly mother received a city bylaw ticket (Ottawa) for parking on private property. A tow trunk was at the scene to tow the vehicle, and they charged a "drop fee" to unhook the vehicle right away. The bylaw officer who issued the ticket was present and said that the ticket would get dismissed in court (as it was issued in error), and that there should be a way to apply to get the tow…
I went to Huntsville for buying a horse trailer in Thursday.
Got 1 ticket of careless driving nearby east gate of Algonquin Park. They police said he received a complaint that my pickup truck hit the road shoulder and disturbed some gravel dust.
I found a police car traced me, so I turn to a roadside motel. After I parked my vehicle, and heading to motel office, the police car arrived gently…
My trial for a speeding ticket is coming up. I have followed recommendations off ticketcombat website and have sent 3 disclosure requests (without phone number) and have received nothing. At the day of trial it will be about 10 months since the ticket was issued.
I guess the first step will be to ask the court for an adjournment during the Motions, "Your Worship, I would like to ask for an…
Last week I was driving though downtown and because of the slippery / wet conditions could not stop when the light was turning yellow to red and slid in to the intersection. I was hit by another car (near the headlamp). None of us were injured, there was significat damge to the cars. The air bags did not deploy.
I was given a ticket that reads : Red Light - fail to stop - H.T.A sect 144 (18) Fine…
a few years ago, I posted about getting a 19+over ticket and said it was a ridiculous ticket since it was down a hill and everyone drives that 10-20 over.
Everyone here claimed I was outrageous to be driving over the limit by ANY amount and I was driving wildly for doing so. Since those two years have passed, I've stuck to the speed limit...guess what happens?
About a month ago, I got a funny situation where a cop made a u-turn to stop in a very showy fashion (that scared and surprised me) because he almost hit me while doing that.
Anyhow, he claimed that he metered me while he was driving towards me so he said his car is equipped to meter opposite coming cars as he drives. I filed the ticket and I was convicted within few days - an…
My wife got a speeding ticket on a construction zone on Hwy 400 and I went to court to try to defend her.
I ordered the disclosure request and got it on the first trial.
The first trial my strategy was to say there was conflict and misunderstanding of road signs. The prosecutor told me I could not confirm that since I personally wasnt there the day of the offence, and my wife has to…
So I had a guy turn across my lane into his driveway and I hit him. I'm going to court solo so I need any information at all regarding proceedings.
I clearly saw two police officers on scene and got disclosure from only one of their black-books even though they both took notes, one from me and one from him. He got a ticket which I will explain in the next paragraph. I don't see any driving history…
So Again, I really don't know how I'm attracting attention to myself, but I am.
Saturday at 1:30 in the morning I was pulled over on the 400 for 142 in a posted 100 Zone. Honestly, I know I was speeding, but I thought maybe 110-120 (I'm trying to clean up my act.) Anyways, Pulled over, Ticketed, Explained 3 options on the back, and we departed on our way.
Hey everyone. Back last summer I got a parking ticket for being within 3m of a fire hydrant. Funny thing is, I parked (in my estimation) at least far enough away from it, deliberately. There were no markings on the pavement but I can't believe I was within 10 feet of that thing (sorry I suck at metric.)
It's only $20 but I was ticked off 'cause I don't park in front of fire hydrants and don't…
I have been charged with driving under suspension due to medical reasons, It was suspended in Mar and In apr I got a new car put it on the road and the License Breau said nothing to me to let me know it was still suspended. I have been to court 2x for this matter first time I asked for adjurnment to seek a resoultion, 2x I went I ask for another adjurnment to seek a resolution because the CA had…
