I am fighting a handheld device ticket in February. I was stopped driving a commercial vehicle and got a whole raft of tickets, one of them being using a handheld device. I don't believe the officer actually saw me on the phone, if he did it would have been a very quick glimpse as he passed me on the highway in the left hand lane. I had admitted to him that i had been talking on my phone in the hopes that if i were friendly and cooperative i might be let go. I showed him the phone at that point. The following traffic stop and vehicle inspection took 2 hours during which he saw me talking on the phone many times. Would it be a reasonable question to ask the officer during the trial, and if he can't remember the colour, might that be enough to be acquitted of the charge?
I am fighting a handheld device ticket in February. I was stopped driving a commercial vehicle and got a whole raft of tickets, one of them being using a handheld device.
I don't believe the officer actually saw me on the phone, if he did it would have been a very quick glimpse as he passed me on the highway in the left hand lane. I had admitted to him that i had been talking on my phone in the hopes that if i were friendly and cooperative i might be let go. I showed him the phone at that point. The following traffic stop and vehicle inspection took 2 hours during which he saw me talking on the phone many times. Would it be a reasonable question to ask the officer during the trial, and if he can't remember the colour, might that be enough to be acquitted of the charge?
BAD MOVE, may have worked in the UK, not here you spell colour correctly? are you brit? or european? Somone else here with more knowledge should be along soon
Heynow999 wrote:
I am fighting a handheld device ticket in February. I was stopped driving a commercial vehicle and got a whole raft of tickets, one of them being using a handheld device.
I don't believe the officer actually saw me on the phone, if he did it would have been a very quick glimpse as he passed me on the highway in the left hand lane. I had admitted to him that i had been talking on my phone in the hopes that if i were friendly and cooperative i might be let go. I showed him the phone at that point. The following traffic stop and vehicle inspection took 2 hours during which he saw me talking on the phone many times. Would it be a reasonable question to ask the officer during the trial, and if he can't remember the colour, might that be enough to be acquitted of the charge?
BAD MOVE, may have worked in the UK, not here
you spell colour correctly? are you brit? or european?
Somone else here with more knowledge should be along soon
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
No, the officer isn't expected to know the color, make, or model of your phone. Not only that, but you admitted to the officer that you were talking on your phone.
Heynow999 wrote:
Would it be a reasonable question to ask the officer during the trial, and if he can't remember the colour, might that be enough to be acquitted of the charge?
No, the officer isn't expected to know the color, make, or model of your phone.
Not only that, but you admitted to the officer that you were talking on your phone.
So first of all, the reason police ask you questions is to get the evidence they need to convict you of something. I stand by my statement of "Never talk to police!" http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7032.html Now the charge you are facing is something like "driving with handheld device", not "driving with purple handheld device". In cross examination, you must bring reasonable doubt to the officers testimony of "saw him with cellphone in hand". If you ask officer the color and they do not know, this may weigh a tiny little bit into the reasonable doubt territory of the officers testimony but certainly, by itself, it is almost worthless. If the officer was driving in the opposite direction you can ask questions like "how far away were you when you alledge I was talking on my phone" and "how fast were you going". So for example, let's say the officer testifies that he "saw you on the phone and saw your lips moving and double checked to make sure it was a phone in your hand." So this is pretty bullet proof testimony by itself. But now let's say you confirm that the officer was driving in the opposite direction to you and you ask how far a way he was when he saw you and he says 20ft and you confirm the speed limit as 80kmh. So two vehicles moving towards each other at 80kmh means he has 0.4 seconds from 20feet before he passes you. It would be very hard for him to see you and see your lips moving and double check to make sure it was a phone in your hand in 0.4 seconds. So this an example of how you could try to bring reasonable doubt to the officers testimony. Now with regards to what you said ... if the officer is on the witness stand and starts to say something that you said, you can object immediately and say that statement is not admissable. Two things could happen: (i) the jp will agree with you and officer will not be able to say anything that you said and the trial will continue, or (ii) the prosecutor will ask for a voir dire (trial within a trial) to find out if the statement was given voluntarily or not. This means they are going to put you on the stand to determine if you voluntarily gave the statement to the officer, or if you gave it because you thought you were required by law to answer the question. So if your testimony is what you said above that you were just trying to be co-operative, then will most likely decide that it was voluntary and not compelled and will then allow it. You want to hope for scenario (i) obviously. The other thing to remember is that after the officer testifies and you have cross examined him, the JP will then ask if you want to call any witnesses. In this case your only witness is you, but you have the right NOT to incriminate yourself, so in this case you want to say NO and you do not want to get on the witness stand. If you get on the witness stand you must answer truthfully. All they have to do is ask you "were you talking on your phone" and you would have to say yes and you have lost. So you do not have to answer any questions put to you when you are not on the stand, and you do not have to take the witness stand at all if you do not want to.
So first of all, the reason police ask you questions is to get the evidence they need to convict you of something. I stand by my statement of "Never talk to police!"
Now the charge you are facing is something like "driving with handheld device", not "driving with purple handheld device". In cross examination, you must bring reasonable doubt to the officers testimony of "saw him with cellphone in hand". If you ask officer the color and they do not know, this may weigh a tiny little bit into the reasonable doubt territory of the officers testimony but certainly, by itself, it is almost worthless. If the officer was driving in the opposite direction you can ask questions like "how far away were you when you alledge I was talking on my phone" and "how fast were you going". So for example, let's say the officer testifies that he "saw you on the phone and saw your lips moving and double checked to make sure it was a phone in your hand." So this is pretty bullet proof testimony by itself. But now let's say you confirm that the officer was driving in the opposite direction to you and you ask how far a way he was when he saw you and he says 20ft and you confirm the speed limit as 80kmh. So two vehicles moving towards each other at 80kmh means he has 0.4 seconds from 20feet before he passes you. It would be very hard for him to see you and see your lips moving and double check to make sure it was a phone in your hand in 0.4 seconds. So this an example of how you could try to bring reasonable doubt to the officers testimony.
Now with regards to what you said ... if the officer is on the witness stand and starts to say something that you said, you can object immediately and say that statement is not admissable. Two things could happen: (i) the jp will agree with you and officer will not be able to say anything that you said and the trial will continue, or (ii) the prosecutor will ask for a voir dire (trial within a trial) to find out if the statement was given voluntarily or not. This means they are going to put you on the stand to determine if you voluntarily gave the statement to the officer, or if you gave it because you thought you were required by law to answer the question. So if your testimony is what you said above that you were just trying to be co-operative, then will most likely decide that it was voluntary and not compelled and will then allow it. You want to hope for scenario (i) obviously.
The other thing to remember is that after the officer testifies and you have cross examined him, the JP will then ask if you want to call any witnesses. In this case your only witness is you, but you have the right NOT to incriminate yourself, so in this case you want to say NO and you do not want to get on the witness stand. If you get on the witness stand you must answer truthfully. All they have to do is ask you "were you talking on your phone" and you would have to say yes and you have lost. So you do not have to answer any questions put to you when you are not on the stand, and you do not have to take the witness stand at all if you do not want to.
The fine is not the issue but I am worried about insurance rates. First speeding ticket in my life Any suggestions on how to handle this? I can't afford to spend a day at the court
So was at court today in Orillia for a friend, and I had submitted a couple notice of motion a couple weeks ago that I wanted to deal with before arraignment. I met with prosecutor before hand, and it went something like this:
Prosecutor: "Do you have the case law?"
Me: "What do you mean?"
Prosecutor: "Do you have the case law for your motion?"
Me: "All the case law is quoted in the motion that I…
1)failure to change address on license (i got married a couple of months earlier and moved)
2) license plate not fully visible
I got pulled over because I had 2 letters peeling off my license plate. I know ignorance isn't a defense, but I really had no idea that this was an issue. Plus, you see many cars on the road with peeling plates. I got both tickets and…
I was driving around 140km/h on a 100km/h posted on the highway. I was in the fast lane. The officer was very nice and reduced it to no points and just 15km/h over.
I only have my G2.
1. Will this affect me taking the G test next month?
2. I am very grateful for the officer lowering the ticket... should I just pay the 52.5$ and leave it as is.. I am a secondary driver under my dads name and we have…
Hi, thanks in advance for the help. Been driving for 10 years, clean record until today when I got slapped with two tickets. First: going 135 at 100 on the 401, second: not having a valid sticker (I recently moved and completely forgot about it)
My friend tells me I should fight the speed ticket, if anything to reduce the fine and points. Would be alot of help if anyone could walk me through…
My wife, who has never had a traffic ticket in her life, just got 11 points.
Two tickets: "following too closely" and "failure to stop"
She was on a residential street and was behind a car at a crosswalk waiting for a pedestrian. Pedestrian crossed, they continued. Cop was drivig towards them down a side street , and as they passed he went after my wife.
I was driving in mid lane and was following a line of cars around speed limit.
The vehicle in front of me was large and I decided to change to the left lane to get better line sight.
As soon as I entered the left lane, I saw the car in front of me approximately 200m away stopped dead (for some odd reason, there was more traffic on the left lane).
Over the last few months I have received several parking tickets from the City of Kitchener. I haven't paid any of them and have attempted to dicuss the situation with the parking authority of the City, however, they're very unreceptive and defensive.
I work at a downtown construction site....ironically a Court House. The site takes up a whole city block, of which ONE side has 2 hour parking…
I was driving on a teusday night in the rain and fog at whites and highview by St. Mary CSS in Pickering, ON. At the time I was waiting at a red light to make a left north onto whites. There was also a car on the opposite side of the intersection making a left. The cars beams were pointed almost directly at my face and as a result, with the combination of the rain and fog, I…
I am new to this website and this is my first post so please forgive me if I've put this question in the wrong place. Please bear with me until I learn the ropes a bit.
So here are my questions:
Antique cars and hot rods (1930's- early '60's) and seat belt use in Ontario. If these vehicles never came from the respective factories with any seat belts, do they have to be retrofitted ?
OK so Jshreck has been taking some heat for the concept of providing the DL as being not required and therefore inadmissable in court. Personally, I think that argument would fall on deaf ears in the lower court and any chance at victory would have to be in the highest court. That would be quite something. When pigs fly I think, but along that line of thought, allow me to continue.......
I have a court date soon and am wondering whether the officers just read off their disclosure notes when interrogated.
Basically, according to the disclosure notes and the said distances and speeds quoted, by doing some simple math it just doesn't add up. My concern is whether the officer can change his story when on the stand after maybe realizing this?
Last week I was driving home from college in the sauga area. I drive a 1995 Chevy Monte Carlo v6 which I've owned since 2000, I really haven't done anything to the car except tinted windows (not completely darken) and some rims, and Nothing Engine wise. Anyway I look in my rear view mirror and out of no where i see cherry flashing. When pulled over the officer asked do you…
I was charged 2 days ago with RED LIGHT - FAIL TO STOP and set fined $150 and I guess 3 points. I was driving turning left on the intersection with a traffic light, and when I jst about to turn left the light turned to orange and I didn't have enough time to stop. Once I turned I saw the light turned to red and 2seconds later I saw a police beacon flashing through my rear-view mirror. It…
I figured pleading not guilty is the same as saying it was signed which is stupid. A friend of mine told me I could plead guilty with explanation and try to get the fine reduced when I come in.
So this Friday I was stopped by a local officer for going 110 in a 80zone. He also claims I was going 105 in a 50zone,which we literally passed when he stopped me as I was braking. It has been 3 days already and I can't seem to locate my ticket on their Internet site "pay ticket". Is there a way to determine if he has filed for certificate of offence to the courts? It has been 3 days I presume…
My trial date is in a couple days for a speeding ticket (york region) and i am nervous it is my first ticket ever as well as first trial
I did notice my ticket was filed beyond 7 days, 10 days after the day i got the ticket to be exact, which is stamped on the ticket. is this enough to have it dismissed?
If you look close enough, beside the drivers' side "A" pillar you will see a white circle = front antenna of Genesis radar......plus look above the dash pad...there is the Spectre RDD.
Any suggestions on how to handle this? I can't afford to spend a day at the court 
