A police officer cannot diagnose a medical condition. Even if they did, who would accept the accuracy? I've had drivers at collision scenes tell me that they blacked out, both for long term medical conditions and "its never happened before...". I've always sent letters to MTO expressing my concern, in the event that the ER doctor doesn't tell me he will be doing it. I've had a few angry phone calls from the drivers in the months that follow. One of them told me on the phone that he thought telling me he blacked out would be better than admitting he fell asleep. As an aside, I also se...

I've laid this charge mostly for MC's, and only a few cars/trucks. I've always laid for based on observations alone. For example, everyone knows (from spending time on the roadways) how much noise traffic generally makes. People Also tend to accept that some vehicles are loader than others ( for example, trucks and MC's tend to be louder than passenger cars). When everyone in my view turns to look after source of the very loud noise coming from one specific vehicle, it makes for good evidence. ok that's very fair. really appreciate your comment. In majority of cases can you say that it would ...

I'm not aware of any provision in the HTA that prevents what you're describing. This is a Grey area in the HTA and many charges are laid, with individual JP's taking different positions on the matter. That being said, since (based on your other posts about loud exhaust, and your avatar) you appear to be either a street racer or wanna-be. Combined with your "Joe-blow cop" attitude you will no doubt be stopped and ticketed. The courts may toss the charges but you'll still spend the time and effort to fight them. Also beware that tuner cars in groups scream out "racers". Any t...

I've laid this charge mostly for MC's, and only a few cars/trucks. I've always laid for based on observations alone. For example, everyone knows (from spending time on the roadways) how much noise traffic generally makes. People Also tend to accept that some vehicles are loader than others ( for example, trucks and MC's tend to be louder than passenger cars). When everyone in my view turns to look after source of the very loud noise coming from one specific vehicle, it makes for good evidence.

From the description provided I would have probably laid the same charge. I would also expect a 50/50 chance of losing the case at trial depending on the JP hearing the matter. I've had similar cases go both ways.

Regardless of disposition of the charge, your insurance company has all the relevant information and will act accordingly.

You got a break at the roadside - I would have bailed you for breaching your conditions. As to the Dangerous charge - enjoy your 30 days inside.

It sounds like one of three things happened: 1. The officer screwed up and wrote 128 when he meant to write 172(1). This seems more likely and I would expect you'll receive a long form summons at your door with the correct charge soon. 2. The less likely option is that he meant to issue you summons for both 128 and 172(1), messed up one of them (the one you got) and failed to give you the second one. For a while we were issuing both but stopped some time ago. 3. Final option is that he gave you the summons he messed up by mistake and still has the correct one with his other paperwork. In any o...

I have to agree with Simon here. Your plates are prominently displayed for a reason, and the police have the ability to run those plates. If a stop becomes justified as a result of running game those plates (unlicensed/suspended/prohibited RO, uninsured vehicle, expired validation, stolen car, Amber alert pointer vehicle, etc.) the stop has been justified by the initial information.

If you explained all that to the officer as part of the investigation you are likely out of luck. Allowing a child to play with a helium balloon while you're the only adult passenger sounds has a somewhat expected outcome and would demonstrate "carelessness". Careless is a serious conviction to have on your record, I would speak with an agent soon for some assistance.

1. You can be charged based on witness information provided to police. In this case the officer would provide to the court information relating to your identity as confirmed by the traffic stop. The civilian complaint would provide the court with his witness evidence as to a person matching your description driving a vehicle with your license plate on a highway while watching what appeared to be a tv. The two components are generally required so long as the officer doesn't actually witness you doing the same thing. 2. Whether or not the witness is required depends on what the officer observed ...

Decatur units will also provide dual signals for target vehicles.

When you (I'm guessing) started arguing with the officer about the ticket and he places it inside the cabin of your car, he "serves" you. I legal component of that ticket is that he "serve" you personally.

It may be a coincidence but 109 in an 80 is a "reduced to" speed. I'm just speculating, but was this ticket reduced from a higher speed?

I went through the same thing last year with a fail to stop read light ticket that had an incorrect set fine on it, so I have a bit of experience with the situation you are in. When you file your appeal you will have to pay the total payable that is listed on your ticket even though it is incorrect. If you win your appeal you will receive a full refund, although it can take up to 120 days for them to send out the refund cheque. The ticket will not appear on your driving record until after your appeal has been heard and if you win your appeal it will never show up on your driving record and th...

If caught driving while under her federal prohibition she will be arrested for criminal code Drive Disqualified. Depending on the officer she may be held for bail, and the vehicle she is driving at the time will automatically be impounded for 45 days at the owners expense. As an FYI, her driving prohibition includes any criminal code classified motor vehicle. This means the standard vehicles we all think about, but also includes E-bikes(if she is observed not using the pedals), mopeds, golf carts, lawn tractors, and anything else with a motor/engine that she drives for transportation. In my ex...

Your understanding of police authority is fundamentally wrong. If you are stopped at a RIDE check (which is the way it sounds), the police are following the accepted brief detention and violation of your Charter rights. If the same police observe an offence being committed as a result of that interaction you seem to believe they should be obligated to ignore it. Having someone open their car door is acceptable to facilitate an interaction with them. It happens all the time at ride checks because windows wont lower. I would suggest that your passengers contact legal representation if they choos...

In Ontario the issuing of a license by MTO grants you permission to drive on a highway. This permission, if your license expires, ends. The courts, along with MTO, can also suspend your license. In this case you are barred by provincial law from driving on a highway. The third level would be a prohibition imposed by a criminal court, which generally bars you from driving any motorized from of transportation anywhere in Canada. Any one, two, or three of these may apply to a person.