So quick little update for those who care: I got my case adjourned to due lack of disclosure which ended up being because the prosecutor gave me the wrong owners manual. However, when I was at my trial i spoke to the officer and he clarified that he had actually used a laser device, and in going thr...

The testimony is that he attended a course and was certified in the use of the radar. He has 'foundation' because he was there for the course knows he passed it and will testify that he did his checks. And he doesn't need to be an expert - that's the instructor who you would have to call as a witne...

Courts will accept an officer's testimony that he has been trained. According to Regina v. Vancrey, [2000] O.J. No. 3033 (Ont. C.A.) "In that case [DAstous v. Baie Comeau, supra.] the court held that judicial notice could be taken of the fact that radar is used to measure the speed of automobi...

Hi there, so a little background: a few months ago I was pulled over on the 403 and given a ticket for doing 136 in a 100. This was my first ticket. I got my trial date for Oct. 27 and I filed for disclosure and didn't receive anything. A week before my trial I called and they said they tried to con...

Decatur wrote:It appears that he simply tested two different speed measuring devices. One a laser and the other a moving radar.

Sorry I didn't specify that the blacked out name isn't his name. So it wouldn't be him testing this device.

On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date adjourn...