Again, that's just my interpretation of the regulation. I'm not a legal expert, so you may want to confirm that with someone else if you're friend's licence is riding on it. Here's the actual section from the o reg. An offence under the Act set out in Column 1 of the Table to the Demerit Point Regulation for which the number of demerit points set out opposite thereto in Column 2 is four or more, regardless of whether or not demerit points have been recorded. FYI, not sure if you're friend's speeding ticket has already been reduced or not, but if he can it reduced to 15 over by the Crown there...

Maybe you guys were just going SO FAST that you were in the first picture but long gone in the 2nd one

Here's the info on the MTO website. Escalating Sanctions for all Novice Drivers (G1, G2, M1, M2) Effective August 1, 2010, novice or hybrid drivers (drivers that hold a novice licence and full licence, e.g., G/M2) will be subject to Novice Driver Escalating Sanctions . These sanctions will apply if, within a five year period, you: * are convicted of violating any of the graduated licensing conditions; * are convicted of HTA offences that result in 4 or more demerit points; or, * receive a court-ordered suspension for an HTA offence that would have resulted in 4 or more demerit points Hybrid D...

I saw these, and thought they were kinda interesting. Ontario company makes this device, apparently available in some stores around here.

Hi everyone, I tried the search but didn't find much on this topic, so I would like to know if anyone here can clarify this situation for me. A friend of mine got his M2 in June of 2009, and has held a full G license for 6-7 years. AFAIK he has pleaded guilty to two minor (speeding) tickets, one in sept 2009, the other in Jan 2010. (Haven't seen an abstract yet so I'm not sure of dates/if there were any points associated with either of these). In Aug 2010, was stopped and ticketed for 20-over, 3 points, coming to trial soon. My question for y'all is how this driver will be affected by Escalati...

Has anything come of this?

I'm curious about speeding tickets that involve community safety zones. Does the Crown have to establish the legitimacy of a community safety zone in order to justify the fine? Because if there is no evidence of a community safety zone (ie. relevant municipal/regional by-law outlining existence and times) then wouldn't that make the fine incorrect, and therefore a fatal flaw on the certifcate? I am obviously not sure whether any of this is true, so I'm seeking opinions from anyone who might be able to help. Also, if the certificate bears an error regarding the location of the offense, but is c...

Sure, but they're not really used to seeing people successfully defending themselves... The same way the officer doesn't realize he's missed something, the JP and crown often don't realize it either until someone points it out. I'm pretty sure in this case the JP was ready to find against the accused, until he brought the court's attention to that issue.

If you have the time, I would do it.

It seems unreasonable for the police officer to not allow you to produce your documents, especially if they were nearby. And if you were on the side of the road, just trying to find the trail, some would argue that you were not on the highway.

Hello, Long time lurker here. Decided I should contribute as best as I can. Windshield wiper, mirror 66. (1) Every motor vehicle other than a motorcycle shall be equipped with, (a) a device for cleaning rain, snow and other moisture from the windshield so constructed as to be controlled or operated by the driver; (b) a mirror or mirrors securely attached to the vehicle and placed in such a position as to afford the driver a clearly reflected view of the roadway in the rear, or of any vehicle approaching from the rear. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 66 (1). So if you were charged with 66(1)(b). When ...

As far as I know, there is no requirement for a sign. I'm no expert though.

anthony bono wrote:it was 66(1)(b) he stood about 8 feet behind my bike and held up his hand and said i cant see this i said that is my blind spot and he said iwill see u in court becouse he gets overtime

Was it a motorcycle? Because if I'm not mistaken sec. 66 deals with vehicles that are NOT motorcycles. So should be an easy win.

^^ Thanks for the update! Yes, this seems to be what happens on a regular basis...what I have yet to see is a recollection of a case that actually "went to trial" without a "deal" and was stayed/not guilty. I'll give you one of those (not to hijack the thread). Defendant was over and ticketed at 30-ish over. No reduction on the ticket. (this was about a year and 8 months ago probably). Officer's notes were accurate and detailed, very standard. Went to trial, defendant was not offered a deal due to driving record. Upon trial, officer neglected to establish concrete that a m...

I thought that template evidence was inadmissable in court, but I can't remember why... Something about it affecting the officer's independant recollection and being "canned evidence" or something to that effect.

Some of it can be outright unbelievable sometimes....

I wonder where the shift happened on a societal level. Like, I somehow doubt that a lot of people in the 1950s and 1960s North America were spoiling their kids to the degree that is more common today.

Am I wrong? I'm too young to actually know for sure, but I feel like my generation's parents always lectured about how things were different when they were growing up and how it was societally/culturally expected for children to have responsibilities and enjoy simpler luxuries rather than the way it is now...