Ontario Highway Traffic Act

I'm not up on the ins/outs of the above stuff. But since a resolution was made, the officer released by prosecutor, then the defendant pulls that stunt is "acting in bad faith", shouldn't 11B then go against defendant?

I see what you guys are saying, but I also pointed out (last reply) that the defendant could tell the prosecutor "I'll have to ...

Let me clarify again that my trial is over, so I am not really asking for advice. I may have started off the thread giving the wrong impression that I was in court simply to make a deal with the prosecutor, whereas in fact this deal was made right before the trial and I was convicted.

in reply to Viper1:

While it is true that I can fool the ...

you probably know better than me, but it wouldn't make sense or at least it wouldn't be fair to attribute the rescheduling to the defendant if he/she wants a trial and the witness is absent. After all, who's fault is it that the officer is not available?

It is not a good idea.

Like OPS said the DA will get a adjournment and you will get no deals.

So you agree with OPS, but can you elaborate on why getting an adjournment is necessarily bad? As I pointed out, a reschedule could be used towards an 11b argument, no? And once again, I ask, will the DA always get an adjournment?

Also if you live in ...

I thought something like that might happen, but is it always the case? Perhaps the JP might think it would be a waste of valuable time/resources to reschedule. And then there's always the argument for the right to a speedy trial if the reschedule is months away. If everyone played hardball and got a reschedule, surely that would be a very ...

Ok, so let's say that they are notified on that day about who will not be present for whatever reason. That still leaves a lot of uncertainty as to whether the rest will in fact make it. I say this assuming that the prosecutor does not meet with every single officer before proceeding to the courtroom. Or do they?

The reason I don't think this is a ...

I was in court today to get a deal from the prosecutor for speeding 73 in 50 zone. I decided to get a trial date because of the possiblity that the officer won't show up. One thing I learnt from a legal expert (who happened to stop by in the hall and talk to the public) was that I did not have to verify whether or not the officer is present in ...

OK, I think I wasn't being clear enough. When I say "talk to the prosecutor before the trial", I mean to say before they start dealing with "not guilty" pleas on the day of the trial. In other words, I remember reading somewhere that the prosecutor will attempt to talk to me both before my scheduled time, and once again when I am called on (BOTH on ...

Thanks for the info guys, but I'm not so much interested in whether the officer will show up, but rather whether I still have the option to talk to the prosecutor once my turn is up and I learn that the officer is present.

In other words, can I do the following: before the trial, talk to the prosecutor and see what he has to offer; then tell him ...

I am contesting a speeding ticket and am banking on the possibility that the cop wont show up.

My main concern is how do I determine whether the cop is there without losing the option to bargain with the prosecutor for a lesser charge?

More specifically, if I wait until my trial begins to determine if the cop/witness is present, and if he is ...