the officer believed was an unsafe pass

Aside from his belief, any other evidence? Another vehicle that had to slow to avoid a collision? Someone had to swerve off the road? Unless there's more to this I don't get it.

That's not a fair charge. Take it to court and request a trial. My only question is how far was the curve when you passed? Not that it matters because even if it was less than 50m it's not the correct charge.

Haha, well you never know but highly unlikely in my opinion.

Most people have little tolerance for that amount of speed though. I know if you're doing 55 or sixty over and have a good record you may be able to plea to a 49 over or to the stunt but no suspension. 94 over may not see much mercy.

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/news/winds ... peed-limit

WOW! Anyone care to speculate on the punishment if convicted??

Greatest Canadian wrote:If you get a ticket and settle out of court by paying the ticket without proceeding to trial, no points can be added to your driving record.

Read my Dermit Point Scam thread.

Say what????

Where (City) was the ticket issued and under what section?

Hi All,
I was putzing around on the net the other day and some guy said he got a ticket for improper tires 70(3)(a). Reason was the car was too low. I looked at the Act and Reg 625 that describes tires but didn't see anything. Is he full of it or did I miss something?
Thanks!
J.

Ok here's the deal. Suspension will be thirty days after conviction or he pays the fine. Ministry will send a letter. Also he will need to go to the Ministry to get his licence reinstated after both suspensions and pay their fees. Otherwise he will be unlicenced. Don't start driving using his old licence after the 3 days. Damn near impossible to beat because the roadside acts as an independent witness and the evidence it provides is difficult to dispute. This is assuming he was charged with young driver bac above zero. Its not the end of the world. They won't take his licence away unless he's ...

He had a beer at some point during work hours

If he had "a" beer and registered a warn, I'm the Pope..........

http://www.windsorstar.com/Windsor+police+catch+Cobalt+driver+doing/5632932/story.html WINDSOR, Ont. -- Police suspended a mans licence, impounded his car and charged him with stunt driving Saturday after clocking him doing 95 km/h over the speed limit on E.C. Row Expressway. A traffic enforcement officer was parked with a radar gun in the centre median on E.C. Row at Jefferson Boulevard around 12:50 p.m. He saw a black Chevrolet Cobalt headed east at a "very high rate of speed." The officer clocked the vehicle at 195 km/h. The speed limit is 100 km/h. He followed the car as it left ...

Likely just used dougall and Darcey as a reference. It doesn't mean that's specifically where the offence took place.

I'll play devils advocate. By your rationale if the road is empty and the weather is good you can go faster than the posted speed limit? Looking at googlemaps there are some houses on the west side of the street. Maybe the home owners don't want people going 80km/h past their house while their kids play in the driveway. Further north there are a lot of businesses then homes on both sides of the street which is likely why its 50km/h. Speed limits start at the sign not before. Not my rules just the way it is. I think the 401 and 407 speed limits are too low too. They are flat,wide, in good repai...

I can't think of any reason why it would be illegal. If the limit is 50 then its 50 regardless of being near the 401 or other circumstances. Your chances of getting it dismissed is slim to none IMHO. Looking at googlemaps though it looks like the 92/60 is the same street (different name) but further north. Not that it matters in this case but just sayin'

Was the 92/60 going northbound on the same road. Prosecutors typically won't be too excited to make a deal with a previous ticket for a similar offence in less than a year.

Forget the demerit points because your potential for jail time is more pressing at the moment.