Ok, so it looks like the play by play of how my case has unfolded thus far is for the affidavit, and the legal argument alone is in the factum, and referenced by the affidavit. So I suppose it makes sense to reference/present the affidavit first then?

As for faxing these off, do I need to include full copies of the the jurisprudence I am using in support of my argument? Or is this solely needed for reference within the court itself, and thus only needs to be included in the copies going to the Prosecution and the Court?

I'm submitting my 11b motion this week and have a couple of questions about how to organise it. Where do I draw the line between a factum and an affidavit? I've been writing the affidavit as a rundown of steps I've taken since the charge has been laid and how each has been responded to by the Crown and the court system. Do I then make my arguments as to the length and reasonableness of the delay, the fact that I have not waived my right to a prompt trial, and demonstrate the increased prejudice to my defence case imposed by an unreasonable delay? Or is this all stuff for the factum? If so, how...

Quick question -- hope to get an answer on this! Where do I draw the line between a factum and an affidavit? I've been writing the affidavit as a rundown of steps I've taken since the charge has been laid and how each has been responded to by the Crown and the court system. Then do I make my arguments as to the length and unreasonableness of the delay, the fact that I have not waived my right to a prompt trial, and demonstrate the increased prejudice to my defence csae imposed by an unreasonable delay? Or is this all stuff for the factum? If so, how much do I put in the affidavit? Or is it eno...

Been awhile since I've been on, but my case still has not been heard. The date of the original offence was the 2nd of July 2009. I had my first shot at a trial on the 29th of March. The prosecution had lined up two cases from the same traffic stop (stop sign blitz), and we both wanted trial. The other guy went before me and won (same reason I am fighting it). When mine came up, the JP declared that since it was essentially the same case, he was prejudiced having heard the testimony from the preceding case, and ordered an adjournment, to which the prosecution wholeheartedly agreed. I, of course...

If the JP decides to hear the case, that's exactly the method I think I'll take. For pre-trial motions, is it worth my while to attempt an argument for improper disclosure based on the fact that I asked for a will say statement from any witnesses (the cop) and didn't get one? His notes don't have any detail at all, so I'm forced to react to what he claims to recall only as he says it, and do not have an opportunity to prepare a defence for that except on the fly. Does this violate my right to fair trial? If not, can I argue improper disclosure later if the cop attempts to reference a hand-draw...

Okay, I got my disclosure now, and there really isn't much to it. They say it was ready on March 5th, but they didn't notify me of that until late on the 18th. My court date is the 29th. I received a photocopy of the front of the ticket only (though I requested front and back), and a copy of the officer's notes which don't indicate much of anything. It names the intersection, that there was a visible stop sign and stop marking there, and I was observed not to stop and that my wheels were in continuous motion. There was no mention of the officer's position relative to the intersection, no maps ...

In July of 2009, I got cited for failing to obey a stop sign. I was in the middle of a move, so my license and registration had the old address, and upon requesting a court date, I changed the address to the new one. I didn't hear anything further on the matter until yesterday (Feb 24th), when I finally got my notice of trial. The notice indicates it was issued on the 11th of January, and a copy was sent to me as well as to the Provincial Offences Officer. It is postmarked on the 23rd of February. Having done a bit of research in the interim, and after speaking with a clerk at the Provincial O...