“121 In 100 On Construction Need Advice To Choose Strategy”

Hello everyone,

My wife got a speeding ticket on a construction zone on Hwy 400 and I went to court to try to defend her.

I ordered the disclosure request and got it on the first trial.

The first trial my strategy was to say there was conflict and misunderstanding of road signs. The prosecutor told me I could not confirm that since I personally wasnt there the day of the offence, and my wife has to be present to confirm the situation.

I requested another trial date to study the disclosure request and also for my wife to be there.

I talked to the manufactures of the radar over the phone and asked if in fact that radar with that specific serial number was manufactured by their company. They told me that the serial number on the disclosure was NOT complete, but they refused to send me anything in writing to confirm what they said, and referred me to a Canadian distributor. The Canadian distributor confirmed the situation by email (see at the bottom)

My question is this; what strategy should I use in my second trial having this information? Is this enough relevant information to be used in the trial, or should I just go with the first strategy and drop this matter completely.

My trial is next week, any suggestions or help would be extremely appreciated.

My English is not the best; maybe someone can find more inaccuracies in the officers notes which can help me out in any way to drop the case. (Please see attachment

http://picasaweb.google.ca/114035329754880120549/FYT# )

Thank you to anybody that reads this, any opinions would be greatly appreciated

DAVTECH Analytical Services (Canada) Inc.

P 613.831.6009 800.331.5815 ext 201 F 613.831.6610

W www.davtech.ca

"Solutions for Law Enforcement & Public Safety"

From: Philipp XXXXXXXXXXX [mailto:XXXXXXXXXXXXX.ca]

Sent: March-09-10 11:42 AM

To: Dale ***************

Subject: Re: DavTech - Contact Request

Hello Dale,

Thanks for response.

After my request to Decatur Electronics they check this serial number 94299 in the sistem and told me it's could not be number for Decatur Radar .

By their information serial number should begin from letter,not from digit.

Could you,please,verify if it the same for Decatur product in Canada?

One more Thanks for help.

Regards,

Philipp XXXXXXXXXXXX

----- Original Message -----

From: Dale ************

To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.ca

Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 10:17 AM

Subject: FW: DavTech - Contact Request

Phillip:

We are not able to provide you with specific unit information on the Decatur Radar product.

You have a couple options available to you:

1. You are entitled to view the operators manual at the local police detachment or court house.

2. You can purchase a manual, the cost is $500.00 USD and requires a Credit Card to process.

Regards,

DAVTECH Analytical Services (Canada) Inc.

P 613.831.6009 800.331.5815 ext 201 F 613.831.6610

W www.davtech.ca

"Solutions for Law Enforcement & Public Safety"

From: support@atomicmotion.com [mailto:support@atomicmotion.com]

Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 12:48 PM

To: sales@davtech.ca

Subject: DavTech - Contact Request

Name PhilippXXXXXXXXX

Email XXXXXXXXX.ca

Phone XXXXXXXXX

Company XXXXXXXXX

Job XXXXX

Address XXXXXX

City XXXXXX

Postcode XXXXXX

Country

Other Dear Sir/Madame Could you, please, provide me information on radar Genesis II Select Directional with serial number 94299 I am interested in Date of manufacturing and history of maintenance of this device This information very important for me. I hope to hear from you soon. Best Regards. Philipp XXXXXXXXXXX

Button Submit

DECATUR ELECTRONICS, INC. | A Soncell NA Company

535 West Eldorado Street, Decatur, IL 62522

Toll Free: 800.428.4315 | Phone: 217.428.4315 | Fax: 217.428.5302

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to

which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged

material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this

information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is

prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please reply to

the sender and delete the material from all computers.

-----Original Message-----

From: Philipp XXXXXXXXXX [mailto:XXXXXXXXXXXXX.ca]

Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 11:35 AM

To: Greg **********

Subject: Contact Us

Name:

Philipp XXXXXXXXXXXX

Email:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Address:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Phone:

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Comments:

Dear Sir/Madame

Could you, please, provide me information on radar Genesis II Select

Directional with serial number 94299

I am interested in Date of manufacturing and history of maintenance of

this device

This information very important for me.

I hope to hear from you soon.

Best Regards.

Philipp XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Security Code:

z6j5q[/b]

Was the officer stationary or moving at the time of enforcement?

yea the officer was stationary and he followed her car after

I assume it was the OPP using Decatur Genesis K Band (they do use some Ka).

These units can be used Constant on or Instant on. Moving or stationary. As Radar Detectors are Illegal up here most police run Constant on where as Police in the USA prefer Instant On to defeat Radar Detectors.

Still you may want to determine which method was used. Does the officer have a tracking history? In other words, did he visually estimate the vehicle exceeding the speed limit and then use his speed measuring equipment to confirm his/her suspicions? This is what they are supposed to do if they are playing by the rules (which FYI most don't).

The service records you are requesting confuse me. Im not sure what you are trying to establish.

The officer has tuning forks that are struck the held to the unit(s) and if the radar reads the speed of the particular fork it is calibrated. No other tests are required. No service would be required.

Radar does make errors.

Good Luck

Mithras wrote:The officer has tuning forks that are struck the held to the unit(s) and if the radar reads the speed of the particular fork it is calibrated.

Just an FYI...

Police in Ontario do not use tuning forks. Officers in some other provinces might, but not here. Tests are usually done internally using the manufacturer's procedures. External tests, if they are performed, typically involve the officer driving down the road and measuring radar readouts versus the calibrated speedometer, or for lidar, doing a fixed-distance zero-velocity test, etc.

I read the notes. Test at 0751 and 1751, so before and after are done. Plus the observations: Northbound white Toyota in passing lane, lone vehicle. Estimated at 120 km/h, actual reading 121 km/h.

The Crown has satisfied the disclosure obligations. The only thing that appears to be missing (unless I didn't see it) is "stopped vehicle without sight lost." Is that enough? Not necessarily. The only opportunity for acquittal here would come from improper performance of the tests or use of the device (radar manual would help there), or if the officer admits he lost sight of the vehicle. With the vehicle being the lone one on the highway, that's unlikely. I'd recommend a plea bargain.

Radar Identified wrote:

Just an FYI...

Police in Ontario do not use tuning forks. Officers in some other provinces might, but not here.

Then I stand corrected.

I am confused though as to why the Police in Ontario would not use the tuning forks that are suppiled by the manufacturer? Won't it be easier to use the forks rather than go through a series of tests?

I don't get it.

Thanks for help.

If understand right the situation with serial number doesnt work or it is not enough to argue about?

Over the phone Decatur confirmed the serial number for devise is not right (not complete).Unfortunately, they dont wont confirm this in written form. They passed my request to DavTech (Canadian distributor) and I have confirmation from this guys by e-mail as you can see lower.

From: Philipp * Edited for Privacy Purposes *

Sent: March-09-10 11:42 AM

To: Dale **********

Subject: Re: DavTech - Contact Request

Hello Dale,

Thanks for response.

After my request to Decatur Electronics they check this serial number 94299 in the system and told me it's could not be number for Decatur Radar .

By their information serial number should begin from letter, not from digit.

Could you,please,verify if it the same for Decatur product in Canada?

One more Thanks for help.

Regards,

Philipp XXXXXXXXXX

Phillip, that is correct, it should begin with G2S-xxxxx.

DAVTECH Analytical Services (Canada) Inc.

P 613.831.6009 800.331.5815 ext 201 F 613.831.6610

W www.davtech.ca

"Solutions for Law Enforcement & Public Safety"

Basically, if you are not recommend this as a tool, I would go with my first idea about road sign conflict (what is true).My wife would bargain for lower money and no points.

Sorry for my funny English and more thanks for help.

This forum is amazing. Follow to "ticket combat" and forum info I Won two courts already(both for my wife)

Mithras wrote:I am confused though as to why the Police in Ontario would not use the tuning forks that are suppiled by the manufacturer? Won't it be easier to use the forks rather than go through a series of tests?

Radar devices sold to police in Ontario actually don't come with tuning forks. If the device is actually mounted to the vehicle, the "rolling speed check" would actually be more accurate (and less time consuming) than striking the tuning fork and testing each antenna. Now as far as hand-held radar goes... this is a bit of a different issue. It has an internal test, but the external tests have been dropped. THIS I have a big issue with, because nothing has verified that the signal has been properly transmitted, modulated by Doppler shift and then successfully returned, received and decoded properly. But that's a different issue... check under "Police Clothing and Equipment."

philkam wrote:Basically, if you are not recommend this as a tool, I would go with my first idea about road sign conflict (what is true).

I wouldn't recommend the serial # issue, just because I'm not optimistic it will work to exonerate your wife. That's just my opinion, though.

philkam wrote:Basically, if you are not recommend this as a tool, I would go with my first idea about road sign conflict (what is true).

how would you figure a 100km/hr zone on a 400 series hwy is a road sign conflict?

Radar Identified,

thanks for the opinion.

I just think if radar could not be identified how can the officer talk about anything else?

Problem is I dont have enough written evidence from manufacturer.

I'll have to try my first strategy (the road sign conflict)

Hwybear,

it's not about 100km on hwy 400 its about speeding in a construction zone. Basically, according to the signs she was already out of the construction zone .That was road sign "construction zone begins" and blue sign with construction info and length of that zone. Sign "end of construction zone" was 3 km further then distance on the sign my wife saw .She was stopped in that 3km zone.

Logically, it is not officer fault and not driver fault.

She would be agreeing with speed but can appeal to this misinformation which helped (I hope) bargain to lower the ticket and dismiss the points.

Ill try –nothing to loose.

What do you think?

Thanks.

philkam wrote:I just think if radar could not be identified how can the officer talk about anything else?

In short, the make/model of the device is sufficient, like a Decatur Genesis VPD or whatever... similar to the idea that you could testify about a vehicle make/model without having to know the VIN #.

philkam wrote:She would be agreeing with speed but can appeal to this misinformation which helped (I hope) bargain to lower the ticket and dismiss the points.

I'd probably try that, if nothing else.

I am agreeing with you but …

Look at the other point, it could be hundreds or thousands vehicles make/model(same as radars of course) and only one (in case of vehicle - with particular plate number) radar have been used .Proof of this exactly radar –serial number, otherwise how I now if officer did not used some other device and later just make notes for disclosure .

Sounds weakly just because I dont have official note from Decatur with same info what I got over the phone.

Representative, after computer check, told me exactly like "we could not identify this device because S/N wrong its could be device made by many other companies. "

Well, I tried my best. The court well have tomorrow. Let see whats gonna happened.

Thanks a lot for help

Let us know how it turns out. If anything, show up early. If you can show the Crown that your wife had reasonable grounds to believe that she was no longer in a construction zone, there's a good chance they'll go for 115 in a 100 zone, and no workers, in a plea bargain.