“72km/h In A 50km/h”

So today I got pulled over *edited* in Windsor, ON. *edited*

Unfortunately everything on the ticket is correct. He used some hand held radar gun.

72km/h in a 50km/h zone.

I will choose option 3 and see if a prosecutor will lower to 0 demerit points. If so I may accept.

There are my questions:

1) If I meet with a prosecutor and he offers a deal to lower the charge to just a fine, with no demerit points, can I still ask for disclosure to see the evidence against me before I accept any type of deal? or would he possibly take offense and just attempt to get the full amount out of me?

2) I work in a Lab and I know all about QC and calibrations. This radar equipment must need to be correctly calibrated and Quality Controlled to ensure the results are accurate. Would all of this info be provided for disclosure? If not is this a possible attack point?

3) If I do receive disclosure, and everything adds up against me are there any acceptable defenses? i.e. Do I just say it "I don't know what happened and I wasn't speeding" and just stick to my story type of thing? or would the Judge still find me guilty?

If your ticket wasn't already reduced, there is a very good chance the Crown will offer you a plea deal to 15 over. Quite likely you'd have an opportunity to review disclosure before having to accept a plea deal, assuming the Crown even has disclosure on your first attendance date.

There isn't much you can fight speeding tickets on since they're an absolute liability offence, short of arguing it wasn't your vehicle or the speed measuring device was not calibrated/working correctly. A hand held radar device should have tested before and after your stop. Some units are self testing, some older units use a tuning fork. Basically all you really need to look for is two test times in the officer's notes.

Can you explain this ABSOLUTE LIABILITY more?

Are you basically saying that if the officer follows all procedures correctly, doesn't make any error on the ticket, and shows up for court, your doomed to lose the case.

Is there no argument you can make? Is there a good way to attack the officers credibility? Is there a way to ask certain questions to him that would possibly present reasonable doubt?

Whats out there to stop some crooked cop from giving me a ticket for 22 over when i was only 15 over for instance? You can't tell me stuff like this doesn't happen.

legalize-it wrote:Can you explain this ABSOLUTE LIABILITY more?

legalize-it wrote:Is there no argument you can make? Is there a good way to attack the officers credibility? Is there a way to ask certain questions to him that would possibly present reasonable doubt?

legalize-it wrote:Whats out there to stop some crooked cop from giving me a ticket for 22 over when i was only 15 over for instance? You can't tell me stuff like this doesn't happen.

stanton wrote:Yep, absolutely you can still fight the charge. It just means your defence options are somewhat more limited and you'll have to try and raise reasonable doubt that the offence took place. Some common defence arguments are the radar wasn't properly tested or the speed reading was from a different vehicle, but this is obviously very case dependent.

But - if the officers notes are correct and the ticket face is correct and the uint was tested properly - and he shows up (I doubt I'll be that lucky twice) - so everything is correct ... is there still any attack-able area of the crown/police officers case against you.