“101 In A 70 Disclosure Requested. First Appearance June 6th”

So back on March 18 2012, I was given a ticket for "Speeding - 101 KPH in a 70 KPH Zone." The officer was waiting just off Bronson Ave. in Ottawa on a side street (Brewer Way). I was in the center lane and had just passed a silver car that was in the left lane. I slowed down but the cop pulled me over just before Sunnyside Ave. at 10:54 pm. He then gave me a ticket and made an illegal U turn at Sunnyside Ave., which has no less than 2 no u-turn signs (presumably to return to Brewer Way to give more drivers tickets). I requested disclosure based on the form at ticketcombat, and also added some additional requests based on some of the members successes here. Below is the disclosure I requested.

o a full copy of the police officers notes;

o a copy of both sides of the officers copy of the ticket (Notice of Offence);

o a typed version of any hand written notes;

o witness will say statements;

o witness statements;

o any statements made by the defendant;

o copies of the original notes of such statements; and

o the names and address, occupation, and criminal record of the person(s) providing such information;.

o Make, model, and serial number of the speed measuring device used to ascertain speed.;

o A complete copy of the speed measuring devices manual;

o Calibration Certificate for the speed measuring device that may have been used by the officer and any Calibration Certificates for the calibration equipment used in the speed measuring devices calibration.; and

o Certificate of Conformance for the speed measuring device and any calibration equipment used to calibrate the speed measuring device.

A few weeks ago I received a copy of the officers ticket and electronic notes, a copy of the handwritten notes, and a suggestion that the manual could be reviewed at the first appearance (can I argue that seeing the manual for a few minutes at a first appearance is prejudicial?). What I'm wondering is should I request the additional disclosure at the first appearance or should I send the request via registered mail like I did the first time? Also is it illegal for the police to make a u-turn at a signed no u-turn intersection if they don't have their lights on? Would it be useful to attack the officer's credibility at trial Ie. if he's willing to break traffic laws because it makes his life easier, then maybe his identification of my car can be called into question. The officer identified my car as silver when its more of a light beige, and he also indicated in his notes "2 male occupants in L1". Does L1 refer to lane 1? Which would be either the right or left hand lane but not the center lane? So what I'm thinking is that the officer initially pointed the gun at the silver car in the left hand lane but then decided to get me instead since I'd be easier to pull over.

I also got the lidar gun's brand Truspeed and the serial number from disclosure. I saw that z24guy was able to get his charge withdrawn by arguing that the radar gun needed a certificate of conformance from Industry Canada to prove that its working in spec. What I'm wondering is does this apply to lidar guns as well? I also noticed that in the manual for a UK model of truspeed that its accuracy range is +- 2kph meaning that I could suggest to the prosecutor that I could have only been going 99kph so he'd need to give me more than just a one point reduction to avoid a trial. Ideally I'd like to plead guilty to a non moving violation with a reduced fine although I'm not sure if the prosecutor will go for that. If he offers me anything less I think I should go to trial. The last speeding ticket I had was at least 5 years ago. What I'm not sure of though is how much of my strategy should I reveal in the first appearance to show the prosecutor I might be difficult to prosecute (and hopefully get a better plea) without giving too much away? Thanks for your help.

I dont think its at all unreasonable to request more time to review the operators manual. I cant advise though when it would be most advantageous to make such a request.

In regards to the officers U-turn, it probably was unlawful unless there was signage exempting emergency vehicles. That being said, if the turn was made safely (regardless if lights/sirens were activated) then the Courts probably wont be very concerned about such actions since it was done in the performance of the officers duties. I think it would take quite an egregious act for the Courts to find fault with the officer. Id also add that I dont think bringing the matter up would impact the officers credibility. In my experience it can sometimes backfire as the Courts dont like people trying to excuse their actions based on other motorists illegal acts. At the end of the day, the trial is about your driving.

L1 is typically shorthand for lane 1, though the fact it says two occupants makes me think maybe its a typo and should have been V1 (vehicle 1). Lanes are typically counted from left to right in the direction of travel, excluding dedicated turn lanes.

In regards to the certificate of conformance, Id argue that the Crown does NOT have to provide that. Z24guy got his charge withdrawn, but he cant say for sure if it was because of that issue. You can certainly give it a try, but do your research so you know why youre asking for it and why you think it should be provided. It might work but I wouldnt say its a guarantee by any stretch.

In regards to your last point, are you simply seeking a reduction to 29 over or less? Because I can pretty much guarantee the Crown will offer you a reduced speed in exchange for a plea. As for the whole moving vs. non moving violation thing, keep in mind its irrelevant to insurance providers. A ticket is a ticket, regardless if its for speeding or having an expired licence plate.

Thanks for the information Stanton, in regard to your question as to what plea I'm seeking my understanding from the ticketcombat website was that if you could get the prosecutor to plea down to a non-moving violation ie. not a Highway Traffic Act violation then your insurance provider wouldn't find out about it.

"If you decide to plead guilty to something, try and get a charge that is a non-moving violation which won't affect your insurance. No seatbelt as a passenger, red light camera tickets and expensive parking violations like parking in a fire route, in front of a fire hydrant or no stopping or standing charges do not affect your driving record."

Also since the charge is so close to the lower rate category, I suspect that creating reasonable doubt as to whether I was going 101 kph or 99 kph would be easy to do at trial just based on the standard of error of the gun (+- 2kph). So I could have been going anywhere between 99kph to 103kph. This means that the prosecutor would have to give me more than a one rate category reduction in order for me to not want to go to trial (since I could almost certainly get a rate category reduction at trial).

As for the certificate of conformance you're right that its definitely not a guarantee but it will hopefully help create reasonable doubt. Actually I was hoping to hear from someone about whether Industry Canada (or any other body)certifies lidar guns in Ontario or Canada as this would give me a place to start looking to see if the gun is certified for use in Ontario/Canada.

I don't think I made this clear in my original post but I did have a passenger with me in the car at the time but he wasn't paying much attention so I don't think any testimony he could provide would be helpful. I'm also not sure why you thought that the L1 might be a typo because I had a passenger Stanton? Was it because I said I was the lead car in the center lane? I suppose I should be able to find out from the prosecutor at the first appearance hopefully exactly what their interpretation of the L1 term is. Would it be advisable to inform the prosecutor at the first appearance that I don't believe I was in the left lane, or would I just be helping them prepare their witness (the cop) for that question?

polybomber wrote:If you decide to plead guilty to something, try and get a charge that is a non-moving violation which won't affect your insurance. No seatbelt as a passenger, red light camera tickets and expensive parking violations like parking in a fire route, in front of a fire hydrant or no stopping or standing charges do not affect your driving record.

The only problem is that a Crown can't in good faith let you plead to something you didn't do. It has to be a similar offence, which when it comes to speeding, limits the options.

polybomber wrote:I'm also not sure why you thought that the L1 might be a typo because I had a passenger Stanton? Was it because I said I was the lead car in the center lane?

Might not be a typo at all. Just sounds odd, two occupants in lane 1. People typically occupy a vehicle, not a lane. Again though, the notes are for the officer's recollection.

They wont give you a non-moving violation, they will simply laugh at you. Basically it's up to you, the prosecutor will likely offer you a lesser fine, you have to decide whether or not the disclosure is correct or has an error or two to gamble taking it to trial, now that being said there is a chance the officer will not show up, but from what i've read on here and heard...it's becoming more of a thing for officers to show up at the courts, esp. in a smaller city. You can always set a trial date after talking with the prosecutor and plead guilty before the trial if you believe the evidence is strong against you; the only plus to that is paying at a later date and a smaller fine (note it will still carry points for insurance).

Hmm ok well I guess I'll see what happens tomorrow. Does anyone know how long it takes in Ottawa for traffic court cases to go to trial? I'm also guessing that if I turn down whatever plea the prosecutor makes me at the first appearance and request a trial I could still accept the prosecutor's offer later or they likely would offer another plea on the date of the trial.

I went to the first appearance today, the prosecutor didn't even know I was coming since I wasn't on some list or other. He offered me failure to obey sign a 2 point offense. I rejected the plea since he couldn't offer me a non-moving violation. You guys were right about that, so I think my best bet is a trial since I doubt I'd get a worse deal prior to trial, and the chance that the officer might not show up or I could get the case kicked due to improper disclosure, or unreasonable delay. I guess we'll see.