“31 Km/h Over In 80 Km Zone”

I was pulled over going 111 km/h in an 80 km/h. The officer told me I was doing 111 km/hr, asked for my insurance. I mistakenly gave him the trailer insurance instead. He came back gave me a ticket for the 111 km/h and warned me I didn'nt have the right insurance. I then showed him the right insurance, at which point he no longer cared. And I'm stuck with a ticket 2 km/hr into the 4 demerit range. I have decided to go to trial. I've been looking into possible causes of reasonable doubt. They are as follows:

1) he has the time as pm when it occurred in the am written on the ticket

2) he was oncoming around a bend, in the rain and I was one of three vehicles on that stretch of road at the time. - have doubt as to whether he recorded my vehicle or whether he could operate the radar accurately and safely in those conditions.

3) the road I was travelling is not signed as 80 km\h in either direction for the 12.5 km stretch I was on even though there are multiple paved interchanges with roads that are 90 km\h in that stretch. Therefore I believe the limit to be 90km

4) will question the radar/laser used and when it was tested, the officer's training on the unit and his ability to operate it in conditions mentioned above.

Does this get me to reasonable doubt? Should I concentrate on one defense? Or should I just throw as much mud as possible and see if something sticks.

I could also get my wife to testify I was not travelling at that speed but I'm not sure that helps or not, as we were talking about travelling faster to get to the kids swimming lessons, but not obviously going that fast.

thanks in advance for any help or advice.

1) An error regarding the time on the ticket can be amended at trial.

2) You'd have to review disclosure and see what the officer's evidence is to determine how likely it is you can argue he obtained a reading from the wrong vehicle. Most likely the officer was using radar if he was also in motion (laser is for stationary use). Radar's accuracy wouldn't be altered by the rain or bend in the road. I don't see how the safety of operating the device wouldn't be relevant at your trial.

3) Unless there was a sign stating otherwise, it would be 80 km/hr. Arguing you believed otherwise wouldn't be a valid defence.

4) You should see some record of testing in disclosure. Certainly if the radar wasn't tested that could raise reasonable doubt.

Your wife's testimony probably would be of little value. Not being the driver, she's not in a position to say with any certainty what the vehicle's speed was.

And just FYI, you're probably aware, but if the 4 demerit points is the main issue I'm sure you could easily get a plea deal to a lower speed with 3 points or less.

thanks for the adivce. I guess I'll see what kinda deal is offered. and save trial as a last resort.

Just for reference. The Prosecutor offered 95 km/h which is no points and a $45 fine. So needless to say I took it. Too bad the cop didn't knock down the ticket originally and save everyone the expense.

The problem is that not everyone simply accepts a reduction and pleads guilty. Many people still try to fight the ticket or seek a further reduction, so theres not always much incentive for the police to offer reductions. And while lowering speeding tickets is pretty common, at the end of the day the officer charged you for the actual offence you committed.

thanks for your help. I guess I couldn't help thinking in the courtroom, that there was no way my $45 was going to cover the cost of the prosecutor, the justice, the court clerk and the office clerk. But I've never been a fan of bureaucracy, I've always been on the outside looking in.

thanks again.