“If A Cop Claims That Your Speed Was 84 Km/hr In 60 Zone”

Stanton wrote:Officers notes: Must be provided

Both sides of the ticket: Wont be provided unless notes were written on back of ticket

Typed version: Unlikely to receive on first request. Will have to justify upon reviewing notes (i.e. illegible, use of short forms that are indecipherable)

Statements made by the defendant: Unless you gave the officer a written statement, this wont exist.

Records relating to training, internal directives, policies: Wont be provided

Occurrence report: Wont exist, police dont complete reports for a simple traffic stop.

Video /Audio Evidence: Should be provided if it exists

Make, model, and serial number of speed measuring device: This would be part of the notes

Owners manual: Youll likely just get the testing section.

Officers training record: Wont be provided.

Repair history of the unit: Wont be provided.

Calibration Procedures & Records: Wont be provided

Procedure for radar/laser equipment testing and operator training standards: Wont be provided.

Traffic Stop and Vehicle Search Procedures: Wont be provided.

You can question the officer regarding his or her training and testing procedures at trial, but you won't receive any documentation in regards to it.

Thanks for your reply, Stanton. If they dont provide me with all relevant information and documentation so I can prepare a defense and answer to the charges, would not it be a reason to request an adjournment or even a stay?

As for typed version of any handwritten notes, I agree that its unlikely to receive it on first request, but if dont request it now and if I get handwritten notes just before the trial, how will I be able to claim that they didn't provide the typed copies of the officer notes and request a stay/ adjournment if Ive never requested a typed version? Thanks.

Memo1 wrote:As for typed version of any handwritten notes, I agree that its unlikely to receive it on first request, but if dont request it now and if I get handwritten notes just before the trial, how will I be able to claim that they didn't provide the typed copies of the officer notes and request a stay/ adjournment if Ive never requested a typed version? Thanks.

They don't have to provide typed notes before you have even seen the original notes. The originals can be perfectly fine and legible. If for some reason you can't read the notes, you can send in a second request. If you don't get the notes in time, they'll likely just give you another trial date. While at the courthouse, it's possible they'll have the officer there to go over the notes with you and satisfy your request.

bend wrote:

Memo1 wrote:As for typed version of any handwritten notes, I agree that its unlikely to receive it on first request, but if dont request it now and if I get handwritten notes just before the trial, how will I be able to claim that they didn't provide the typed copies of the officer notes and request a stay/ adjournment if Ive never requested a typed version? Thanks.

They don't have to provide typed notes before you have even seen the original notes. The originals can be perfectly fine and legible. If for some reason you can't read the notes, you can send in a second request. If you don't get the notes in time, they'll likely just give you another trial date. While at the courthouse, it's possible they'll have the officer there to go over the notes with you and satisfy your request.

Thank you, Bend.

If that is what they do, it looks like its better not to request a typed version now, hoping that the original notes will be difficult to understand. It also looks like its better send a second request as late as possible (perhaps just before the trial) to leave them with less time to provide a typed version. But, on the other hand, according to http://www.ticketcombat.com/step4/section_109.php, in order to give them proper notice of a constitutional question "section 109 requires you to …notify them at least 15 days before the court date."

So, what would be a better approach?

1) Send the first disclosure request as soon as possible and send the second request as soon as the first disclosure is received in order to have time notify them of constitutional question at least 15 days before the court date

2) Send the first disclosure request as late as possible (6 weeks before the trial date?) and the second request as late as possible (perhaps just before the trial date?) to leave them with less time to provide the second disclosure

Thanks

You're supposed to want disclosure as soon as possible. Waiting until the last minute or waiting until it's impossible to respond doesn't benefit you.

You're only sabotaging your own trial.

bend wrote:You're supposed to want disclosure as soon as possible. Waiting until the last minute or waiting until it's impossible to respond doesn't benefit you.

You're only sabotaging your own trial.

Thanks for your advice, Bend.

Let me expand.

If you sit around for months and wait until the last minute to request disclosure, it will be used against you. You're going to argue how you don't have disclosure and the other side is going to make the point that you've made no attempt to request disclosure until the last minute.

Your trial will likely be adjourned and you'll be considered at fault for the delay. You can no longer argue your trial is taking too long because you're the one who is wasting time.

They are going to make sure they satisfy any relevant requests then and there before you leave the courthouse. Example, if you're arguing over wanting a copy of the device manual, they'll book you an appointment in their office to look it over and you'll be forced to drive back down again. They've now instantly satisfied your request without doing any work and now you've got to waste another day before your trial.

bend wrote:Let me expand.

If you sit around for months and wait until the last minute to request disclosure, it will be used against you. You're going to argue how you don't have disclosure and the other side is going to make the point that you've made no attempt to request disclosure until the last minute.

Your trial will likely be adjourned and you'll be considered at fault for the delay. You can no longer argue your trial is taking too long because you're the one who is wasting time.

They are going to make sure they satisfy any relevant requests then and there before you leave the courthouse. Example, if you're arguing over wanting a copy of the device manual, they'll book you an appointment in their office to look it over and you'll be forced to drive back down again. They've now instantly satisfied your request without doing any work and now you've got to waste another day before your trial.

Thanks for your reply, Bend. I requested the disclosure and today I've already got a call from the prosecutor who told me that I can pick it up. So it does not look like there will be any delay or any opportunity for adjournment. Actually, Im surprised. I've never expected that it would take them only one day to provide a disclosure. Is this typical?

I got a disclosure. I requested a full copy of the officers notes but was provided with something titled "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text". However, there is no narrative there and its not a handwritten either. It looks like a computer printed form that just repeats the info from the ticket. There are no additional details whatsoever other that it does say:

"Actual Speed: 80" (originally the cop claimed the speed was 84)

Is that normal? Can I request another disclosure insisting on getting a full copy of the officers notes?

Must a cop have handwritten notes with some details? If he has no details, how is he supposed to testify? For example, what is going to happen if he is asked about the color of the car and he does not remember?

Also, I got a copy of some pages from Speed Laser Users Guide but the quality is so poor that I cannot read some of it. Can I request a readable copy? Thanks.

It seems like you got one of the new e-tickets (which ARE permitted). The officer's notes do not need to be handwritten. They simply use the laptop inside the cruiser which populates a lot of your data once your driver's license is swiped and then they type in their additional notes. There should be some notes about things like the officer's observations, road conditions, the speed limit, how they ID'ed you, any statements/comments made, etc. If nothing exists, then you've likely got yourself a winning case. After all, how will the officer be able to remember the particulars of your specific incident? That would make for a VERY easy cross-examination to create reasonable doubt. In all likelihood, if there are NO officer notes, the prosecutor usually drops the charge as there is no reasonable prospect of conviction. However, if there ARE notes, then they should have given you them at your first request and any delay (adjournment) that arises should be counted against the prosecution.

highwaystar wrote:It seems like you got one of the new e-tickets (which ARE permitted). The officer's notes do not need to be handwritten. They simply use the laptop inside the cruiser which populates a lot of your data once your driver's license is swiped and then they type in their additional notes. There should be some notes about things like the officer's observations, road conditions, the speed limit, how they ID'ed you, any statements/comments made, etc. If nothing exists, then you've likely got yourself a winning case. After all, how will the officer be able to remember the particulars of your specific incident? That would make for a VERY easy cross-examination to create reasonable doubt. In all likelihood, if there are NO officer notes, the prosecutor usually drops the charge as there is no reasonable prospect of conviction. However, if there ARE notes, then they should have given you them at your first request and any delay (adjournment) that arises should be counted against the prosecution.

Thanks a lot, Highwaystar. In the "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text" given to me, there are no notes "about things like the officer's observations, road conditions, the speed limit, how they ID'ed you, any statements/comments made, etc " and I was told that this police officer is known for providing the very minimum. Your reply gives me hope that this case can be won. Probably, not by me but by an experienced ticket-fighter who knows how to handle this. Do you happen to know such a ticket-fighter? Thanks.

Memo1 wrote:Your reply gives me hope that this case can be won. Probably, not by me but by an experienced ticket-fighter who knows how to handle this. Do you happen to know such a ticket-fighter? Thanks.

Save your money. If what you received is the only evidence they have, I can't imagine they'd even proceed to trial.

bend wrote:

Memo1 wrote:Your reply gives me hope that this case can be won. Probably, not by me but by an experienced ticket-fighter who knows how to handle this. Do you happen to know such a ticket-fighter? Thanks.

Save your money. If what you received is the only evidence they have, I can't imagine they'd even proceed to trial.

Thank you, Bend. I have a feeling that they will not only proceed to trial but also will be amending the speed rate up.

As for the officers notes, they told me that the computer made "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text" (with "Actual Speed: 80") ARE the officers notes.

The problem is that I dont know how to handle cross-examination to create a reasonable doubt. And I dont know what exactly I should do in case if they give me ‘Winlow Warning' or if there ARE some officers notes not given to me at my first request. Im not even sure whether or not I should request another disclosure. Thanks.

Would the following questions be useful during cross-examination?

1. What color is my car?

2. How many doors does my car have?

(The color of my car and the number of doors are not mentioned in the computer made "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text" provided to me as the officers notes, but probably they can get this info by using the plate)

3. What was I wearing?

4. Was I wearing a pair of glasses?

5. Was that a pair of sunglasses or a pair of regular glasses?

6. What was the weather like?

7. What did you tell me about the speed of my car?

8. What did you tell me that the speed was 84 "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text", says Actual Speed: 80"?

9. Did you show me the laser reading?

10. Why did you not show me the laser reading?

11. Do you never show the driver laser reading?

12. Is that a bad practice to show the driver the laser reading?

13. Do the other police officers show the driver the laser reading?

Also I have a general question. Suppose, the officer would say that he told me that the speed of my car was 80 (actually, he told me that it was 84) or he would say that he showed me the radar reading (or he would say something else that is not true.) In this case, there will be his words against mine. So, what should be or done in such a case? Thanks.

If the disclosure is really only what you received, it's a slam dunk. That being said, those are some of the absolute worst questions.

Why is the colour of your shirt or whether or not you were wearing khakis relevant? It's a speeding ticket. The officer is not required to remember what was on your dash, what color your seats were, or what was hanging from your mirror. Unless you're defending a seat belt violation and want to make a point about your shirt colour being the same as your belt, the question is a big waste of time.

Why is sunglasses versus glasses relevant?

Why 100 questions about showing the device? The officer is not required to show you anything, end of story. Whether he showed you, didn't show you, shows anyone, good practice to show, or other police officers show is irrelevant.

Your disclosure is missing the most critical information and you're arguing about what you're wearing. Start at the basics.

bend wrote:If the disclosure is really only what you received, it's a slam dunk. That being said, those are some of the absolute worst questions.

Why is the colour of your shirt or whether or not you were wearing khakis relevant? It's a speeding ticket. The officer is not required to remember what was on your dash, what color your seats were, or what was hanging from your mirror. Unless you're defending a seat belt violation and want to make a point about your shirt colour being the same as your belt, the question is a big waste of time.

Why is sunglasses versus glasses relevant?

Why 100 questions about showing the device? The officer is not required to show you anything, end of story. Whether he showed you, didn't show you, shows anyone, good practice to show, or other police officers show is irrelevant.

Your disclosure is missing the most critical information and you're arguing about what you're wearing. Start at the basics.

Thank you, Bend. I do appreciate your reply. Like I said, I have no experience with cross-examination. So, it leaves just the following questions:

Would the following questions be useful during cross-examination?

1. What color is my car?

2. How many doors does my car have?

(The color of my car and the number of doors are not mentioned in the computer made "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text" provided to me as the officers notes, but probably they can get this info by using the plate)

3. What did you tell me about the speed of my car?

4. Why did you tell me that the speed was 84 but "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text", says Actual Speed: 80"?

A general question: Suppose, the officer would say that he told me that the speed of my car was 80 (actually, he told me that it was 84) In this case, there will be his words against mine. So, what should be or done in such a case?

As for disclosure, do you think I should make another request for disclosure? If yes, could you please let me know what do you think about the following request? Thanks.

General Request

We are scheduled to appear in courtroom to answer the above charge. With regard to the above matter and in light of the guidelines set out in R. v. Stinchcombe, 1991 CANLII 45 (S.C.C.), and subsequent cases, we are requesting that you provide us with all relevant information and documentation in order to make full answer and defense to the above charge.

Specific Request

Without limiting the generality of the above request, we ask that you also include:

o A copy of both sides of the officers copies of the ticket (Notices of Offence) and any notes from the officer pertaining this case. Alternatively given weve received a copy of one side of the officers copies of the ticket and the computer made "Ontario Offence Ticket in Narative Text", please provide a signed letter by appropriate authorities confirming that no other documents of this nature exist and will be used in this case.

o A typed version of any hand written notes including the hand written notes related to the make, model, and serial number of the unit used to measure the velocity of the car, its owners manual and the officers training record specific to the said unit

o The following records (in readable form) relating to the incident, and to training, internal directives, policies and the identity of various kinds of equipment used by the Police:

1. Occurrence report

3. Video /Audio Evidence

4. The make, model, and serial number of the unit used to measure the velocity of the car (radar/laser or specification of the other unit), and its full owners manual (all pages).

5. The officers training record specific to the said unit

6. Any repair history of the unit

7. Calibration Procedures

8. Records of the calibration of the unit used to measure the velocity

9. Official procedure for radar/laser equipment testing and operator training standards

10. Traffic Stop and Vehicle Search Procedures

o Any other evidence the Prosecutor intends to use at trial

Missing Information

We also request that you advise us of any information, which is not being disclosed and an explanation for such non-disclosure.

If you require further information from us or have any questions regarding our request for disclosure please do not hesitate to contact us.

Thank you.