“Help To Decipher Notes - 109 In 80”

Hello,

I was pulled over for doing 123 in an 80 zone on highway 7 near Peterborough. The officer reduced it to 109 in an 80. It was HIGHLY unlikely that I was going 109, let alone 123, so for the merit of it I am taking this to court. Court case mid January.

Other notes:

- The officer was quite rude to me, saying I was passing on the right etc. It is true that I passed on the right, but on a two lane highway to avoid someone who was left turning, and this action is not illegal

- I was moving with traffic, with a vehicle in front of me, to the right of that, and behind me to the right.

(So I am not sure how he could radar test my speed from in front, considering there was a vehicle immediately in front of me)

- I do not have any recent tickets, which shows that I do have good driving habits, considering I commute 2+ hours there then back on a highways daily, no tickets

Do I have any case?

What are the chances of the court bumping it back to 123?

In my opinion the aid of a paralegal does not help much, unless it ensures a win to keep from getting a record on my insurance. But I also feel I have no case here, which is quite unfortunate as there is no way I was going 43 over...

I would send another disclosure request and say "I can not read or understand the officers notes. Please send a typed copy along with any meaning of abbreviations used."

- 1-307

- GenIIselect 23107 (Genesis II Select Radar and Serial)

- ST 1730 (Start Time 5:30pm)

- Sunny, Dry, 22c, 80 (Posted 80)

- Mobile/Opposite/Approach

- ?

- me e/b (eastbound) @ (at) Henderson Line

- L1 (Lane 1) @ (at) 86

- Veh (Vehicle) w/b (westbound) l2 (Lane 2), l1 (lane 1), l2 (lane 2)

- 50m (50 metres) @ (at) 123

- ?

- red mazda 6

- Lone occ (occupant)

- ?

- ET 0430 (End Time 4:30am

jsherk wrote:I would send another disclosure request and say "I can not read or understand the officers notes. Please send a typed copy along with any meaning of abbreviations used."

Thank you for the advice! Yes, I did just send for second disclosure.

jsherk wrote:I would send another disclosure request and say "I can not read or understand the officers notes. Please send a typed copy along with any meaning of abbreviations used."

This advice will help you with a more digestible and readable version of the officer's notes.

The officer has included 'R' in the code box to indicate the roadside reduction in the rate of speed (from a 4 demerit point offence down to a 3 demerit point offence). The original rate of speed also appears to be included in the Officer's notes. With the original rate of speed being 43 km/h over the posted speed limit, the prospect of a lesser offence being negotiated in minimal...possibly a generic signage offence. However, I am generally very careful to caution clients on these cases that if the matter can not be resolved before trial, it is generally not advisable to run the trial as the Prosecutor will likely seek to have the rate of speed amended back up to the original rate of speed.

It's hard to tell from the notes, but I do not think the officer included anyting with regards to testing the unit. Will need to see typed version though to confirm this.

jsherk wrote:It's hard to tell from the notes, but I do not think the officer included anyting with regards to testing the unit. Will need to see typed version though to confirm this.

I think the bottom line means it was tested at 4:30am. No notes on when it was tested again later, so I did request a second disclosure asking for them to provide evidence (notes) on the testing of the device.

If they do not provide any notes or evidence, do you think the justice will accept simply the officer's word of mouth testimony that he tested it? Or is this grounds for dismissal?

I believe the ST and ET lines in the officer's notes refer to testing of the RADAR unit.

lolwut wrote:I believe the ST and ET lines in the officer's notes refer to testing of the RADAR unit.

Thanks! Ha I think I was reading your post elsewhere too while researching for tips.

I feel like I am toast here, only hope is officer no-show. It's tempting to just pay it off to avoid the stress, but I think I will go in anyways just for the record so I can state my futile case.

kbo wrote:

lolwut wrote:I believe the ST and ET lines in the officer's notes refer to testing of the RADAR unit.

Thanks! Ha I think I was reading your post elsewhere too while researching for tips.

I feel like I am toast here, only hope is officer no-show. It's tempting to just pay it off to avoid the stress, but I think I will go in anyways just for the record so I can state my futile case.

An option always open to you is to pay the fine in advance of the trial date and the court will cancel the trial. The Officer was kind and used discretion in reducing the ticket at roadside, which is a bird in the hand so to speak as far as mitigating the penalties.

kbo wrote:Thanks! Ha I think I was reading your post elsewhere too while researching for tips.

It could the start and end of the officers shift, testing times, or both. It's also not uncommon for an officer to write testing procedures on a separate page so they're not writing the same thing over and over again.

You can always ask for clarification, but that's something you should be doing before your court date. Most likely you'll show up, the officer will sit down with you and clarify anything you have trouble with, and your trial will either take place or be adjourned.

bend wrote:It could the start and end of the officers shift, testing times, or both. It's also not uncommon for an officer to write testing procedures on a separate page so they're not writing the same thing over and over again.

You can always ask for clarification, but that's something you should be doing before your court date. Most likely you'll show up, the officer will sit down with you and clarify anything you have trouble with, and your trial will either take place or be adjourned.