“Speeding 22km/h Over The Posted Speed Limit.”

While this thread has gone on to other topics, I'll post on the original issue of your ticket.

1. You were speeding.

2. Read #1 again. It is an absolute liability charge at the moment and no excuse or explanation including "hey, everybody's doing it", or an analysis of variable rates of velocity, or distance between chevrons, or what lane you chose to drive in, or who was passing whom will work. Nothing.

3. You have to look at fighting your charge in one of two ways:

• technical arguments
• preventing foundation

4. So start off with a solid disclosure request and look for potential Charter arguments under sections 7, 11a and 11b. And with respect to foundation, check out R. v. Martin for an example. While that case was lidar, your case will either be pacing or front antennae radar. Focus on the merits of your case and forget any excuse or justification. They will distract you from what you need to do.

And post back here as you work through this. There are a lot of people here with considerable experience. We can help.

Thank you Ticket Combat,

Well I haven't picked option 3 yet. I am busy with exams and projects right now, and have to travel from St. Catharines to Whitby to go to the office to hand in my decision to fight this.

I have selected next Monday to do this.

I guess the first thing after that would be to try and get full disclosure.

From your website it seems like the timescales for everything will be quite far apart.

So 1 thing at a time.

P.S. Too bad this is an absolute liability charge... , so I get your point any of this story only incriminates myself, so focus on the accuracy of how the officer obtained my speed. However first make sure I get full disclosure!

As well I am guessing from your website that the 401 would have some by-law to make it so it can go 100km/h and not 80km/h... since I was caught in a posted 100km/h zone, would they have to show that it was a 100km/h zone? As well as show me the by-law if I request full disclosure?

Thanks for your help people, I will post back with anything which happens for help.

You can file at any court house. Call the one closest to you to make sure.

Im so sick of this if they are gonna make it 100 they should start driving 100 to and then enforce it.

The limit is a joke even the cops cruise at this speed always.

Why don't you and your friends get together and role down the 401 all the way through the GTA locked at exactly 100 km/hr and sit in the 2 left lanes.

If we all drove 100 we wouldn't get anywhere they're would be so much traffic.

The real speed that 85 % of the cars are going is no where near 100.

Most are usually 115-120 the faster ones (left lane) usually 125-135.

Here is my question people keep talking about cops having the right to speed "within lawful execution of their duties."

What does this mean.

Just driving on patrol, chasing someone down.

I mean if i am late for court and i get pulled over and tell the officer i was late for court i get a ticket.

But if a cop is late for court he can now speed as much as he likes to get there on time?

If i am done work and want to go home i am supposed to drive the limit.

but if the cop is done his shift he is freewill to speed alll he wants.

I mean its one thing for a cop to be going to an emergency, catch someone, etc, then he puts his lights on speeds up to catch them.

But every time i see an HSD he is speeding usually like everyone else 15-30 some of them are ridiculous but that is a very few.

So there whole shift these guys are "within lawful executions of their duty."

It's one thing to be upset by going 122 cause everyone else does it. Thats probally just the flow of traffic along with the fact that most officers probally drive that fast anyways.

It's such a joke and there is nothing we can even do about it. I bet if you called *OPP and told them one of their own was speedng they would take it as a funny joke.

I guess Robert Tapp and Heidi Fischer know all about that to.

Remember the first time they put the 50 over and they wanted to post the names of these people?

When Fischer got caught no one mention what happened a few months ago when she crashed into an old lady for going 168 up a hill crest.

Her car never even got impounded, not even her personal car, they "parked" the vehicle at an OPP lot for security purposes.

And we never heard what happened on march 24th either, full pay and everything. What a joke.

Then this guy goes 122 and gets a ticket what gives?

Does anyone remember Gord Thompson the teacher who got one on the 401 for going 118. Then he went 100 with a friend in the 2 left lanes and caused a 6 km traffic jam and boy were those cops mad at him.

When that one guy went 250 on the 400, and the 231 on the DVP it was not a big deal.

Whenever one of their own gets caught its always a small story with no comment.

401Driver wrote:If the MTO says stay in the right hand lane, which makes more sense than the centre, I will start doing that from now on in 3 lane or more, instead of centre.

As I said, I always found that rule weird.

You know what, I want to thank you for being willing to change. I have a lot of respect for truckers, and I think it shows in your attitude towards driving. I do the same thing you do with flashing the trucks in when their trailer clears my car, but I cycle my taillights to thank them where you flash your four-ways. I don't think I've ever seen anyone else do that on the roads, aside from truckers themselves.

tdrive2 - a left-lane protest would just result in charges of 'fail to keep right' or 'unnecessary slow driving'.

401Driver wrote:As well I am guessing from your website that the 401 would have some by-law to make it so it can go 100km/h and not 80km/h... since I was caught in a posted 100km/h zone, would they have to show that it was a 100km/h zone? As well as show me the by-law if I request full disclosure?

No by-law required. It should be covered under Reg 619. If you successfully argued no by-law, then the default speed limit applies, which is 80. Your fine and demerit points will increase. You don't want to go down that road.

401driver wrote:If the MTO says stay in the right hand lane, which makes more sense than the centre, I will start doing that from now on in 3 lane or more, instead of centre.

I agree with Squishy here. If you're willing to change your habits, kudos to you.

As TC mentions, no by-law is required for the 401 speed limit of 100 km/h, as it is administered/controlled by the province of Ontario, not a municipality. In your disclosure request, one tactic that sometimes trips up the Crown is to ask for the radar manual (if that was used). If they want a reason, ask to see specifically the sections on how it is to be used "in the field" so to speak, and how it is to be tested. Some Prosecutors stonewall the request and, if the defendant (you) are quick enough with it, you can file a motion to quash the charge on grounds of improper disclosure. There are many avenues to go through here, though, that's not the only one available to you.

ticketcombat wrote:

401Driver wrote:As well I am guessing from your website that the 401 would have some by-law to make it so it can go 100km/h and not 80km/h... since I was caught in a posted 100km/h zone, would they have to show that it was a 100km/h zone? As well as show me the by-law if I request full disclosure?

No by-law required. It should be covered under Reg 619. If you successfully argued no by-law, then the default speed limit applies, which is 80. Your fine and demerit points will increase. You don't want to go down that road.

Ah ok... for some reason you made it sound like the case would get thrown out because of no by-law presented. Because my ticket said it was in a 100km/h zone, they would have to prove it was indeed a 100km/h zone. But if the default applies anyways, which is 80, I see, no point.

Thanks for the kudos. Well I do change to things which make sense, and will increase safety. The only reason I did the centre lane previously, is because that is what it said to do in the driving book I had read. It never made sense, and even my father said he disagreed with it, and it should be the right lane unless you are passing(or in Toronto, always passing).

You have to remember I do come from a smaller town, Cornwall or St. Catharines now, and the traffic is not like it is in the GTA. So all that stuff that is going around you can get a bit overwhelming even for the best drivers out there. Therefore, I have taken measures to reduce that. It has worked for me for years. I find it an easy way through, less to worry about, less action around you, etc... I don't think everybody should adapt it. Each person has to find a way of driving depending on their circumstances which they feel the most comfortable and safe at. My ideas about Toronto may not be what someone else feels.

It is the world's busiest and widest(unrestricted lanes) highway, just google or wiki that one. It can be overwhelming to lots of drivers. I know my mother refuses and is afraid to even drive through Toronto.

I find that speed whether fast or slow isn't really what causes or induces accidents. It is relative speed to what the flow is doing.

If you are 40 over or 40 under the speed of the flow of traffic, you are a hazard, and the more over or under you are the more of a hazard you are. If everybody is travelling 200, and the road is safe to travel at that speed(curves wise) and you are then you are alright. No matter what the speed limit is, it is these people who are weaving in and out of traffic, or the people who are WAY slower than everybody else who cause or induce more accidents for one simple reason. Their actions are not predictable, everybody has less reaction time to these scenarios because of the difference in speed, and they don't stand out.

It is the difference in speed, and not speed itself which is a bigger factor. If I really need to I can create a traffic simulation program to prove this(I am taking a Bachelor in Computer Science).

You can just look to the scenario where you are following safely behind someone(a truck) doing the same speed as you, and lets say they suddenly merge over in front of you, and in front of him, is now a car going 50km/h less than you. Sorry, but you are now approaching him, if you are going 100km/h, at 50km/h rate instead of 0km/h rate from that other guy, your safe following distance, is now not so safe, and better put on the brakes, and better hope that guy behind you is not following too closely or else there will be an accident. It is just common sense.

Actually believe it or not uncontrolled intersections allow more traffic to flow through faster than controlled intersections according to one of my friend's papers. However this paper did not cover safety, obviously, just more cars got through in less time.

Also as for the autobahn, I had the luxury of working in Germany last summer. So I got to travel on it. Their road rules are 50km/h in the city, 100km/h in the country, and unlimited on freeways(autobahn, yes it is the whole network not just one highway), unless otherwised signed. In city regions it is slowed down to 130km/h.

As well there is no such thing as drinking and driving laws. At least for prevention. You are allowed to drink then drive on any and all German roads legally, HOWEVER... if you do get into an accident or another violation of the road laws and even have 0.01 alcohol in your system, you are automatically at fault or share of fault, even if you wouldn't have been at fault otherwise. Also the penalty of whatever infraction is multiplied by 10. So nobody really does it in fear of that consequence.

Also can drink alcohol in public, walking down the sidewalk or on the train if you want. No public intoxication law either. Just help home if you are far gone. Allowed public nudity in all public parks, and nude sunbathing is popular on a nice day.

Different culture, but I have to agree with some of it. It allows the police to actually focus on actual crimes and things which are dangerous rather than meanial stuff.

Note: I am not condoning drinking and driving, just how they handle it allows for less police to worry about it. I guess it is the difference of overpunishing the consequences instead of the what ifs. Either way, nobody should ever drive when they have had a drink.

Hi, I had my court date today and I lost and had to pay the fine. The judge agreed with the prosecution that the officer paced me at 122km/h.

He also had a Genesis something saying 122km/h, officer said his spedometer was close within a few kms of 122.

Thing is I thought it would go my way based on no calibration record for either the spedometer or propoper maintance procedures on the Genesis, and the officer having no recollection of when either of them were calibrated/maintained. As well I made a note that I didn't believe he had an independant recolection due to the officer seeming like he knew nothing which wasn't noted down. At one point while the prosecustion asked him a question about another matter he replied "I don't know it wasn't in my notes".

When asked about the Genesis by me the officer stated it is routine to calibrate it every morning and evening(or maintain, it was something like that), when asked by me if he actually did it and at what time, he couldn't give me a straight answer, and went blabbering that it was normal procedure, and he didn't have it down in his notes whether he did it, and it was unknown. So I think I got the Genesis stuff out due to that.

So the judge got me on pacing, reading the calibrated spedometer. I questioned the officer concerning its calibration, and when it was calibrated during that week and when, the officer didn't know when the spedometer was calibrated, wasn't in his notes. Also the prosecution offered no calibration record as well. Stating they didn't have to they could just go off what the officer stated. Refering to R vs Pappas and R vs Roshani-Kalkhoran(basically trying to plague me with paper work). I guess looking back at it I should have asked for a 30 minute recess so I could go over these documents in more details, since I found flaws in how the prosecution used the documents to refer to my case, but didn't. Foolish on my part now, but remember I was nervous and this was my first time ever in court.

Therefore since there wasn't any calibration records of either the Genesis or spedometer, shouldn't both looks from the officer of the devices been invalidated and therefore I couldn't be convicted of pacing. As well I thought I made a sufficient point that I did not believe the officer had an independant recolection of the events that day, due to him not being able to tell me if he did his calibration of the Genesis before and after and what time.

So question 1. Do I have grounds for appeal? If so what?

2. Is appeal worthwhile, I was told when I tried to get a record of proceedings that I would need to pay for 3 for appeal and this would cost me 215$, which is more than the 99$ fine I have to pay. I thought this information was public info? shouldn't it be free to me? Also they stated I'd have to go back to Whitby to file for appeal if I decided to do so, I am in St. Catharines anyway to file it from here within 15 days if I decide to do so.

3. Should I just pay the fine and get on with it, I would have a clean record if not for this ticket.

Any advice?

I wish I had the record of proceedings to see what exactly was said though. I admit I was a little nervous and perhaps my defense wasn't as focused as it should be raising perhaps the relevance of each thing in detail, and perhaps I should have went over the officer's stated events and pointed out why each of my points was relevant and how it invalidated the pacing thing, but I guess I thought this was for closing remarks, which I was saving for, which never happened. It went from me presenting my defense to hey here is the judge's saying. I guess I was confused a bit as my first try, as well the prosecution was trying to put paper work on me of precedants and even that bold statement that they did not need to present calibration records that the officers statement was enough, since if they were required to do that for every case it would overwhelm them and it should not be required for them to do so.

So just pay? or how to appeal from here perhaps without paying 215$ or any other charges, if you think I have grounds?

Note: A response from TicketCombat or any others who know more about these precedings that I do would be helpful, thanks.