OHTA.ca

I received my first speeding ticket on Monday - allegedly going 60km/h in a 40km/h zone and I want to fight the ticket. I could use any advice/pointers on this anyone has that can help.

Details:

1. The cop did not show me the reading from the radar gun.

2. I live on the street where the alleged offense took place - the street has 3 schools on. I'm well aware of the 3 schools and that there are frequently a lot of kids around so I drive cautiously on this street.

3. The is on a hill, I was pulled over just before ascending the hill - is it possible the cop got the speed of a car descending in the opposite lane?

4. I have a clean driving record.

I have gone to the court house to request a date to fight the ticket. I was asked if I wanted to meet with a prosecutor ahead of time to try and resolve outside of court. I said yes, but after reading other posts I think it's pretty much for them to try to get me to plead guilty to a lesser charge, which I will not do. Is it a bad idea to meet the prosecutor ahead of time? Will they just try to gather more evidence against me?

1. Does not have to unless you ask and even then as long as the cop can explain why it was not locked in it is still valid

2.big deal...No bearing

3. No radars work in one direction at a time...Or he may have used LIDAR

4. again So...People with clean records speed..

OPS

You've already gone through the first step, which is setting up the trial date. When you get your trial date, you can then make a disclosure request to see what the evidence is against you. The disclosure request would basically include a copy of the officer's notes, and the relevant parts with the radar (or lidar) manual (testing and use of the device). This way, you can build a case to defend yourself, or decide what other options you want to pursue.

Here's a website with some useful information:

Just to note, when it comes to the "disclosure" part of it, that website suggests you ask for a whole bevvy of information which you not only won't need, but it won't be disclosed (e.g. witness criminal records & occupation, will-say statements, etc.) When the time comes, you want to ask for a full copy of the officer's notes, the radar/lidar manual, and any photographic/video evidence, if it exists. When you get the disclosure package, you can post the info here and we can see what we can do to help.

Your defences could focus on things like whether the device was tested properly, used properly, if the officer did a "tracking history" correctly, did the officer lose sight of your vehicle after the speed reading was obtained, etc. It all depends on what the officer observed.

Just to add to what OPS Copper said, the officer has no obligation to show you a reading from the speed measuring device. Of all the times I've been stopped, I've been shown the reading only once. It doesn't help your case, unfortunately. A clean driving record also only helps if you want to plea-bargain, which you said you didn't want to.

FYI - if convicted, you'll get 3 demerit points and probably $95 total payable (the JP can adjust this at trial). A plea-bargain to 15-over would get you 0 demerit points and $52.50 total payable.

I have requested my disclosure for the ticket and am looking for some advice. The first thing I notice in the officers notes is that "[my] vehicle was found to be travelling 61km/h at a range of 75metres" and later on it says I was issued a provincial offences notice for "a charge or speeding at a reduced rate of speed of 60km/h in a 40km/h zone".

From what I've read online and seen in other postings, people say that if the officer reduces the speed on the ticket that it should have a code "R" on it. However my ticket does not have an "R" on it, nor did the officer tell me he was reducing it. I know it's only a reduction of 1 km/h but is this error of not having an "R" on the ticket when it was reduced a fatal error? i.e. enough to get it thrown out?

The ticket should indicate whether it was reduced but that is not a fatal error.

Simon Borys wrote:The ticket should indicate whether it was reduced but that is not a fatal error.

Is it enough to build a case around? I.e. if he made a mistake not indicating it was reduced then he could have also made a mistake in pulling over the wrong car, or calibrating the laser.... am I on the wrong track?

Wrong track I think, if your suggesting one mistake might have led to another without their being a direct and articulable link between the two issues. Every police officer makes mistakes and I don't think the court will automatically accept that that fact means the rest of your ticket wasn't proper or correct.

Simon Borys wrote:Wrong track I think, if your suggesting one mistake might have led to another without their being a direct and articulable link between the two issues. Every police officer makes mistakes and I don't think the court will automatically accept that that fact means the rest of your ticket wasn't proper or correct.

Do you have any advice for forming a proper case then? Do you need any more information from the disclosure?

I think that, with regards to the issues you have posted already, OPS Copper and Radar Identified have (rather bluntly) already addressed them and I don't have anything to add. Also, the missing 'R' is not enough of an issue to build a defence around.

The only other thing I can think to suggest, if you are of the opinion that you weren't acually speeding and the officer might have measured the vehicle going in the opposite direction, is that you might want to look into whether he was using a radar or a laser and if he was using a radar, was it in toward mode, away mode, or both.

If he was using a laser he would have had to target your vehicle specifically through the scope, so there is no chance he got the other vehicle. If he was using a radar in toward mode, there is also no chance he caught the other vehicle. If, on the other hand, he was using a radar in away mode, then he couldn't have measured your vehicle at all. If he was using a radar in both modes then he would have to articulate how he is certain it measured your vehicle and not the other one. That is difficult to do as it involved the relative size and speed of each vehicle.

The information as to what type of device he used should be in his notes, but it is unlikely that, if he was using a radar, he noted which mode it was operating in. Perhaps the only way you will be able to find that out is by asking him on the stand. If he is unable to remember which mode it was operating in, it might raise reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of the reading and the validity of the ticket.

I just want to make a note, for you and anyone else reading this, that I'm not trying to give advice on how to beat the ticket just because someone sped and got caught and now you don't want to pay the ticket. (I'm not suggestion that this is your situation, I'm just saying...) I give advice to people because I think it's fair that they should have the knowledge to be able to hold the crown accountable for having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the offence. It might seem like an irrelevant distinction, but I think it's an important philosophy to espouse.

Simon Borys wrote: If he was using a radar in both modes then he would have to articulate how he is certain it measured your vehicle and not the other one. That is difficult to do as it involved the relative size and speed of each vehicle..

our units show us "T and A"

61kmh/ at 71Meters = laser and correct car.

OPS

He gave a speed of 75 km so I thought it might be an estimate while using a radar, but laser makes a lot more sense.

Hwybear, which radar do you use?

sixcardkitty wrote:

Do you need any more information from the disclosure?

If you could type out the officer's notes (removing any personal details that may identify you or the officer specifically), that would help. Speeding offences are not the easiest to beat, though. As Simon Borys said, it's an absolute liability offence. The only defence to it is defence of necessity, which basically means you had to speed due to some life-threatening emergency.

Simon Borys wrote:Hwybear, which radar do you use?

Decatur Genesis II Select Directional and

Decatur Genesis VP Directional

hwybear wrote:Decatur Genesis II Select Directional and Decatur Genesis VP Directional

Those are both great. I used the VP Directional and I liked it a lot. It was a nice upgrade from the MuniQuip KGP radars we had before that. It does indeed show whether you're reading a vehicle going towards or away from you, but not all do that so I think it might still be relevant in some situations what direction it was being used in.