OHTA.ca

I got a speeding ticket back in June which I pleaded not guilty to. My main reason being that the ticket states that I committed the offence of driving at 129 km/h in a posted 90 km/h. But it was on Hwy 400 and I know it is 100 km/h.

My court date has been set. Maybe I should have researched more because reading some of these threads I see that this is not a fatal error and can be corrected in court? Am I SOL?

I should also add that the set fine is $108.75, which I believe is for 29 km/h over not 39 km/h over.

My plan is to argue the following;

1) I haven't had a speeding ticket in 14 years of driving and do not think I was going that fast. I recall that I was at the crest of a hill while passing an erratic braker, which would have been my max speed. The overpass where he had a tripod setup was about 400 m away (google maps). This alone questions the accuracy of the device, but I'm not sure how to submit this as fact.

2) I am not guilty for "committing the offence of speeding 129 km/h in a posted 90 km/h". I have google street views of the 100 km/h signs just before the overpass, but isn't that common knowledge? I find it strange that if they were working a speed trap that they would get the posted limit wrong?

The worse case is they amend the ticket to read 129 km/h in a posted 100 km/h and the set fine amount is unchanged. I guess I have nothing to lose, but would appreciate any advice.

Thanks

If the set fine is wrong R. v. Monahan et al., 2009 ONCJ 298 (CanLII)

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj298.html might apply.

Agreed: The charge (speeding 129 km/h in a 90 km/h zone) doesn't match the set fine. Did the location simply say "Hwy 400" or was it more specific?

MackAttack wrote:. The overpass where he had a tripod setup was about 400 m away (google maps). This alone questions the accuracy of the device, but I'm not sure how to submit this as fact.

Sounds like lidar which is target specific and very accurate. Would only be a beam width of 1.2m at 400m. Most vehicles are about 1.7m -2.0m wide, lane is 3.75m wide. Even at 1000m, beam is 3m wide, less than the width of a lane.

But a sweep/panning error is possible on overpasses, less so when roadside. I wonder if the full alignment check was performed?

panning/sweeping - I have never seen these types of errors. Yes, I have seen many a youtube video showing the errors, but they all have the same common denominator = lidar not being used properly. Plus they seem to all have a camera looking thru the eyepiece, so then the person is not using their eye for proper focusing onto the target....wonder why there are error(s)

Overpass vs roadside = same result. Whether you are 5m higher than the target or 5m to the side of the target, there is no difference.

Overpass vs roadside = same result. Whether you are 5m higher than the target or 5m to the side of the target, there is no difference.

I would beg to differ. From the side of the road you would be more likely to maintain the target of the front plain of the car. From the overpass, your target might be the front licence plate, but your have now introduced the hood and road as well.

And as much as the the youtube videos may have a camera in the lens, it still shows that the errors are possible. It still comes down to the officers training and ability to identify when an error is occuring.

Reflections wrote:And as much as the the youtube videos may have a camera in the lens, it still shows that the errors are possible. It still comes down to the officers training and ability to identify when an error is occuring.

of course there are errors with the cameras being used....simply the unit is not being used properly. When used properly I have never had an error. So either use it properly with no errors or use incorrectly and get an error

It was a specific location on the Highway "radar identified". How do you know if any of these errors were applicable. Request a disclosure asap?

I would not attorn the jurisdiction to this one and see if it gets quashed. If not file an appeal. WI Win situation in any event (unless you make a mistake and actually show up for your trial).

If the officer says you were speeding 129 km/h in a 90 km/h zone, the fine is not correct and the ticket should be quashed (London v. Young case). I'd follow Traffic Law and Simon Borys' advice here. If you do not show up for trial, the Justice of the Peace has to examine the ticket for fatal errors, like incorrect set fine/total payable. As the fine you were given does not match the fine for the offence described on the ticket, it should count as a fatal error. However, the JP may err and you may have to appeal (again as Traffic Law said)...