OHTA.ca

Hello,

I was hoping i could get some insight/help with some traffic issue im currently facing.

I was issued a ticket for speeding 73 in a 50 last year, and obviously i took it to court, the trial for which was yesterday.

The ticket was given to me in the right lane heading southbound on Bathurst St. I was driving behind a car (Ford F150), there was another car behind me, and one to my left. The officer took the shot with a radar gun, and signaled for a vehicle to pull over. The guy in front of me, naturally, pulled over. The cop then also signaled me to pull over, at this point i became confused. Then he proceeded to let the guy in the F150 go, the guy i was driving behind, and gave me a ticket... I was driving my fathers car, a new Saab 93 Aero, which is why i believe he gave me the ticket, but that's a whole other story (I was 21 at the time)...

I took the ticket to court and had my trial yesterday. I chose to take the ticket to trial, and not accept the reduced offer, because i feel as a matter of principal that i was wronged. This is how the trial went.

Officers Statement:

- Radar was calibrated several times during the day

- It was a clear day and he could make everything out

- He had a clear shot of me

- I was gaining on the car in front of me

My Defense:

- I was not driving 73, i recall i was going slower, under 60 i believe.

- I was driving with the flow of traffic around me

The verdict: Guilty

- I didnt specify an exact speed with which i was driving

- I have no proof that i was going that speed even if i had specified it

- Driving with the flow of traffic doesn't matter, and they took the cops word over mine on that i was gaining since i had no hard proof of the speed, and officer had radar shot.

Alas i was found guilty.

Apparently going with the flow of traffic around you is not a valid defense. At the trial the officer said that equipment was all calibrated, and he confirmed that i was driving in a pack of cars, but claimed that i was gaining on the car in front of me and that's why he singled me out.

What i want to know, is if i can/should appeal the conviction?

1. Will i have another option at the appeal to settle for a reduced fine with the prosecutor?

2. If not, can i change my defense on the second trial? and if so what would be a more reasonable defense? I never admitted to speeding, i said i must have been going under 60 at the trial but did not specify a speed, can i swear at the appeal that now i remember i was going 50 and with the traffic around me? and that the big F150 in front of me may have affected his radar?

Thanks for any help.

George

You need some grounds to appeal the conviction on. Based on what you'd said so far, I'm not sure what grounds you have to reopen the matter.

An appeal is not a retrial - you do not get to call evidence again or re-argue the case. An appeal is to argue about how the trial malfunctioned - either because it wasn't fair or because the judge misapprehended the evidence or misapplied the law to the evidence. As Stanton said, I'm not sure what, from your post, you feel your grounds of appeal are. Certainly that you disagree with the verdict is not one.