OHTA.ca

Hi, first time user here.

The officer claims I was speeding 75KM/H in a 50KM/H zone. The officer reduced it to speeding 60K/H in a 50KM/H zone. I am prepared the accept the consequences that the charge may be amended to the higher speed since both charges would affect my insurance the same way. I don't know if I was speeding because that day I was busy thinking about getting to destination but I have been reviewing my dashcam footage.

I requested disclosure multiple times via fax. My court date is in 2 days but I haven't received any disclosure documents. I feel so stupid because I didn't realize I have to actively call the prosecution office to follow up on the disclosure request.

I also didn't know I have to file a section 7 Charter application (citing the lack of disclosure) to request a stay at least 20 days before my trial date.

I have dashcam footage to show the following:

The officer was waiting for me in a driveway for townhomes (car parked behind the sidewalk) in the straight section of the road that comes after a curved section of the road. I went to the exact same spot he was parked and took photos to support that the officer could not have seen me until I was about 130 to 140 metres away from him (distance from end of curve to his car), maybe even less because if I sit INSIDE my car, my view is blocked by trees along the inner side of the sidewalk. He said he had me on radar and my understanding of how radar works is that it bounces off my vehicle. If his eyes cannot see me, then his radar should not either? Could I argue that he cannot possibly have enough distance for his radar machine to properly measure me? I read online that radar machines require at least 150 metres to properly measure a moving vehicle?

Based on my dashcam I can see that from the point in time when I could see the front tip of the officer's car was at 43 seconds of the minute. Before I even passed his vehicle he started moving his vehicle at 49 seconds of the minute. There was only 6 seconds or even less of time (I say less because I think his radar could not have seen me until I was visible after the trees) that he could properly measure me on his radar machine, for him to read my speed and start his engine and step on gas. Is there any argument that he could not have done all these things in a mere 6 seconds?

My dashcam doesn't show the speed I travelled at but based on the time shown on my dashcam and the distance measured using google maps, I was travelling the distance of 140 metres in about 10 seconds. If I recalculate this into metres per second, I was travelling 14 metres per second. For reference, I believe 50KM/H is the equivalent of 13.89 metres per second and 60KM/H is the equivalent of 16.67 per second. So I think I was travelling in between 50KM/H and 60KM/H.

Questions:

1. Should I call the prosecution office tomorrow, the day before my trial? Should I go pick it up tomorrow if it is available?

2. Is there any point to file a section 7 Charter application tomorrow, the day before my trial?

3. Can I use my dashcam footage at any point in the trial? I read on another post that it's not recommended I be a witness or testify as I was in fact speeding so I don't know if I have any opportunity to present my findings?

4. Can I use my calculation about the meters per second in court to support I wasn't speeding?

Thanks in advance.

In regards to number 4, doesn't your calculations show you were travelling at 50-60 km/hr so you were speeding?

Sorry just wanted to edit the 3rd question I meant to say "IF" instead of "AS"

3. Can I use my dashcam footage at any point in the trial? I read on another post that it's not recommended I be a witness or testify "IF" I was in fact speeding so I don't know if I have any opportunity to present my findings?

argyll wrote:In regards to number 4, doesn't your calculations show you were travelling at 50-60 km/hr so you were speeding?

I agree, I wasn't going at 50KM/H but I also wasn't going at the 75KM/H that the officer claimed. I guess your point is if I bring this up then it's still lost cause?

1. Most likely they will have disclosure ready for you at the trial date, so just wait until then. If they give it to, then I would request an adjournment (new trial date) as you need time to review the disclosure and decide what you are going to do. If they do NOT have it ready, then I would ask the JP have the charge dropped because they are not ready to proceed and did not provide you with anything.

2. In my opinion no, because you have to give notice to both the attorney general of ontario and attorney general of canada at least 15 days before the trial. So most likely it will not be accepted and it will not be useful to you at all.

3. & 4. You would need to take the stand to offer up the video. In cross examination if the prosecutor asks you if you were speeding you have to answer honestly. If you say yes, the trial is over and nothing you say matters. The only other way around this is to show the video to the officer while the officer is on the stand and ask him questions about it. It might be possible to get the information out that you are trying to get out, but it would take a lot of thought and planning and knowledge of cross examination techniques to succeed.

jsherk wrote:1. Most likely they will have disclosure ready for you at the trial date, so just wait until then. If they give it to, then I would request an adjournment (new trial date) as you need time to review the disclosure and decide what you are going to do. If they do NOT have it ready, then I would ask the JP have the charge dropped because they are not ready to proceed and did not provide you with anything.

2. In my opinion no, because you have to give notice to both the attorney general of ontario and attorney general of canada at least 15 days before the trial. So most likely it will not be accepted and it will not be useful to you at all.

3. & 4. You would need to take the stand to offer up the video. In cross examination if the prosecutor asks you if you were speeding you have to answer honestly. If you say yes, the trial is over and nothing you say matters. The only other way around this is to show the video to the officer while the officer is on the stand and ask him questions about it. It might be possible to get the information out that you are trying to get out, but it would take a lot of thought and planning and knowledge of cross examination techniques to succeed.

Thank you for your responses. Can I also add the following questions for your opinion?

5. If I lose the case, I am aware that the JP will raise the charge back to 75KM/H. Can I bring up the fact that I recalculated my speed at that point to justify that the officer was inaccurate (while acknowledging my calculation may have room for error too).

argyll wrote:In regards to number 4, doesn't your calculations show you were travelling at 50-60 km/hr so you were speeding?

But you will be pitting google maps and a commercial dash cam against a law enforcement radar or laser speed measuring device. I don't anticipate a good outcome for you, I'm afraid.

To address some of your comments:

-You said " I don't know if I was speeding". In other words, you cannot say that you were NOT speeding. Your entire defense then that you THINK you weren't speeding based on some back of the napkin calculations based on google maps and your eyeballing of dashcam footage vs. the police speed measuring device (which was more then likely tested before and after this event - you'll need to see disclosure to confirm). Also when you say you don't know if you're speeding, then follow that up with "but I know I wasn't going 75", you are casting doubt on your own evidence. Consider the possibility that you actually were doing 75 km/hr. So unless the crown has some fatal issue with their case, you're going to need something more solid as a defense. Again, you'll need to review your disclosure for that.

-Speaking of disclosure, you're planning on filing a S. 7 challenge based on lack of disclosure. Is this going to be your first court date? Most likely you'll just be given disclosure on your court date. Others may have different experiences but I've never seen a challenge like this succeed on the first court date.

-Police RADAR works within 150m, and depending on the device used and the positioning of the vehicle etc, there is a good chance they saw or could see you before you could see them in your video. If it was laser there might even be a range at which your speed was measured.

-As others have said, really your next step is to get that disclosure and request an adjournment to review it prior to going to trial. Once you see the cards the crown is holding you can figure out what your next steps are.

Here is an update on the trial. I also attached the officer's notes - the only mistake I could find was the direction I was travelling in. I'd really appreciate hearing any feedback that anyone might have. Thank you so much.

• Signed in with prosecutor who said she saw disclosure was requested and outstanding. Prosecutor said hang tight the officer hasn't signed in yet.

• Officer shows up 5 min late and signs in.

• P hands me the officer's notes and says I might want to request another trial date.

• I am called to stand. The issue of disclosure outstanding is brought up by the prosecutor.

• The JP says I can review the officer's notes today and the trial can restart later today.

• I said that I won't enough time to prepare a proper defense and I didn't receive all the items in my disclosure request. JP asked if I have my trial notice with me and after I said Yes, she asked if I reviewed the website at the bottom and I said no but I referred to other resources. She asked if I plan to hire legal help and I said no I intend to defend myself.

• We started to review each item in my disclosure request and the JP and P commented on each one (their comments are in italics):

o A full copy of the officer's notes, typed if not legible; - a photocopy was provided at the trial

o If short-form writing is used in the officer's notes, please have the officer provide an explanation for the short forms; - spoke with officer to clarify things I couldn't read or understand

o A copy of both sides of the officers copy of the ticket (Notice of Offence); - JP clarified with P that nothing was on the back so I don't need a copy.

o Any statements made by the defendant; - Think prosecutor said statements were noted in officer's notebook.

o Information about the speed monitoring device used in the alleged offence; -JP asked for clarification of my request and I said I meant the make and model which I received in the notes today.

o The make, model, manufacture date, software revision, and repair history log of the said speed monitoring device; -Think prosecution said the software and repair history log would not be available to prosecution.

o A copy of the manufacturer's specifications for testing the said speed monitoring device; -testing papers were provided to me by the prosecution office afterwards. 1 page only and cover page of manual.

o A full copy of the operators manual, including the calibration requirements and frequency for said speed monitoring device; -P said I would need to book an appointment with the prosecution office to review the manual.

o A copy of the officers training record, and certificate of qualification specific to the said speed monitoring device for the last 12 months; -JP said defendant can ask the officer during the recess. I forgot to ask as was distracted with clarifying his notes but was able to ask when I took stand again and the officer stated he could not remember right now so P said I will have to submit another request.

o A detailed description of the settings the said speed monitoring device was in at the specific time of the alleged offence; -JP asked me to clarify and I said I received this information in the notes.

o A copy of the officer's log for testing of the said speed monitoring device on the alleged offence day; -P said this information was in the notes.

o A copy of the calibration history of the said speed monitoring device on the alleged offence day; -P said this information was not available to the prosecution office.

o An indication of whether the engine of the officer's police vehicle was on or off as the officer was operating the said speed monitoring device; -JP asked why I need this. I explained that the road I was travelling on had a bend and that there were a row of tall trees that may have blocked his view because he was parked in a driveway. JP asked me to get to my point and I said let's say for example the officer only had 6 seconds from the time he could possible see me to the time he started to pull out of the driveway, if his vehicle was on, whether the vehicle engine was on would determine whether he had enough time to properly operate the radar device. JP said I can ask the officer today. I forgot to ask but I can put that in the next disclosure request.

o Any photographic or video evidence if it exists and the Crown intends to use it at trial; -P said none were used.

o Certified copy of s.128 of the Highway Traffic Act; and -JP and P said that's available online.

o Any other document or information that the Crown may rely on at trial. -P said nothing else.

• JP asked if we addressed everything today. I clarified that I still need time to prepare my defence and need an adjournment. JP she said she'd get to the adjournment later. JP says she wanted to make sure we covered everything so that next time I come back I can't say we are missing anything.

• Recess, I went to talk to officer and clarified which part of his notes weren't relevant. P came to get me and said I will get a new date from JP and then after the trial I need to go to the prosecution office to get the test pages and submit a new request for the outstanding items.

• P asked me if I am aware that there's a possibility the charges will be raised up and I said Yes.

• I was called to stand again. JP asked if I got everything and I said I forgot to ask about officer's training and she said ask now and officer said he doesn't recall at the moment so P said to submit another request.

• JP asked again if I had everything and I clarified whether the user manual was available online and P said no and said I can come in and see it. P said she's never even looked at the manual and JP agreed and said she doesn't know how the manual will help because it's the facts of the case that are relevant.

• JP asked if anything else I want to add. I said no. JP asks if P agrees with the request for adjournment and P says no and that the officer is here and they are ready to proceed with the trial.

• I said I would like to object as I requested disclosure several times and only received some information today and I need time to prepare a defense. I clarified that I don't want the adjournment to count against me.

• JP says unfortunately it will count against me due to the case Jordan. JP said unfortunately it will count against me because of the case Jordan. JP said simply put, the prosecution has 18 months to fight the case. JP said I could file an 11b at that point. However, this adjournment will have to count against me. JP asked P if new court date would have to be a new year and P said yes and started to look at her notes. They said Jan X, 2017 and asked if I can do this date and I said Yes. The court clerk gave the time. (Later on I went home and found this link: topic7680.html?hilit=jordan)

• JP said the charge was reduced and prosecution may bump the charge back up and if I understand. I said I understand.

• JP suggested I read the link on the trial notice and asked again if I plan to hire legal help. I said not sure. She said okay noted that the next trial will proceed with or without legal counsel.

Remaining attachments (I can only attach 3 at a time).

Last attachment of 7 files.

I would suggest your utterance about going 10 km/hr over the speed limit is going to sink you. Yes, you can hold a voir dire but these type of comments are almost exclusively admitted.

I do think you got screwed by having the adjournment count against you though.

The officer has great notes...this will be a tough one to win...

Your laundry list of disclosure certainly didn't help your cause. You probably found it on a paralegal site that is notoriously out of date. Most of the items would of never exist for a speeding charge and some have been decided by the courts as not being relevant to disclosure. Some are also usually part of the officers testimony.

Based on the notes, this won't be a win unless the officer doesn't show up.