OHTA.ca

Hi all,

I'm so glad I found this forum. My trial is on Thursday March 21, 2013, and after reading this forum, ticketcombat, and others, I've done as much background work as possible, and I need to file a 4F by this Monday March 4 (it's only only date I have free). So the particulars are as follows:

Offence date - April 22, 2012 - Disobey Stop Sign 136. (1) (a)

Filing Date - April 26, 2012

Early Resolution Date - July 5, 2012. Offered no points and no fine, but moving violation. No resolution, moved to goto trial.

Trial Date - March 21, 2013

Disclosure Request 1 - sent November 20, 2012 - picked up disclosure based on ticketcombat template, only received handwritten police notes (as attached) and a copy of the ticket

Disclosure Request 2 - sent December 13, 2012 - picked up disclosure, only received same handwritten police notes

Disclosure Request 3 - sent January 7, 2013 - didn't receive notice in mail, called and found out the notice supposedly went out, picked up disclosure today, includes handwritten police notes and a dvd with video of the incident. The video shows me slowing before the stop sign from 40 km/h down to maybe 10 km/h, and then accelerating.

Based on a delay of 11 months minus 1 day from offence date to trial date, I'm thinking filing a 4F due to unreasonable delay as my primary defence.

Can I / should I also file a 4F for improper disclosure at the same time? I've attached a scan of the officer's notes, and I can *kind of* make out his writing and infer the missing details, but that's different from actually knowing the entire text, which would have the case if I had received a typed copy of the notes. That said, the video does show a rolling stop. Although the video didn't record it, when the officer asked, "Why did you go through that stop sign?", I replied, "I thought I stopped."

Should I file a 4F for both improper disclosure and unreasonable delay?

If both 4F's aren't accepted, and the officer's at the trial, I'm probably going to argue strict vs absolute offence citing R. v. Locke, 2007 and R. v. Kanda, 2008, and say that the video shows me slowing down, it was my intention to stop and I thought I did momentarily, and no prior convictions showing I have a good driving record.

Please let me know what your thoughts are.

Thanks in advance!

What is 4f

11B charter application tends to apply for trials that occur after a year following the incident

Hi,

Right, Form 4F - Notice of Constitutional Questions is the form I'll be filling out, requesting a stay of trial whether it's for Section 7 under the Charter - No Disclosure / Improper Disclosure, or Section 11b - Unreasonable Delay.

Here's an example from another forum that I used.

Just wondering if I should mention Section 7 and/or Section 11b on my Form 4F?

How did it go, I am in a similar situation ?

Regardless of the time issue what can't you read on the notes ? Seems pretty legible to me.

Otingocni wrote:If both 4F's aren't accepted, and the officer's at the trial, I'm probably going to argue strict vs absolute offence citing R. v. Locke, 2007 and R. v. Kanda, 2008, and say that the video shows me slowing down, it was my intention to stop and I thought I did momentarily, and no prior convictions showing I have a good driving record.

I'm not sure about this strategy. I agree that's it's most likely a strict liability offence, but how are you showing due diligence on your part? I would argue the act of simply slowing down in itself doesn't show reasonable care, regardless of your driving record. There would have to be some additional aggravating factor that prevented you from making a full stop beyond your control.