OHTA.ca

Good morning,

I got caught by approaching radar in the Bonchere area.

Ticket is for 46 over.

How do I plead "not guilty"? Can I mail it in with the option 3 box checked?

How do I request "disclosure"?

Is the officer required to bring in "calibration records" and certificates for the radar and the tuning fork (is this how they set it)?

If asked at the trial does the officer need to produce their certification records and that of the person who certified them?

I have a 2008 Accrua CSX and a Toyota truck was behind. Is the bigger target behind a defence? I don't believe I was doing 46 over?

How do I plead "not guilty"? Can I mail it in with the option 3 box checked?

---mail it in with the option 3 box checked

How do I request "disclosure"?---Check Here:http://www.ticketcombat.com

Is the officer required to bring in "calibration records" and certificates for the radar and the tuning fork (is this how they set it)?

---no

If asked at the trial does the officer need to produce their certification records and that of the person who certified them?---Not sure

I have a 2008 Accrua CSX and a Toyota truck was behind. Is the bigger target behind a defence?

---You will have to prove that is how radar works, or get the officer to verify that point

I don't believe I was doing 46 over?---Guilty until proven innocent in Traffic Court

Thanks to "reflections" for your reply.

In disclosure is it reasonable to ask for:

make, model, & serial # of the radar unit?

frequency and serial # of the tuning fork?

the calibration records for the radar unit?

the tuning fork?

the officers certification, training records, and test scores?

the examiners certification?

service history of radar unit and tuning fork?

a manual for the radar device?

calibration procedures?

I deal with testing and supplying materials for the nuclear industry and all of our testing equipment we use can be identified and all these questions verified. If the police are able to use the results of equipment as evidence I feel my questions are valid.

Is the officer required to bring in "calibration records" and certificates for the radar and the tuning fork (is this how they set it)?

If asked at the trial does the officer need to produce their certification records and that of the person who certified them? No

I have a 2008 Accrua CSX and a Toyota truck was behind. Is the bigger target behind a defence?

A lot of questions are not applicable and you are on a "fishing expedition", but if a JP wants to believe a good fishing story.....

radar bill wrote:In disclosure is it reasonable to ask for:

make, model, & serial # of the radar unit?

frequency and serial # of the tuning fork?

the calibration records for the radar unit?

the tuning fork?

the officers certification, training records, and test scores?

the examiners certification?

service history of radar unit and tuning fork?

a manual for the radar device?

calibration procedures?

As far as the courts are concerned, really only two things are required to satisfy disclosure obligations:

- Officer's notes

- Radar/laser manual

You are entitled to make a "full answer and defence," and that's what the courts consider sufficient to do so. The Crown has to prove that the officer identified a vehicle that was speeding visually, used a speed-measuring device to verify the speed, the officer essentially did not lose sight of the vehicle until it was stopped, and that the device was tested and working properly. That is the standard set by the courts Canada-wide. In some US states, the courts often require a mountain of evidence to prove the device was working properly, but that is not the case here, or, for that matter, in most US states.

Officers go through regular recurrent training. The officer's testimony that he was trained on the device and re-qualified properly is sufficient to satisfy the courts. To my understanding, most police services do not even provide "certificates" of the officer's training or completion, but

I might be wrong. Rather, the record of requalification is part of their personnel file, and that will not be disclosed for a speeding case.

Tuning forks are not used on radar devices in Ontario anymore. If the officer was using a hand-held radar device, there may be an opportunity to challenge its accuracy, if the manufacturer does not specifically state in the manual that the internal test verifies that the device is working properly and is accurate. You'd need to read the manual to find that out. As far as calibration goes, some devices require periodic bench testing, others have a warranty or guarantee of service - again, in the manual. However, if the device was tested by the officer and found to be working, it's an uphill battle. If the radar device that was used was "moving radar," in other words, built into the patrol car, the officers usually test it by driving down the road and measuring its readings versus the car's calibrated speedometer, which eliminates any possible need for a tuning fork. (I was a radar recurrent instructor, although that's not for police radar devices.)

Disclosure would have more answers. Speeding cases are not the easiest to win, unfortunately. Once you have more information, then we might be able to give you some help. Regardless, if the officer did not reduce the charge, you should be able to plea-bargain to something less, if nothing else.

Good afternoon,

I recieved a "Notice of Appointment" yesterday in the mail. It is about a 400k trip. If I don't attend this, is there still the possibility that the prosecutor will make an offer on the trial date?

I am going to ask for disclosure.

Thanks

Good afternoon again,

I was on "Ticket Combat.com" and see that if I request disclosure I must go and pick up the material.

Is that true. It's a long way to go.

Thanks

No, it should come in the mail. You should also specify for a mail-in of the package.

I received disclosure yesterday.

Radar identified as Decateur Genesis Directional VIP.

No manual was included. I have been researching and see that this unit comes with tuning forks. When are they to be used?

Does anyone have an online link to the manual.

I am going to file a 2nd request for more disclosure.

There's a lot of case law that supports that disclosure of the manual is required. Failure to disclose relevant parts = STAY. You can (and probably should) do your own research, but do not proceed to trial unless they've given you the relevant parts (testing, operation, things like that). Providing you with the evidence is the duty of the Crown.

I'm not sure about providing tuning forks or the requirement to test the device with tuning forks.

EDIT: Should add... as previously mentioned... tuning forks are not in use in Ontario anymore. Most devices are tested using alternate methods to verify accuracy, although there are some that only do internal tests and there may be an opportunity to challenge that.

radar bill wrote:

No manual was included. I have been researching and see that this unit comes with tuning forks. When are they to be used? .

You have found the American version not Canadian.

hwybear wrote:

radar bill wrote:

No manual was included. I have been researching and see that this unit comes with tuning forks. When are they to be used? .

You have found the American version not Canadian.

I would say they all come with the forks bear, just you don't need them.

Reflections wrote:

hwybear wrote:

radar bill wrote:

No manual was included. I have been researching and see that this unit comes with tuning forks. When are they to be used? .

You have found the American version not Canadian.

I would say they all come with the forks bear, just you don't need them.

No tuning forks come with the units and no where in the manual does it mention them....