OHTA.ca

hello everyone, i am in need of some advise

i recently got pulled over by an opp in and undercover car for going 118 in an 80.

I am planning on fighting it because i cant really afford the $283 ticket or the 4 demerit points because i have already gotten a speeding ticket in the states which got me 3 demerit points.

so here is my story, i was following a van that was going to slow for my liking so i decided to pass it. we were at the top of a big hill and there was an oncoming car about half a kilometer so i pulled out beside the van and passed it. after returning back to my lane and slowing below 100 i realized that the one oncoming car that was half a k down the road was a cop and he had enough time to slow down, turn around and wait for me to pass him before pulling me over. the cop said he radared me going 118 and when i explained that it was because i was passing the van he told me that he radard the van going 94, he did not reduce the ticket at all and i was shocked that he didnt take any mercy.

so tmrw i am planning on going to court to say that i am fighting the ticket and to set a date, because tmrw will be day 14 of the 15 day period.

do you have any ideas to help me fight the ticket, i doubt that i will get it off but am hoping for it to get the fine and amount of demerit points reduced if i explain to the judge that i was passing on a hill and the car accellerated quicker than i expected

First let me clarify that the demerit points are not negotiable. They are associated with the speed and are an administrative MTO penalty. Neither the JP nor the crown has any jurisdiction over them. That being said, if you are able to plea to a reduced speed, you will get the points associated with that speed.

I've seen people argue exactly what you said about going down a hill or accelerating to pass and JP's never bought it. The speed limit is the limit, as in maximum, and that includes situations like passing or going down hill. Still, you could mention this to the crown, not as an excuse, but by way of an explanation (crowns usually don't like excuses - it makes it seem like you're not taking responsibility for your actions) and perhaps work out a plea to a reduced speed.

yes i was planing on saying that because i was on a hill i accelerated too much and that i never wanted to reach a speed of 118 and that it was for a very short time, i dont plan on disputing the speed just saying the hill made me accelerate faster than expected.

Do you think that is a good thing to say? and is there anything else i could say in my defence?

I think that whatever you say should sound like an explanation and not an excuse. If it does then I don't think anything you say can be a bad idea.

ok thank you il make sure i dont make any excuses and only explain the situation.

i went to the courthouse today to declare that i am going to fight it, the lady gave me a yellow form to fill out so that i can have a meeting wwith the prosecutor so i can ask for a reduction. what should i expect from this meeting? and what aproach would be in my best interest, ideally the prosector would be feelin generous and take mercy on me and drop it to 15k over so i dont lose any points

given that im only 18 and already have one fairly serious ticket do i have a chance of the prosector reducing the ticket? will he or she take mercy on me becausei have already lost 3 points?

any input would be helpful thanks for the help

Well I don't think that the fact that you've already got 3 points is a mitigating factor, if anything I'd say it's an aggravating factor.

However, if you show up prepared to take responsibility for your actions and don't make excuses, they'll probably offer you a reduction. If they don't, you always have the option of going to trail and forcing the crown to prove their case.

Remember that 0-15 km/hr is 0 points and 16-29 is all the same with 3 points.

ya i was thinking it would probably be a bad thing.

im pretty much working for damage control at this point i just want some kind of reduction. what should i say in regards to me passing the van? like the van and i both stopped at a stop sign then i followed it for about half a k and it took a long to time accelerate to speed so i decided to pass it then i came over the crest of the hill and the coast was clear so i pulled out and passed, the cop said the van was going 94 which in the real world is a good speed but in legal world its speeding so wat should i say? my cruising speed was under 100

any ideas?

Basically just what you said, the van was going too slow, you passed when it was safe to do so. In order to pass the van safely since the other car was oncoming you had to accelerate and that put you over the limit, after which you slowed down again.

.

Hey gottastopspeeding:

gottastopspeeding wrote:...im pretty much working for damage control at this point i just want some kind of reduction. what should i say in regards to me passing the van?...

...the cop said the van was going 94 which in the real world is a good speed but in legal world its speeding so wat should i say? ...

I wouldn't give up so easily. A couple of things:

First, I am curious about how and why the Officer was able to read the van's speed. This has to do with tracking and device mode.

Second,

you previously wrote:

there was an oncoming car about half a kilometer so i pulled out beside the van and passed it. after returning back to my lane and slowing below 100 i realized that the one oncoming car that was half a k down the road was a cop and he had enough time to slow down

Most likely, the officer was using a dash mounted device -not a laser- and I am curious as how the officer could at half-a-k differentiate between the two vehicles.

You may have a good defence to your ticket.

The best option seems to be to attend to the First Attendance meeting, if that is what you requested when filing the NIA, and see what the prosecutor will offer.

If the offer is 15 over, I would take very fast, otherwise, he/she will most likely write the offer on your file and it will remain valid until the day of the trial, unless otherwise stated by the prosecutor.

You may excuse yourself from acting on the resolution offer as "you will have to think about it" and request disclosure to review it before making up your mind.

By the way, I would not talk about the alleged offence or what the Officer told you at all. I would focus on trying to avoid the expense -legal representation- and time necessary for you to go for a trial. Prosecutors are usually happy if they can reach a resolution and avoid the trial.

Once you get disclosure you will know some details of what will be the evidence for the prosecutor at trial. We can take it from there.

Cheers.

.

thank you simon and biron

ya it was an undercover cop car so far down the road that i had already merged back into the lane and drop my speed before i could even tell it was a cop and at that point he was slowing down and doing a u turn in the intersection infront of me so he was facing my direction, at this point i had still not reached him doing 90 and it took me acouple seconds more to get close to the intersection thats when he turned on the lights

so my meeting with the prosecutor is tomorrow. What should i expect?

should i talk about the speeding and admit that i did go 118 but explain that i was passing the van at the top of the hill and accelerated and focused on the road not my speed then once passed the van got back in my lane and lowered to a cruising speed of 95?

or should i talk about how i would like to come to a conclusion with the prosecutor to avoid the time and money that going to court would take?

any help is much apreciated