OHTA.ca

So here I am, browsing this forum and wasn't able to find a related topic so I decided to start my own.

On a way back from a trip to detroit on a motorcycle, I was stopped by a police officer (his disclosure form is attached) saying that I was speeding and passing trucks in 1 lane construction zone. Then he ended up giving me a ticket for (disobeying legal sign 100km/hr) based on a calculations he made approximating time and distance traveled, I explained to the officer that I certainly didn't do that, and for the truck, a truck driver drove into my lane (right hand side lane) in a two lane area which prompted me to speed up to evade him (none of this was mentioned in the disclosure form) and I also mentioned that I was doing the speed limit, a couple of shady things about the ticket I had: 1) The officer didn't pace me for more than 2 seconds, actually the moment he got behind me he opened up his cherry. 2) I was going as fast as the cars in front of me and I didn't even notice him since he had a completely unmarked car. 3) the 126km/hr mentioned in the disclosure is certainly not true as once I passed his SUV I changed to the right lane and doing the speed of the car in front of me thats behind a truck.

"Charge: HTA 182(2) disobey sign 401 east bound Furnival Rd, Rodney, ON exit 129

Motorcycle blue/black **wrong its blue/white**

complainer name: complainer

received traffic complaint 401 east bound in construction zone near Merlin rd, Ontario, dark motorcycle rider wearing blue helmet no plates obtained, motorcycle passing tts (Trucks) in single lane construction zone on left between them and barriers.

i **officer** was at 130 east bound shoulder, stayed and observed,

observe motorcycle east bound approaching from rr @ 129 in rearview / side mirror passing car in an onramp and shoulder @ hros **high rate of speed**

-dnls- i got up to speed quickly, motorcycle came upon me and slowed-passed me slowly.

i paced motorcycle east bound from 131 @ 126km/hr on speedo slowed down to 118-113.

pulled over, advised driver reason for stop and of traffic complaint, driver acted oblivious. requested plcl complainer and have him stop at our location.

driver kept trying to talk me out of taking enforcement action, complainder attended and immediately agreed that was the same backpack on deck metals, same bike driver description.

said motorcycle passed 4-5 tts (Trucks) in construction.

note other red tts honked at me approximately 2 minutes after stopping motorcycle.

doing math: distance traveled 65km appx from complaint, time approx 25 minutes

**officer did calculations** speed calculated 156km/hr average speed.

Driver explained its not the case, said left from detroit apprx 5 pm,

PON disobey sign @100km/hr maximum white/black sign limit.

weather clear day sun, roads dry"

also added to the disclosure form at the very end "20 minutes later, motorcycle was speed clocked by a speed trap on the highway doing 110km/hr"

till the time I left I didn't understand what the ticket was for , the officer insisted that I was driving recklessly on the street with excessive speed and assumed the distances and time and calculated speed I got the ticket. I didn't try to talk him out of giving me a traffic enforcement, I was talking him into understanding that it wasn't me. yet, in a stressful situation my english revert back and I lose words, he took this sign of me stuttering as I'm lying to him.

I'm not an angel but I that's not something I committed, I gave this ticket to a paralegal, he went for an early resolution (ER) and called me with a reduced charge of 115km/hr so I refused because the charge should be fully dropped.

Now I'm kind of questioning his ability in court since he went for ER without reading the disclosure form, he wasn't very enthusiastic reading the disclosure/going for trial. However, I declined his offer and im going to trial. Any help would be appreciated cuz I believe I will be standing for myself in court.

My court date is in January, 2017 in Elgin County Courthouse.

Thanks for your comments.

****** Please, post if you know, or have knowledge of this or similar issues, otherwise please advise that it is just your personal opinion. ******

What do I see wrong in this ticket, everything. How many motorcycles were traveling down the highway, how long did the reporting process take from the truck driver noticing the motorcycle till he parked to make the phonecall, (im sure he didn't stop in a one lane construction zone and impede traffic) how credible is the truck driver, did he have anything to drink? no license plate reported. if its true and the motorcycle was passing with 160km/hr by the trucks how was he able to identify the type of motorcycle with such speed. does the description of a dark motorcycle constitute a blue/white motorcycle, or did the officer just want to give a ticket?

You got a disobey sign charge because the cop did not get an actual speed reading on you. The disobey sign charge is 2 points...the early resolution deal of Speeding 115Km/H would be no points. When it comes to insurance either one would likely cause you grief. As for the pacing thing, the cop was likely pacing you way before you noticed him; he does not need to be directly behind you to pace you. If you go to trial on the origional charge, the officer just needs to say you were going faster than the posted speed limit to prove the disobey sign charge: the speed limit sign is the sign you disobeyed...it is actually kind of a hard one for you to win...he doesn't even need any other witnesses to prove that charge...he does not need to include any of the rest of your story either, that is irrelevant to that actual charge...

RE: screeech,

Looking backwards, He was parked right before where he stopped me, He was parked on the shoulder facing on wards not sideways, he sped up and I was just thinking its a regular suv that was parked for whatever reason, hence, he didn't pace me for long.

is it beneficial to obtain his video/audio recording? I could be above the speed limit but just like everybody else, I believe I didn't commit a wrongful act and hence I want to fight it. I was just driving like everybody else, the range of 110km/hr give and take. do they still consider that legitimate reason to convict you with a traffic ticket?

So my question would be, can the officer rely on any calculations based on complainer, if the complainer does not show to court? I don't think so.

Basically every time the officer tries to testify something that the complainer supposedly said, I would object and say its hearsay and not allowed.

But even if you throw out all the stuff related to the complainer, you still have the officer testimony of him pacing you. This all relies on his speedometer. So attacking the calibration/accuracy of the speedometer would be the only way to get rid of specific speed references.

If this were a speeding ticket, getting the two thing above thrown out would get your ticket thrown out. But this is a disobey sign charge, so there is more to consider...

So now even if you get those things all thrown out, will the JP believe the officers testimony (based only on the officers opinion), that you were travelling greater than the posted speed limit. Of course I am making an assumption here that the charge for "disobey sign" is that you disobeyed the speed limit sign.

The officer will testify that you were driving above the speed limit, which is the sign that was disobeyed. The officer will testify why he thinks you were speeding and when the prosecutor is finished with him you will have your chance to cross examine. If you wish to tell the court that you were only doing 110Km/H, as was everyone else, you will need to take the stand and give that testimony, then you will be available for cross examination by the prosecutor...that can be a dangerous position to be in as you will have just admitted to disobeying the sign...If you do not take the stand to testify, the court only has the officers testimony to go on...

jsherk wrote:So now even if you get those things all thrown out, will the JP believe the officers testimony (based only on the officers opinion), that you were travelling greater than the posted speed limit. Of course I am making an assumption here that the charge for "disobey sign" is that you disobeyed the speed limit sign.

Based on the written ticket and the disclosure, officer specifically said disobeying sign of 100km/hr so yes. thats the sign he was referring to, but which one made him giving me the ticket, was it his calculations or the pacing, I'm going to go with calculation because it was mentioned right before he written down the statement of disobeying sign of 100km/hr. but its really confusing, cuz at the traffic stop, he told me that he was writing me on what he saw (126km/hr) im sure that wasn't the speed, like I'm 100% sure, but how to prove him wrong. Thats why im thinking of getting the dashcam of the cruizer and hoping there will be a posted speed in the camera.

Also, What are methods of attacking the speedometer of the car, Any resource would be appreciated.

Regards,

screeech wrote:The officer will testify that you were driving above the speed limit, which is the sign that was disobeyed. The officer will testify why he thinks you were speeding and when the prosecutor is finished with him you will have your chance to cross examine. If you wish to tell the court that you were only doing 110Km/H, as was everyone else, you will need to take the stand and give that testimony, then you will be available for cross examination by the prosecutor...that can be a dangerous position to be in as you will have just admitted to disobeying the sign...If you do not take the stand to testify, the court only has the officers testimony to go on...

Thanks Screech, I have no experience with courts therefore i resorted here, I have only once been there, that I can relate to what you said, I had a cellphone ticket 3 years ago and the officer said his testimony and I was asked if I agreed and I did and got conviction on point. didnt know much about early resolution / reduced charges.

Again, Any resources when it comes to court handling would be great. I just understood that once you make a statement then the opposite stand will cross examine your testimony.

Regards,

Attacking speedometer means asking a lot of questions about whether it was accurate or not. For example, when was it last tested/calibrated?

But again even if you get the speedometer reading thrown out, the officer simply saying he thought you were going above 100km will probably be enough for them to convict as the JP will most likely believe him.

You have the right not to testify against yourself and given what you have already told us, you should not testify as you wil be found guilty based on your own testimony. So the only way you can win is by cross-examining the officer and bringing reasonable doubt to what he said.

You should probably read these:

jsherk wrote:Attacking speedometer means asking a lot of questions about whether it was accurate or not. For example, when was it last tested/calibrated?

But again even if you get the speedometer reading thrown out, the officer simply saying he thought you were going above 100km will probably be enough for them to convict as the JP will most likely believe him.

You have the right not to testify against yourself and given what you have already told us, you should not testify as you wil be found guilty based on your own testimony. So the only way you can win is by cross-examining the officer and bringing reasonable doubt to what he said.

You should probably read these:

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7039.html http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7041.html

Q: do I ask these questions during the court, or should I obtain records of calibration/ car maintenance before hand and see if it's not been calibrated? I wish that would prolong the trail, and probably less likely for them to have those records, which will make the pacing issue questionable.

- Can I go that route?

Also thanks for the links, Eye opener.

I just called the OPP detachment to ask for video recording of the traffic stop, they said they dont record traffic stop. My hopes of having a video of the officer pacing me for little time just vanished.

Any help would be appreciated.

Regards,

You do not contact anybody but the prosecutor to ask for disclosure.

You can ask for video, and they should give it to you IF they have video, but not sure if OPP does much video recording yet.

You should probably send a letter and ask for speedometer calibration records ahead of time. Most likely they will not give them to you. When the trial starts (when you first go up in front of the Justice of the Peace), you can tell JP there is an issue with disclosure and that they did not give you what you asked for. If you can convice the JP that you need them, then JP will order prosecutor to get them for you and the trial will be adjourned. If JP does not agree with you then the trial may proceed.

Once the trial gets under way, the prosecutor will call the officer up to testify and ask them a bunch of questions. When prosecutor is done, this is when you would cross-examine the officer and ask a bunch of questions where you are trying to bring reasonable doubt to officers testimony. This is NOT the time to tell your side of the story, but is the time to try an bring doubt to what the officer said. When you are done, the officer will step down and JP will ask if you want to call any witnesses. You can say yes and then take the stand yourself and now give your side of the story, or as I recommended earlier, you probably should just say no and not take the stand. When you are done, the prosecutor will give a summary as to why you should be convicted and then you get to give a summary as to why you think you brought doubt to officers testimony and therefore should not be convicted. Then JP will make decision.

jsherk wrote:You do not contact anybody but the prosecutor to ask for disclosure......

Thanks Jsherk for all these info. Thats deep.

Should I write a letter to the prosecutor to obtain the SUV records, Or to OPP?

Regards,

To the prosectuor.

There won't be any speedometer calibration records...

If there was a radar in that cruiser, and there likely was, the officer will testify to the patrol speed on the radar confirmed with the speedometer in the car...

screeech wrote:There won't be any speedometer calibration records...

If there was a radar in that cruiser, and there likely was, the officer will testify to the patrol speed on the radar confirmed with the speedometer in the car...

I dont think thats a valid argument. As to what seems to be the case, officer's opinion is irrelevant. If its not calibrated then its not.

any thoughts Jsherk?

What if they insist that the calculation be enforced, how would I go about proving them otherwise, as the only description they had was a dark motorcycle with blue helmet. my helmet is blue but my motorcycle is blue/white.

Regards,

NM

Well, it actually is a valid arugment...if there was no radar in the car, yes you can attack the calibration...if there was a radar, it won't be an opinion the officer is putting forth, it will be evidence, and therefore, quite relevant...the whole matter comes down to a small moment in time, can the officer state you were speeding, at some point, and thereby disobeying a sign? it's quite simple really...and here is another thing to think about...let's say there was no radar, no calibration of the speedometer and no pacing...the officer could still get a conviction by testifying that he observed you going at a high rate of speed (which is in his notes in the disclosure)...There does not need to be any actual speed number given to breaching the speed sign...yes, if you were only doing a little over the speed limit it would be much harder to prove, but when the officer says "high rate of speed" it will be quite obvious to the court you were going over the speed limit...yes, you can attack the officer on that too, however his level of training and experience will give him credibility to be able to deteremine when a motor vehicle is speeding "at a high rate of speed"...There are very few times an office can give opinion evidence, but speed is one of the exceptions...