OHTA.ca

Hope to get some input on my case here.

Date of infraction was May 2020 where I was given a ticket for speeding 134 over in a 100 zone in the City of Toronto by TPS on the QEW.

My court hearing has been scheduled for January 2023. I requested and have since received a disclosure (see link - I have redacted identifying information).

Constable was sitting stationary in the left-hand shoulder with rear facing RADAR.

I knew for a fact I was not travelling at that speed but probably in the low 120 km/h range. I was traveling with a pack of vehicles, largest being a dump truck. One vehicle in the pack was, in fact, travelling faster than me and passed right by me. He was in lane #1 while I was in lane #3. He switched into lane #2 ahead of me while I also switched into lane #2 behind him. Constable pulled out of the shoulder and then pulled me over.

RADAR being used was an MPH BEE III in which I assume based on his car being station and facing with traffic, was using the rear-facing radar unit.

Here is my thinking on how I believe I can win this case in court:

1. Section 11(b) – Trial within a Reasonable Time

   Most likely this will be disregarded as a delay from a global pandemic is excusable



2. Demonstrate reasonable doubt that the constable took an accurate speed reading off my vehicle
   1. Ask the constable a series of questions to discover exactly how he had his radar setup that day, what mode the radar was in, and how he was able to ascertain that the speed reading he got was from my vehicle.
   2. Play my dashcam footage for the courts which will:

      i. Exhibit the large pack of vehicles I was traveling with which included two heavy dump trucks

      ii. Exhibit the vehicle that was traveling faster than me

   3. Turn the courts attention to the BEE-III Radar operational manual which on page 19 states the following Operation Concern while operating in “Fastest Mode” (most likely the logical setting the constable will have disclosed during questioning he was using
      MPH BEE-III Operational Manual Page 19 to 20
3. Prove error in constable’s notes (provided in disclosure) which then questions the validity of the information in the disclosure
   1. In the disclosure the constable indicated they pulled me over WEST of highway 427
   2. Dashcam footage will exhibit that he pulled me over EAST of highway 427

Part of me wonders if I should just start with strategy #3 as that would surely have the case dismissed right from the beginning.

Wondering what your thoughts are about this case. Do I have something here I can win this with?

Any advice is appreciated.

Speeding is what they call an "absolute liability offense."

In short, this means you were either travelling the speed limit or you weren't. They are not going to consider whether you were driving 110, 120 or 130. There's no in-between here.

"I was driving 120, not 134" would mean you'd be found guilty and you provided the evidence to boot.

I don't know how they're currently handling 11b arguments since covid, but it's certainly the better option.

I am not admitting that I was speeding.

I am proving that it's highly probable beyond a reasonable doubt that the constable could not have ascertained the speed measured was absolutely my vehicle.

In addition, I am questioning the validity of any of the information within the disclosure based on the fact he made an error on the location of where I was pulled over. If he screwed that up, what else did he screw up?

That's a risky strategy. The officer will testify that he is trained to estimate speed visually (most of these guys can accurately estimate a speed to within a few kilometres per hour). He'll also say that he determined visually that you were the fastest vehicle.

The officer's notes are simply that: notes that are intended to refresh the officer's memory. They are not, in and of themselves, testimony or evidence.

If you entire defence is "the notes are wrong," you will lose.