OHTA.ca

More than 140 people reluctantly accepted that deal from June 2006 to June 2008, according to court records. Among them were a black grandmother from Akron, Ohio, who surrendered $4,000 in cash after Tenaha police pulled her over, and an interracial couple from Houston, who gave up more than $6,000 after police threatened to seize their children and put them into foster care, the court documents show. Neither the grandmother nor the couple were charged with or convicted of any crime.

Officials in Tenaha, situated along a heavily traveled state highway connecting Houston with several popular gambling destinations in Louisiana, say they are engaged in a battle against drug trafficking, and they call the search-and-seizure practice a legitimate use of the states asset-forfeiture law.

While the province doesn't directly make money out of 172 seizures (towing companies and impound lots do), I can see 2 ways how it can be abused here.

1) While a great majority of police constables are completely clean, denying the existence of police corruption is an idiocy. If a constable receives kickbacks from the tow operators/impound lots, (s)he's more likely to charge someone of street racing. Kind of like that judge south of the border who received kickbacks from a private prison (and he had a 4x higher sentencing to incarceration rate compared to other judges in the area).

2) 172 can be used as an intimidation tool to force vehicle operators not to dispute less serious charges. That means more ticket revenue, especially these days when fewer people are driving and the vehicles are more fuel-efficient, so the money's getting tight.

FiReSTaRT wrote: 2) 172 can be used as an intimidation tool to force vehicle operators not to dispute less serious charges.

So what your saying is not to use discretion in regards to any of the 172 sections. Give everyone the full hammer instead of a lessor offence which also applies.

(IE...stop someone for 150km, lower it to 149km so they don't lose their vehicle and licence, and just out of courtesy let them know the repercutions of the 1km faster is intimidation?)

What is not right is someone who gets such a discretion, then decides to fight that? Certainly would make one think twice before ever giving a break again??

side note....stop someone and they tell me that they will be going to court.....oh no....please don't do that......I'm worried and stressed BTW I\ll just pencil you in on my schedule with the others

This is a fairly common scenario for me...

I'm doing Xkm/h. The constable tells me that I was doing X+5 to 10 but because he's such a nice guy, he'll drop the ticket down to X.

Guess what would happen if I were lidared/paced doing 140-145 on the 407........

By the way, how do they evaluate your performance on h.t.a. enforcement duty?

Logic would indicate a combination of the number of charges laid and the conviction rate. (correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm curious about it) Under those circumstances, using the 172 boogeyman would do wonders for the conviction rate.

FiReSTaRT wrote:This is a fairly common scenario for me...

I'm doing Xkm/h. The constable tells me that I was doing X+5 to 10 but because he's such a nice guy, he'll drop the ticket down to X.

Guess what would happen if I were lidared/paced doing 140-145 on the 407........

sorry, I do not understand that at all, please refresh and try again, thanx

By the way, how do they evaluate your performance on h.t.a. enforcement duty? Logic would indicate a combination of the number of charges laid and the conviction rate.

As with any job, a person has to be held accountable for their work or lack thereof. A justification for what you did. Officer "A" might have 22 charges and Officer "B" might have 73 charges. Now factor in many variables:

- training

- time spent sitting in court

- criminal investigations

- collision investigations

- calls for service

- completing crown briefs

etc..

Charges vs conviction rate....I've never heard it mentioned....ever. If you are laying charges the same charges over and over and no convictions....something is wrong......either laying the wrong charge or you better get better evidence!

Typical example: Doing 115 goin' up 400. Pulled over (OPP in this case as I was near the north end).. The constable takes my docs, they check out, comes back with the ticket basically saying "I caught you you doing 122, but I cut you a break and dropped it down to 115."

FiReSTaRT wrote:Typical example: Doing 115 goin' up 400. Pulled over (OPP in this case as I was near the north end).. The constable takes my docs, they check out, comes back with the ticket basically saying "I caught you you doing 122, but I cut you a break and dropped it down to 115."

So that discretion by the officer saved you about $70 and 3 demerit points...don't see a problem. Officers notes would reflect accordingly of initial speed and charged speed.

Discretion? Re-read my post. I was actually doing 115. By the way, that was not the only occasion or the only vehicle for that matter where the "stated" speed was 5-10km/h less than the actual speed, but the constable "did me the favour" of "dropping" the ticket down to the actual speed.

I keep all of my vehicles looking and performing up to stock specs (epecially the rims and tires) and if those big digital displays that warn drivers of their speed are correct, my speedometers weren't off. (I was gonna say "my speedos weren't off" but this is supposed to be a family-oriented forum )

Sounds like the typical (not saying it was) when I saw the officer I was at x speed.....well that is too late!

In my case, I cruise at the same speed. See a cruiser, check speed, back off the throttle and/or downshift, pray. Speed X refers to my cruising speed.