OHTA.ca

i was charged under sec 142(1) HTA in a 3 car collision. I requested a trial date and disclosure. when the disclosur documents arrived included was an application for an adjournment due to the officer being on training course during the scheduled trial date. I assume a new date will be set further out? When i reviewed the disclosure docs it included accident reports, statements from the 3 drivers involved and photocopies of the officers notes. the officer has mixed up the drivers and their vehicles in his notes. the accident report names D1 D2 and D3, as well as V1, V2 and V3. In his notes he has me listed as D2, but in the accident reporrts and stmts I am listed as D3. Very confusing. Will this be a factor when it goes to trial? is there a way I can cast doubt on his notes given this confusion (presumeably he will rely heavily on his notes to recollect the events and testify to them?) Also, if the prosecutor was going to call witnesses beyond the officer, (who really didnt witness anything) would that be included in the disclosere?

You can be more aggressive with your disclosure requests. You can ask for a list of witnesses, will say statements, even contact information of all witnesses prior to trial.

Unless the officer is an accident reconstruction expert, the Crown will need at least one witness to testify about what happened. The accident report does not carry much weight without the people who made the statements being there.

You've mentioned three "cars" but 142. (1) is failing to yield to a bus. Was a bus involved? If it was then the bus driver will likely be there. (His union contract probably won't dock his pay to attend court and testify.)

So your defence strategy should assume at least one witness present.

142.1(1) is failing to yield to a bus. 142(1) is failing to signal a turn (including lane changes).

Doh! My only defence was that it was 1:38 in the morning and I was busy working on friction coefficient test questions!

Methinks you haven't changed the time for DST. Have you been showing up an hour late to work?

ticketcombat wrote:Doh! My only defence was that it was 1:38 in the morning and I was busy working on friction coefficient test questions!

so when I asked for disclosure, should I have specifically asked for a list of any witnesses? I assumed that would be a given but only got copies of accident reports and the officers notes? Is it too late to go back again and ask for more disclosure, or better to question at trial why further disclosure including witness names were not provided at the first disclosure request??

My main issue is why I was charged the way I was...unsafe lane change does not make sense given the circumstances, car 1 hit from behind, car 2 hit's car 1 and is charged with FTC and car 3 (me) hits car 2, and I am charged with 142(1) unsafe lane change? no one saw me change lanes.

Looks like a lot of errors were made.

Since a collision was involved, witnesses must be present at trial. If they do not show up, case dismissed. You can rip cop's "evidence" in shreds given his/her mistakes in notes and accident reports, as they are inconsistent with each other. Write a detailed account of what had happened to you as you were driving and the accident as you can remember it, just your calm, accurate recital of the facts will sway the JP to dismiss officer's conflicting evidence, unless he shows up with a witness that says that you had changed lanes improperly.

dgs wrote:so when I asked for disclosure, should I have specifically asked for a list of any witnesses?

Disclosure request should detail all information required:

Example

dgs wrote:When i reviewed the disclosure docs it included accident reports, statements from the 3 drivers involved and photocopies of the officers notes. the officer has mixed up the drivers and their vehicles in his notes. the accident report names D1 D2 and D3, as well as V1, V2 and V3. In his notes he has me listed as D2, but in the accident reporrts and stmts I am listed as D3. Very confusing. Will this be a factor when it goes to trial? is there a way I can cast doubt on his notes given this confusion (presumeably he will rely heavily on his notes to recollect the events and testify to them?) Also, if the prosecutor was going to call witnesses beyond the officer, (who really didnt witness anything) would that be included in the disclosere?

You received the statements from the other drivers which would be witnesses for the prosecution.

Now the V1,V2,V3 can be different in a notebook compared to the Collision Report. Here is the reason for the difference. Officer rolls up to scene and sees 3 vehicles, obtains particulars from 1st person talked to and then calls that person D1 driving V1 in his notes. A normal collision report has D1/V1 which caused the initial impact listed as the very first vehicle on the collision report (not necessarily the order of who the officer spoke to and wrote down in a notebook)

thanks hwybear..the officers only recollection of the incident will be from referring to his notes. If his notes do no correspond with the official accident reports, would that not cast some doubt on his recollection of the events.? I am quite sure they have no witnesses who can testify that they actually saw and recall my lane change...that will be taken only from my statement I gave to the cop after the accident.

dgs wrote: If his notes do no correspond with the official accident reports, would that not cast some doubt on his recollection of the events.?

no, we bring both the notes and the collision report to court, plus all the statements

I have requested a trial. Do I wait for a trial date to ask for disclosure, or request disclosure now?

pinch, as soonas I got the trial date confirmed, I then requested disclosure.