OHTA.ca

Hi,

I just got a red light camera offence notice. On the top of the photograph, I saw the speed is 80km, and I just realize that the max speed limit in Upper Middle road (where the camera took the pictures) is 60km. I was in an emergency at that time, and it was a heavy foggy that morning, so I thought the line was close enough to pass. Now, I am thinking to choose option # 2, The question is: Does Justice of the Peace also consider the speed when considering to reduce the fine? What should I say to Justice of the Peace in order to reduce the fine?

I really appreciate for anyone helping me out of this. Thank you so much for the helps.

Kutum

Hi There.

First off, a speeding charge is separate from the red light camera charge. Police have 6 months to charge you with that, but it's a separate charge in itself.

Secondly, the Justice of Peace doesn't reduce the fine, at least not in the way you think. That's a discussion that occurs between you and the Prosecutor when you offer to plea guilty to a lesser charge. The speed might be something the Prosecutor can use to scare you in taking a worse deal, but like I said, that's a separate charge that needs to be laid.

Finally, if you want to plea to a lesser charge, I suggest choosing Option #3 and meeting with a Prosecutor prior to trial date. You can plea then, and with the new regulations coming into effect on March 31st, you can most likely go before the JP on the day you arrive to speak to the Prosecutor to have the charge entered.

Kutumba wrote:On the top of the photograph, I saw the speed is 80km, and I just realize that the max speed limit in Upper Middle road (where the camera took the pictures) is 60km. I was in an emergency at that time, and it was a heavy foggy that morning,

all I can say is WOW!

Ya go with Option #3 and handle the speeding charge if it comes and when it comes!

I'm going to assume by "in an emergency" you meant something life-threatening, yes?

"First off, a speeding charge is separate from the red light camera charge. Police have 6 months to charge you with that, but it's a separate charge in itself."

-----------------------------------

I am confused now. Do you mean after this red light camera ticket, it would be another ticket sent to me by mail for the speeding? How? I thought it was for red light camera ticket only. There was no police that pulled me over at that time nor driver identification (Who the driver was?)

Could you please explain to me? Any information would be much appreciated.

Thanks

The red light ticket isn't sufficient evidence in itself to charge you with speeding.

mnstrcck wrote:Finally, if you want to plea to a lesser charge, I suggest choosing Option #3 and meeting with a Prosecutor prior to trial date. You can plea then, and with the new regulations coming into effect on March 31st, you can most likely go before the JP on the day you arrive to speak to the Prosecutor to have the charge entered.

we can plea-bargains directly with the JP?

Stanton wrote:The red light ticket isn't sufficient evidence in itself to charge you with speeding.

Thanks Stanton..!

That makes more sense now. Because there was no police at that time and no driver information was taken for this kind of ticket (red light camera). How would the police mail the speeding ticket to the driver address by mail?

I called the court today, and the court clerk told me to meet JP on the day I come to the court. (I told her that I would like to choose option #2).

Thanks.

Well technically I believe the HTA still contains all the relevant legislation for photo radar, where the ticket is mailed to the vehicle owner, its just no longer enforced. Regardless, Im not aware of any legislation that would allow the speed reading taken by red light cameras to be used for a speeding charge.

Just to clear up a few things in this thread:

1) It's unlikely that you'd ever be charged with the speeding offence because there's probably no way to prove who was driving (and a ticket has to be served personally on the driver) and, as Stanton pointed out, the red light camera system is not a photo radar system (which is the only way the owner to be charged).

2) You can ask the JP for a reduced fine, whether you're in front of him to plead guilty with an explanation (option 2) or there for a trial (option 3). That is within the JP's discretion, regardless of any arrangements made before hand with the crown. Of course many people do negotiate with the crown for a resolution before hand that includes a joint submission on fine, which the JP may or may not accept.

3) I don't know what the fog had to do with anything, but if it was foggy you'd think one would slow down. That's neither here nor there though with respect to the offence.

Simon Borys wrote:Just to clear up a few things in this thread:

1) It's unlikely that you'd ever be charged with the speeding offence because there's probably no way to prove who was driving (and a ticket has to be served personally on the driver) and, as Stanton pointed out, the red light camera system is not a photo radar system (which is the only way the owner to be charged).

2) You can ask the JP for a reduced fine, whether you're in front of him to plead guilty with an explanation (option 2) or there for a trial (option 3). That is within the JP's discretion, regardless of any arrangements made before hand with the crown. Of course many people do negotiate with the crown for a resolution before hand that includes a joint submission on fine, which the JP may or may not accept.

3) I don't know what the fog had to do with anything, but if it was foggy you'd think one would slow down. That's neither here nor there though with respect to the offence.

Thank you so much for your clarification Simon!

For # 2) above, could you please briefly let me know what's meant by " ....plead guilty with explanation". I mean what explanation, for exmaple, that I could give to JP?

For # 3), It was my fault that I didn't slow down, I was following a car in front of me, and I really didn't realize that I drove at 80km/hr. It was dark in the early morning and foggy, and I thought the white line was close enough to pass. It was my fault, and now regret that I didn't check my speed at that time, I will never do that again and will treat this as my lesson, anyway I don't want to discuss about this.

Once again thank you for the input and explanation. I hope you could give me more information regarding #2 above.

Thanks.

So guilty with an explanation just means you go before a JP, enter a plea of guilty and then give them your explanation with the hope that it will help the JP to justify reducing your fine. It's basically pleading guilty and then making submissions on sentence.

As to what exactly you'd say, I don't know because it depends on the circumstances of your case. You could raise any mitigating factors and try to show how this wasn't the most severe red light offence ever and that you're not the worst traffic offender ever. You could also make submissions about your financial situation if it is relevant to your ability to pay. These are just some examples of things people talk about to help give the JP justification for reducing the fine.