Topic 'Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?' in forum 'Canadian Chat' - dslreports.com

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:16:17 EDT

bylo posted :

said by TLS2000:

I won't argue any points you made anymore since it's obvious that we are in disagreement and will continue to be so.

There's no disagreement. You simply don't understand how our justice system works ;)

Last year, I got a ticket on HWY 410, I didn't respond on the assumption that I would get a trial. A few weeks after the deadline for my response, I received a letter telling me that I have been convicted of a traffic offense, and that I needed to pay the fine within 15 days of the mailing of the letter. No guilty plea, no trial, convicted. My rights were violated by the courts because they do not have the time to deal with trials. They ASSUMED that I was accepting guilt by not responding to the ticket.

You know what they say about making "assumptions" ;)

Here's my theory. In order to expedite due process of traffic offenses, the courts have changed how you exercise your right to a trial. In the past, if you did nothing you were assigned a court date. I suspect that many people, who had no intention of fighting their ticket or paying their fine, simply didn't show up. This created a lot of needless delays for the courts because your trial would be on the docket, the clerk had to read out the charges, wait for you to acknowledge your presence, etc. Also if the cop showed up but you didn't there'd be a further waste of police resources.

So, if my theory is correct, they changed the procedural rules. If you get a ticket and you want to fight it, then the onus is now on you to contact the court to set a trial date. If you don't do that, then the court presumes you're waiving your right to a trial and passes sentence accordingly.

The parking ticket I mentioned above supports that theory. If I'd wanted to exercise the 3rd option, i.e. to fight the ticket in court or even to "dispute its issuance", it requires me or my agent to go to one of only 4 locations in Toronto within 15 days. I cannot do this by phone or by mail. They're open to 6pm only on Wed and Thu and not at all on weekends. Etc. One has to be determined in order to get a trial. However, all the information on the ticket confirms that I still have the right to a trial, notwithstanding how difficult it may be for me to exercise that right.

Many would argue that the rules of the traffic court system are oriented to maximizing fine revenue. I'd certainly agree with that. However, even if their administrative procedures are intended to "encourage" you to pay the fine rather than fight the ticket in court, they do give you the opportunity to have your day in court.

Of course, if you feel strongly about this and/or still believe your right to a trial has been violated, then you're also free to consult a constitutional lawyer about your right to launch a Charter challenge.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:33:52 EDT

TLS2000 posted : I won't argue any points you made anymore since it's obvious that we are in disagreement and will continue to be so. However, there is one point that I will argue.

said by bylo:

They cannot waive your right to a trial. Only you can do that. And if you don't waive it, the court is bound by the Charter to give you one.

If you do not respond to the ticket, you are convicted without a trial. You have not pleaded guilty or innoccent, and the assumption is made that you have pleaded guilty, which is the same as assuming that you ARE guilty.

I have personal experience with this. A few years ago I got a ticket and was told by my counsel not to reply, as they would be obligated to give me a trial. They sent me a letter outlining that I have choosen to take my case to trial. I won the case after pleading not guilty at my trial when my counsel fought some mistakes the police officer had made.

Last year, I got a ticket on HWY 410, I didn't respond on the assumption that I would get a trial. A few weeks after the deadline for my response, I received a letter telling me that I have been convicted of a traffic offense, and that I needed to pay the fine within 15 days of the mailing of the letter. No guilty plea, no trial, convicted. My rights were violated by the courts because they do not have the time to deal with trials. They ASSUMED that I was accepting guilt by not responding to the ticket.
--
Tom Murdoch »www.tomscomputers.com

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:41:44 EDT

Devanchya posted : Tyreman, if I had any points left I'd promote you ;P

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:16:40 EDT

Tyreman posted : I listen to 96.3 classical.
It much slower paced.
The hurrier one goes.....the be hinder one gets.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:16:02 EDT

bylo posted :

said by Snickerdo3:

said by bylo:In that case, you'd appear before a judge to plead guilty and "allocute", but there would be no trial.

Actually, from what I understand, allocution is almost exclusively an American thing. Rather, here the Crown reads what is known as a Statement of Fact to the court, and if you agree with the events outlined in this statement, you plead guilty. In criminal trials, the crown and defense work together on the Statement of Fact prior to the plea so that the events read to the court are agreed upon by both parties.

Thank you. That's why I put "allocute" in quotes. I knew the term isn't used here but I wasn't familiar with Canadian practice. (IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.)

said by Snickerdo3:

said by bylo:If you try to pay a traffic ticket without signing your guilty plea on the back, the court clerk will return your ticket and require you to appear in court. They cannot waive your right to a trial. Only you can do that. And if you don't waive it, the court is bound by the Charter to give you one.

When a ticket is written, the fine listed is, 99% of the time, identical to what would be handed down by the court had you been given a trial. For this reason, it is always beneficial to take the case to court, as the Crown will reduce the fine as part of a plea bargain. If you mail in the ticket and pay the fine, you aren't doing yourself any favours. If time is a problem and you can't appear before the JP to enter the plea bargain, you can always send someone on your behalf.

It's been at least 10 years since my last moving violation. I'm sure that, at least then, it was cheaper to pay Da Man now rather than to pay him later. In any case, if you go to court, have your trial and lose, you'll pay court costs on top of whatever fine Da Man hands you.

BTW, I got a parking ticket in Toronto for Christmas. They gave me three options:
1. You can decide, within 7 days, not to dispute the charge and to make a "voluntary payment for the offense." No signature or admission of guilt is required.
2. You can decide, within 15 days, not to dispute the charge and to pay the "set fine... for the offense." In this case your signature is required however there is still no requirement that you admit guilt.
3. You can decide to go to court.

So Monty, what's the difference, apart from 7 vs 15 days and the terminology "voluntary payment" vs "set fine", between door number 1 and door number 2? There must be an interesting story behind the creation of that distinction.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:23:19 EDT

Snickerdo3 posted :

said by bylo:

In that case, you'd appear before a judge to plead guilty and "allocute", but there would be no trial.

said by bylo:

If you try to pay a traffic ticket without signing your guilty plea on the back, the court clerk will return your ticket and require you to appear in court. They cannot waive your right to a trial. Only you can do that. And if you don't waive it, the court is bound by the Charter to give you one.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:29:11 EDT

bylo posted :

said by TLS2000:

So what you're saying is, that after you have proven beyond reasonable doubt that you are innocent, no conviction will occur.

I said no such thing. In fact I said just the opposite. You're presumed innocent until the crown can prove beyond reasonable doubt that you're guilty. That doesn't mean you're necessarily innocent either, only that they can't prove it to that standard -- even if (wink, wink) everyone "knows" you did it (e.g. OJ Simpson.) Forests have been destroyed arguing over the meaning of the word "reasonable" and a JP who's spent years in traffic court may set a lower standard than a judge who's presiding in a murder trial, but that principle remains as the bedrock of our criminal justice system.

quote:
Your statement of how Laser/Radar is hard to cast doubt upon is incorrect.

I said "generally." Yes, people can challenge a radar/laser gun and the cop's use of it, etc. but it's much harder to do than to challenge a cop's estimate based on an observation from a moving vehicle. As others have said upthread, the cops who operate these devices have had special training and the devices are checked for accuracy on a regular basis, etc. All of that is done to make it as difficult as possible to successfully challenge a speeding ticket. That doesn't mean it's impossible, of course. But it's a helluva lot harder than with other moving violations where the evidence boils down to a simple "he said, she said."

quote:
In a criminal matter, you get a trial by default where the crown MUST prove that you commited the crime in question.

Again, you are completely mistaken. If both parties (Crown and accused) agree, you can waive your right to a trial and plead guilty. That's called a plea bargain. The reason it's a bargain is that by saving the cost and effort of a trial you get a lighter sentence. In that case, you'd appear before a judge to plead guilty and "allocute", but there would be no trial.

quote:
In a non-criminal traffic offense, you do NOT get a trial unless you request one. You are ASSUMED guilty, unless you introduce evidence that either proves the cop wrong, or introduces reasonable doubt as to your guilt. If you fail to do this, you ARE convicted.

Wrong again. Read what it says on the back of a traffic ticket. When you pay the fine you are voluntarily pleading guilty, accepting the cop's version of events as evidenced by the ticket, and waiving your legal right to a trial. In exchange you pay a smaller fine than if you had your day in court and were found guilty. In other words, you enter into a plea bargain.

If you try to pay a traffic ticket without signing your guilty plea on the back, the court clerk will return your ticket and require you to appear in court. They cannot waive your right to a trial. Only you can do that. And if you don't waive it, the court is bound by the Charter to give you one.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:28:23 EDT

FishPants posted :

said by Tyreman:

Ah ha! So you DO speed? end quote yours
Now whos jumping to conclusions?:D
And so what does that comment prove?
For your info thats how I know(and learned) it doesn't pay to speed:D
Like I type... go ahead speed. get ticketed.protest them.go to court. spend your life fighting the "system".
Its your choice.
I wouldn't want to be beholden but hey you enjoy it so play the game...you got lots of money-+
Fortunately for me I have better things to do in my day than costly non productive ventures that were created by my own "frivolity".

Do you ever listen to 102.1 the edge in the morning? Are you Eduardo? lol. On a more serious note, I haven't been dinged for a major speeding ticket since I was 16. My point was everyone speeds, even a little bit (Thus your little speeding ticket.. For speeding a little bit).

Not to worry you don't need to be "beholden", whatever that was supposed to mean.
--
Hail to the Nipple-Titan.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Thu, 12 Jan 2006 03:47:52 EDT

TLS2000 posted :

said by bylo:

To add further substantiation to that, the reason why the cops concentrate so much resource on speeders compared to other moving offenses, isn't because speeding is so much more dangerous but rather because radar/laser evidence is so much harder to refute or cast doubt on than subjective stuff like the cop's "opinion" that you were following to closely. If the cop says you were less than x car lengths or y meters from the car ahead, you can then ask him how he measured this, how accurate his measurement is, as well as remind him that he's testifying under oath. As soon as he acknowledges it was a visual estimate taken while he was also driving a car then you've got reasonable doubt. With a speeding ticket he has the objective evidence of the radar/laser device, i.e. 140 km/hr plus or minus the accuracy of the device. That's much harder to refute. It may get you knocked down to 130 km/hr but there will generally be no doubt that you were speeding.

So what you're saying is, that after you have proven beyond reasonable doubt that you are innocent, no conviction will occur. That's exactly what I've been saying ;) Your statement of how Laser/Radar is hard to cast doubt upon is incorrect. Can the cop PROVE that his Laser beam hit YOUR car? Does he have to PROVE it? Or do you have to PROVE that it didn't? Maybe the cop is dyslexic, and when he saw the radar gun say that you were doing 141km/hr, it actually said 114km/hr. Radar or Laser is NOT hard evidence. It is just evidence that is accepted as hard evidence, merely because the cop says so. This means that even though the cop can prove that he calibrated the Radar/Laser, he can not prove that the reading he got was correct, other than through his notes, which is circumstantial evidence at best.

A gun with your fingerprints on it that matches the ballistics of the bullet pulled out of the person you shot IS hard evidence. The police and crown have physical evidence in this case, which can prove beyond reasonable doubt that you are guilty. Without some kind of physical evidence, or a lot of circumstantial evidence, you will not be convicted.

In a criminal matter, you get a trial by default where the crown MUST prove that you commited the crime in question.

In a non-criminal traffic offense, you do NOT get a trial unless you request one. You are ASSUMED guilty, unless you introduce evidence that either proves the cop wrong, or introduces reasonable doubt as to your guilt. If you fail to do this, you ARE convicted.

Note the differences here:

Criminal trial: Crown charges you, you get a trial, crown introduces evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you commited the crime. Your RIGHT to a trial is exercised without you having to take any action. If you choose not to fight the charges, you plead guilty. If you have no plea, it is assumed that your plea is one of NOT guilty, and the trial will proceed.

Traffic office: Crown charges you, you do not request a trial, you may be summarily convicted without a trial, even if you do not plead guilty. The burden is on you to prove that you are innocent. I have a conviction on my record from a traffic ticket a year ago where I did NOT plead guilty, and I did NOT get a trial. If you are assumed innocent until proven guilty, simply not responding to the ticket should automatically get you a trial, because they should assume that you have plead NOT guilty. They currently assume that you plead GUILTY if you do not respond to a ticket.

A Radar / Laser is good evidence based upon the word of the police officer in question. There is no proof that you were caught doing anything except for what the police officer claims his Radar gun told him. There is no physical evidence and it is his word against yours. His notes are enough to convict you, as they are the only evidence that says that you were doing XXXkm/hr. There is no physical record of it. Your job is to refute his "evidence", or you will be convicted.

It may be really simple to refute his evidence, or to cast doubt upon it, which is why people can get off of these charges quite often. But that does not say that you are assumed innocent until they prove you guilty.

edit: I'm not saying that you do not have the right to be assumed innocent until you are proven guilty. I'm saying that the judicial system used to enforce non-criminal traffic violations is violating your rights by assuming that you are guilty based upon weak evidence at best. They force you to come out and strongly refute that weak evidence, whereas you should simply be able to say "I didn't do it, he's wrong, and I want him to prove how he is right"

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:30:06 EDT

Tyreman posted : Ah ha! So you DO speed? end quote yours
Now whos jumping to conclusions?:D
And so what does that comment prove?
For your info thats how I know(and learned) it doesn't pay to speed:D
Like I type... go ahead speed. get ticketed.protest them.go to court. spend your life fighting the "system".
Its your choice.
I wouldn't want to be beholden but hey you enjoy it so play the game...you got lots of money-+
Fortunately for me I have better things to do in my day than costly non productive ventures that were created by my own "frivolity".

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:39:48 EDT

bylo posted :

said by Snickerdo3:

said by TLS2000:

Here's the thing Bylo: If a police officer charges you with Murder, unless he has solid evidence indicating that you committed a murder, you will NOT be convicted on his word that you did it. If you are charged with a non-criminal traffic violation, the police officer merely has to state that you were doing such and such, with not a shred of evidence, and you will be convicted unless you prove him wrong.

Bzzt, wrong again. I have been to many Provincial Offenses proceedings where someone took the case to trial, outlined what they were doing and the JP found them not guilty. The burden of proof is on the Crown, and a police officers 'word' is NOT enough to obtain a conviction anymore than it would be in a murder trial.

To add further substantiation to that, the reason why the cops concentrate so much resource on speeders compared to other moving offenses, isn't because speeding is so much more dangerous but rather because radar/laser evidence is so much harder to refute or cast doubt on than subjective stuff like the cop's "opinion" that you were following to closely. If the cop says you were less than x car lengths or y meters from the car ahead, you can then ask him how he measured this, how accurate his measurement is, as well as remind him that he's testifying under oath. As soon as he acknowledges it was a visual estimate taken while he was also driving a car then you've got reasonable doubt. With a speeding ticket he has the objective evidence of the radar/laser device, i.e. 140 km/hr plus or minus the accuracy of the device. That's much harder to refute. It may get you knocked down to 130 km/hr but there will generally be no doubt that you were speeding.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:47:17 EDT

Snickerdo3 posted :

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:40:43 EDT

TLS2000 posted :

said by bylo:

"You" should but in my experience as a pedestrian, all too few do. Just watch what goes on at busy Toronto intersections, especially during rush hour, to see what I mean. If car drivers don't at least signal their intentions then how are pedestrians supposed to anticipate someone who may not stop?

In any case, it's much easier to train yourself to always signal, even if there's no one around to see it, then to tailor your signalling to who's around. Again, all too many drivers seem to not signal by default. And just as bad, often when drivers do signal, they do so after they've begun their lane change or slowed down for the turn. That may meet the letter of the law but it hardly meets the intent.

I completely agree with you. My argument was that it is not a requirement of Ontario law that you signal a turn, if it won't affect other traffic.

I can't stand dumbasses who think that it's okay to signal after starting a lane change/braking for a turn/braking for a u-turn/braking to stop on the side of the road/insert your own pet peeve here. I signal every move I make before I do it, because even though it may not be the law all the time, it is certainly polite.

said by bylo:

That's quite a charge to make against our legal system. The onus is on you to prove it beyond reasonable doubt

Although I've had very little first-hand experience, that's not how it has appeared to me. If you can shed some reasonable doubt on the evidence provided by the crown then you will be found not guilty. Of course traffic court judges have heard all the usual stories and excuses, so you'd better have something credible or your "argument" is toast.

Here's the thing Bylo: If a police officer charges you with Murder, unless he has solid evidence indicating that you committed a murder, you will NOT be convicted on his word that you did it. If you are charged with a non-criminal traffic violation, the police officer merely has to state that you were doing such and such, with not a shred of evidence, and you will be convicted unless you prove him wrong.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:23:35 EDT

FishPants posted :

said by Tyreman:

Well I knew that was coming.
How do you know how I drive?
Answer you don't.

True. But I have a feeling you still speed.

said by Tyreman:

But you figure by your entitlement of licence, young age or urine and vinegar you are entitled to speed.

No. It's a simple fact of life, breath in that fresh air outside I think it may do you some good. Jump to conclusions much?

said by Tyreman:

As you type roughly:Who doesn't speed if not a little bit.
Thats how you excuse it.
Driving on to days roads is way different than before.

Before what? The gulf war? The vietnam war? WW1? The pioneers settling the land? You make no sense, and coincidentally neither does your argument.

said by Tyreman:

More complex roads, More traffic, more pedestrians you name it.Many close quartered turns in and out of mall areas and coffee shops etc.Multi lane highways.

Very true. I looked back at my original post and I never posted "You should speed in parking lots, or in the tim horton's drive through". Never ass-ume.

said by Tyreman:

for your info:
I drove up until last year..commercially.. in a service van for 25 years(night driving and all hours) and having been hit by 2 drunks(ironically from behind each time and 1 person additionally who didn't know what they were about internally)
Yes in my driving history I had a speeding ticket.. in '91 in my car 10km. over.
And speed in most accidents is definitely a factor.

Ah ha! So you DO speed? Guess it's hard to be up on that high horse while racing around the highway like everyone else. You simply have proven my point, everyone speeds even a little bit. Cheers!
--
Hail to the Nipple-Titan.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:13:10 EDT

Smokey posted :

said by Brownbay:

Can the cops inconsistent signature be used in my advantage.

Not in the slightest.
--
Son, you got a panty on your head!

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:07:06 EDT

Brownbay posted : Alright guys, in my futile attempt to fight this ticket... I've upped a picture of the cops signature on both the tickets I received (No Insurance/Speeding). Can the cops inconsistent signature be used in my advantage. I'm pretty sure this does not constitute a "fatal flaw" in the ticket... or it could just be my eyes playing tricks on me.

The other interesting point (although I doubt the judge will care) is that the cop was waiting a the end of a slope a few KM away from the Britania Rd. sign. And this isn't a gradual slope either... its noticeable (begins right after Derry Rd. I think). I'd love to get my hands on an elevation map of the 407 at that particular point.

And umm, I asked before - but I guess with the influx of posts you guys might have missed it. So I'll ask one last time: does anybody know how good the Milton/Burlington cops are at showing up to court for traffic cases?

Thanks A LOT for all the advice you guys have given so far. It really did help!
--
You can make Time wait... Just don't count it.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:58:22 EDT

Tyreman posted : Then drive moderately above the speed limit.
Get your tickets.
beat your insurance company before they find out
go court
spend your time fighting them.
you must have lots of time to do it.
say driving on the 401 at 20 kmh over the posted with everyone else..
just make sure you can all stop and have left enough room between vehicles to do so.
unfortunately that doesn't work that way.
but its your culture of entitlement to do so.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:51:46 EDT

Smokey posted : Properly done, even at great range radar is very accurate.

As to the other idea that a truck in the other lane could effect the radar, it can, but a trained operator knows how to set the radar to not do that as easily, and when to know that it did happen and get a new reading.
--
Son, you got a panty on your head!

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:49:40 EDT

Wolfie00 posted : Furthermore, driving moderately above the speed limit can be completely consistent with safe driving, all the more so when everyone else is speeding and the "pious" one constitutes a goddamned obstacle on the road. Posted limits are usually 10 to 20 Km/h lower than they need to be unless the driver over 98 years old, half-blind, and possesses the reflexes of a cabbage.

The key thing is driving for the conditions. Unfortunately most idiots don't know what that means, so vehicles end up in the ditch during even light snowstorms, and at the start of showers when roads are at the peak of slickness. Being alert, anticipating other drivers' actions, signalling, and having a safe well-maintained vehicle are the other keys to safe driving.

It really irks me to see cops sitting at radar traps in areas where the "natural" speed (and safe speed) is much higher than the posted limit -- and meanwhile I've seen idiots weaving in and out of traffic, morons trying to run red lights where one of those caused a huge accident right in front of me a few months ago, and lots of other dangerous things daily that are basically accidents waiting to happen. Those things are dangerous. Driving at a speed higher than the posted limit inherently is not. Unfortunately, speeding is the easiest infraction for cops to process, especially with modern radar equipment when they can just set up an assembly line, so the real problems don't get much attention.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:47:16 EDT

Tyreman posted : Well I knew that was coming.
How do you know how I drive?
Answer you don't.
But you figure by your entitlement of licence, young age or urine and vinegar you are entitled to speed.
As you type roughly:Who doesn't speed if not a little bit.
Thats how you excuse it.
Driving on to days roads is way different than before.
More complex roads, More traffic, more pedestrians you name it.Many close quartered turns in and out of mall areas and coffee shops etc.Multi lane highways.
for your info:
I drove up until last year..commercially.. in a service van for 25 years(night driving and all hours) and having been hit by 2 drunks(ironically from behind each time and 1 person additionally who didn't know what they were about internally)
Yes in my driving history I had a speeding ticket.. in '91 in my car 10km. over.
And speed in most accidents is definitely a factor.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:43:08 EDT

FishPants posted :

said by Tyreman:

1.then don't speed in the first place.
2. I am typing tickets in the $75.00-$100.00 range hence my typing "basic" ticket
No way thats going to pay to go to court on unless a party thats likely to have a points review or put him her to that state..then you shouldn't be operating a motor vehicle any way.

Oh puhleeze, who doesn't speed even if not a little bit? Perhaps your are pious (and should apply for the next pope posting) but I guarantee everyone in here speeds to a certain degree. :uhh:
--
Hail to the Nipple-Titan.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:42:52 EDT

Snickerdo3 posted :

said by Deadpool0:

You could also argue in court and ask the officer to prove that the speed gun he used was properly calibrated and how often he does it, how far he was from you when he tagged you, etc...

They're required to calibrate the gun twice a day, once at the beginning of the shift, and once at the end. If you go to trail and get disclosure, you will be provided with information on this. If the gun wasn't calibrated, the crown would more than likely withdraw the charge on the spot.

said by Deadpool0:

Keep in mind that the farther you are from the gun, the large the area the gun covers.

Radar, yes. Laser, however, is a whole different situation, and only reflects off a single point.
--
Bigot - Someone that has won an argument with a Liberal.
Yes, I CanChat. Can You? www.fiberal.ca

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:20:15 EDT

Deadpool0 posted : You could also argue in court and ask the officer to prove that the speed gun he used was properly calibrated and how often he does it, how far he was from you when he tagged you, etc...

Keep in mind that the farther you are from the gun, the large the area the gun covers.

I'm not from Toronto, so I don't know the area, but if a huge truck was passing in the opposite direction of the highway at the same time, and going 140 km/h, then it could have been that vehicle that got caught, and not you.

Although not likely, it opens the door for ya...
--
Sens 4 - Leafs 0 **** Round 5 of 8: January 21 2006

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:53:49 EDT

Tyreman posted : 1.then don't speed in the first place.
2. I am typing tickets in the $75.00-$100.00 range hence my typing "basic" ticket
No way thats going to pay to go to court on unless a party thats likely to have a points review or put him her to that state..then you shouldn't be operating a motor vehicle any way.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:51:05 EDT

kim posted : Everyone that I know that has gone to court to fight a ticket or even plead guilty has had it reduced. I don't know of any cases where it wasn't worthwhile to fight it.

Whether you fight it depends on what your time is worth also. If the ticket is $100 and you will loose $200 by taking a day off work then it's pretty straighforward.
--
Choose heaven for climate, hell for society.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:18:46 EDT

Deschutes posted :

said by TLS2000:

And quoting Ohio law is going to prove your point that I am wrong about Ontario law?

Actually no, I was quoting Uniform Vehicle Code. But you are correct in that I quoted a US code, rather than Canadian law.
--
I have tried to see things from your point of view, but no matter how hard I try, or what I do, I just can't get my head that far up my ass.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:39:58 EDT

bylo posted :

said by TLS2000:

As for pedestrians on a green light, there is no requirement to let them know you are about to turn, you should be stopping for them anyway, no?

"You" should but in my experience as a pedestrian, all too few do. Just watch what goes on at busy Toronto intersections, especially during rush hour, to see what I mean. If car drivers don't at least signal their intentions then how are pedestrians supposed to anticipate someone who may not stop?

In any case, it's much easier to train yourself to always signal, even if there's no one around to see it, then to tailor your signalling to who's around. Again, all too many drivers seem to not signal by default. And just as bad, often when drivers do signal, they do so after they've begun their lane change or slowed down for the turn. That may meet the letter of the law but it hardly meets the intent.

The mere fact that you are charged puts the onus on you to prove yourself innocent. The judge will assume you are guilty unless you provide proof to the contrary. Technically the crown does have the burden of having to prove your guilt, yes. You will find that in traffic court, the system is set up the exact opposite way. If you can not prove beyond reasonable doubt that you are innocent, you will be found guilty.

That's quite a charge to make against our legal system. The onus is on you to prove it beyond reasonable doubt ;)

Although I've had very little first-hand experience, that's not how it has appeared to me. If you can shed some reasonable doubt on the evidence provided by the crown then you will be found not guilty. Of course traffic court judges have heard all the usual stories and excuses, so you'd better have something credible or your "argument" is toast.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:43:11 EDT

TLS2000 posted :

said by bylo:

Are you sure? What about oncoming traffic when you make a left turn? What about pedestrians who are crossing the street on a green light that you're about to turn into? Do they not deserve a signal? How else are they supposed to know what you're about to do?

I mistakenly said that it would have to have effect on someone behind you. You are required to signal if it will have an effect on other drivers.

As for pedestrians on a green light, there is no requirement to let them know you are about to turn, you should be stopping for them anyway, no?

said by bylo:

Are you sure? AFAIK you're presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law (or you plead guilty.) The onus is on the cop to prove you broke the law. His notes, when provided as evidence at trial, are taken as that proof unless you're able to shed some doubt on their veracity. Ordinarily that's not an easy thing to do.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:28:42 EDT

TLS2000 posted :

said by Deschutes:

Using your signals is the law, and can cost you a fine if you don't use them. You are always "required" to signal if you are driving anywhere other than straight ahead. Many don't do it, but it is most definitely required.

»www.ohiobike.org/NCUTLO/ ··· 1pt2.htm

And quoting Ohio law is going to prove your point that I am wrong about Ontario law?

»192.75.156.68/DBLaws/Sta ··· tm#BK199

Refer to 142:

The driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway before turning to the left or right at any intersection or into a private road or driveway or from one lane for traffic to another lane for traffic or to leave the roadway shall first see that the movement can be made in safety, and if the operation of any other vehicle may be affected by the movement shall give a signal plainly visible to the driver or operator of the other vehicle of the intention to make the movement. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 142 (1).

In other words: Signal if it is going to have affect on other traffic, otherwise, it is NOT required. Nothing in there about how you need to signal at ALL times.

edit: Actually, it's kind of funny, the HTA mentions nothing about signalling a lane change. Only right and left turns

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:53:02 EDT

koira posted : You might try explaining the insurance form to the judge. You do have it and it was a matter of not finding the form quickly for the impatient Officer. It was in there wasn't it ? Who says there is a time limit within reason of course.

As for the speed , it looks like he clocked you at 140. You need to tell a story why that was so quick to the judge.
Being behind the truck then pulling in front of the truck and not seeing the signs won't sound good . Common sense says slow down and back off so you can see down the road instead of riding the truck so close that you can't see around it. All the exits are in the right lane and you should have been in it driving at 100km or so with a safe distance ahead of you.

You might want to try a story about how you were going with the flow, ie you were keeping up with the traffic but didn't realize how fast everyone was going. At the end of the day you were speeding. Admit you were speeding and ask for a break saying you learned your lesson and that you won't be back. He might drop the fine. Then just keep your word and don't mess around in traffic. Good Luck

WALSTIB

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:31:53 EDT

FishPants posted :

said by Tyreman:

And nobody is going to fight a basic speeding ticket in court which means taking a day at least off work to do it.
doesn't make economic sense.

Sure it does. Say cost of ticket = $200, even if you are pulling $30 an hour ($240 for an 8 hour day) you need to factor in insurance premium adjustment over a number of years (usually a couple hundred at least unless they don't catch you). Makes simple economic sense to fight it.
--
Hail to the Nipple-Titan.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:26:13 EDT

Tyreman posted : And nobody is going to fight a basic speeding ticket in court which means taking a day at least off work to do it.
doesn't make economic sense.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:22:07 EDT

Snickerdo3 posted :

He was wrong. The Crown still has the burden of proof, and anyone who has ever plead to a lesser charge in the Provincial Offenses Court will remember that the JP quite clearly says that by pleading guilty, you are giving up your right to a trial where the Crown will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are guilty of the offense. The difference between a regulatory offense and a criminal offense is that simply committing the a regulatory offense is grounds to being found guilty, whereas in a criminal case they must also prove mens rea in addition to the facts of the case.
--
Bigot - Someone that has won an argument with a Liberal.
Yes, I CanChat. Can You? www.fiberal.ca

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:10:49 EDT

Deschutes posted :

said by TLS2000:

ewriter:One thing to keep in mind when it comes to using your signals, you are only required to use a signal if your lane change/turn will cause someone behind you to have to slow down. This is in the HTA.

Using your signals is the law, and can cost you a fine if you don't use them. You are always "required" to signal if you are driving anywhere other than straight ahead. Many don't do it, but it is most definitely required.

»www.ohiobike.org/NCUTLO/ ··· 1pt2.htm
--
I have tried to see things from your point of view, but no matter how hard I try, or what I do, I just can't get my head that far up my ass.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:37:09 EDT

bylo posted :

said by TLS2000:

You are guilty of a traffic offense in Ontario unless you prove yourself innocent of the charge. If the police officer had shown up for your court date and presented his notes as evidence, you probably would have lost.

Are you sure? AFAIK you're presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law (or you plead guilty.) The onus is on the cop to prove you broke the law. His notes, when provided as evidence at trial, are taken as that proof unless you're able to shed some doubt on their veracity. Ordinarily that's not an easy thing to do.

said by TLS2000:

One thing to keep in mind when it comes to using your signals, you are only required to use a signal if your lane change/turn will cause someone behind you to have to slow down. This is in the HTA.

Are you sure? What about oncoming traffic when you make a left turn? What about pedestrians who are crossing the street on a green light that you're about to turn into? Do they not deserve a signal? How else are they supposed to know what you're about to do?

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:29:30 EDT

TLS2000 posted : ewriter:

You are guilty of a traffic offense in Ontario unless you prove yourself innocent of the charge. If the police officer had shown up for your court date and presented his notes as evidence, you probably would have lost.

One thing to keep in mind when it comes to using your signals, you are only required to use a signal if your lane change/turn will cause someone behind you to have to slow down. This is in the HTA.
--
Tom Murdoch »www.tomscomputers.com

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:40:29 EDT

dirtyjeffer0 posted :

said by ewriter :
...or the gomint should give every1 who does a $100 'Clean Air refund.'

oh my...now i have seen many different ways of spelling the word government, but that has to be the strangest.
--
"You seem to be looking to buy, but perhaps you are only curious...I think you are buy curious." ;)

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Sat, 07 Jan 2006 04:37:10 EDT

blackeyes02 posted : London Ontario? Isn't bulldogdsl.com located England and Wales.:o

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Sat, 07 Jan 2006 03:51:39 EDT

anon posted : This is probably a post too late, but i had some good experience awhile back over being pulled over Dec. 23 by a cop in London Ont. He figured 'i didn't signal' when i turned right; that cost me a $60 ticket plus whatever. I decided he was being a jerk and that i would not pay, from the start (since in all fairness, i CLEARLY remember signalling). The cop also told me to get my 'noisy muffler fixed.' This was a very unpleasant incident for me cos my older brother was visiting and with me at the time; and in typical fashion he blamed me (though he doesn't even drive).

Thing is, the cop told me my signal light was not working. This was news to me, as i was sure it was.

When i took it to court, i told the judge that i regularly check the lights and was sure it was working, and that i definitely signalled (cop didn't bother showing up). To accolades from those facing much worse fines and 'Serving You COP ATM mobile bank machine charges,' the judge responded that the charge would be dismissed. There was no fine and no points etc.

The reason i was reasonably certain i would not be paying the fine or court costs, was that i realised it was my word against the cop's. After all, could he be 100% sure that I had not moved my indicator stick? Could he PROVE that he saw me and that i did not do that, from his donut-mobile? And could he PROVE that i KNEW that i was driving with a 'broken tail light?' (in fact it was just loose and worked fine although it DID not work when i was stopped).

The fact that the cop could NEVER prove that i actually 'did not signal' meant that i could easily tell this to the judge and the judge COULD NOT make this charge stick.

Hope you can think up something useful like this...personally, i detest the 401 and the 407 but only at 'rush hour' because (especially for drivers new to the road or who've not been on it recently) it is very easy to miss an exit. The first time i took my galfriend (x now) many years ago on that route, i was trying to get off the 401 and ended up taking the LAST exit on it...which of course put me on the 403 to Hamilton. The girlfriend was not impressed (but jerkoffs driving like idiots are SO hard to pass, since they WILL speed up if you do and prevent you from making your exit).

I think everyone who can should buy an electric scooter like i have...or the gomint should give every1 who does a $100 'Clean Air refund.' Like that's ever gonna happen...

Cheers

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Sat, 07 Jan 2006 02:15:57 EDT

blackeyes02 posted : You could have a case about the insurance. The owner of the car is responsible to supply you the driver with all the proper paperwork. Not your drivers license but ownership can be photocopied and insurance companies give you plenty of copies. One can be left in the car.

By the way, truck drivers really, really and really hate when you 4wheelers speed passed to make an exit. It's dangerous. You have no idea how many people could lose their lives by that action. If a truck losses control anything is possible. Especially, this time of year. Please stop it. Thank.

P.S. No matter who is in the right, you tangle with a big rig you won't be around to worry about it.
--
Science is keeping an open mind and not having your mind already made up before studying something. -Dr. Brian Weiss

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 23:15:37 EDT

Snickerdo3 posted :

said by FishPants:

Wrong. They look at convictions under the HTA, period. Granted if you are DUI vs Speeding, then yes there are different insurance penalties. But if you get no points for speeding, vs points, they don't care (more money for them). My brother in law works for an insurance company (along with the various news stories lately about convictions vs points) kind of back that up. Please stop spreading misinformation.

Correct. There are only three infraction classifications used by the insurance company to determine surcharges - minor, major and serious. Almost everything falls under the 'minor' category, except for speeding over 50KM/h over the limit, which falls under 'major.' Careless driving, dangerous driving (criminal version of careless) and all forms of impaired driving and its lesser included offenses are considered serious. Minor convictions may go un-noticed by an insurance company, while major will usually result in a 25% surcharge. Serious usually results in the Facility Association being your only way to get insurance.

In addition, when an insurance company pulls an abstract, they don't see the fine or the points that were added to your license, they merely see what section under the HTA you were convicted under. Speeding is speeding under the HTA, except for Over 50KM/h which has its own special subsection (which, in turn, allows them to classify this as a major rather than minor infraction). Points are only used by the MTO internally to determine license suspensions, they have zero impact on anything else.
--
Bigot - Someone that has won an argument with a Liberal.
Yes, I CanChat. Can You? www.fiberal.ca

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 23:08:43 EDT

Snickerdo3 posted :

said by mr weather:

Yes, OPP are "paid duty" on the 407. In fact, that may make them even more "conscientious" about handing out tickets.

Exactly. I can't remember exactly what happens, but the fact that it occurs on private property means that the municipality doesn't get the money, which means that the OPP and the Provincial Offenses Courts are less likely to fight a ticket tooth and nail.

Also, Speeding is most certainly NOT a criminal act! A traffic violation doesn't require 'mens rea' (lit: guilty mind, which is intent and recklessness) for conviction As a result, it is considered a regulatory offense, and therefore an 'infraction' rather than a 'crime.' For more information, see:

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re ··· offences
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R. ··· roup_Inc.
--
Bigot - Someone that has won an argument with a Liberal.
Yes, I CanChat. Can You? www.fiberal.ca

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:36:58 EDT

mr weather posted : Yes, OPP are "paid duty" on the 407. In fact, that may make them even more "conscientious" about handing out tickets.
--
"It's all coming down!!" - Mike Holmes

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 22:30:04 EDT

DKS posted :

said by AR:

On the 407? I thought the OPP don't give tickets on the 407. During weekends, I've done 140 on that freeway. I'll be careful next time.

The OPP police 407 as it is a provincial highway.

quote:
Q. Will law enforcement be the same on this highway as other provincial highways?
A. In accordance with the Highway 407 Act and for customer safety, 407 ETR pays to have the highway patrolled. 407 ETR is patrolled in the same way as other 400 series highways, by the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) and Ministry of Transportation (MTO) Enforcement Officers.

»www.407etr.com/qas/qas.a ··· orcement
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:58:19 EDT

digitalfutur posted : Not many drive at the limit on the 407. But ya gotta know where you can speed, when (only during rush hour), and how (never be the lone speeder or the lead vehicle in a pack).

Normal speed on the 407 in the fast lane is 140 clicks but if you're in a pack of luxo tourers, 160 is normal. Now that's the express toll route.
--
Less said takes longer. Walk the talk.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:57:15 EDT

andyb posted : Fishpants anything to do with your license stays for 6 years in the insurance industry.(actually 10 but they cant use it)

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:55:30 EDT

AR posted : On the 407? I thought the OPP don't give tickets on the 407. During weekends, I've done 140 on that freeway. I'll be careful next time.

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:54:25 EDT

andyb posted : get a company called points i think as was allready said.you are allowed to go over speed limit in order to overtake someone.you are also allowed 24 hours to provide license/ownership/insurance

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:36:05 EDT

joeblow3 posted :

said by Snickerdo3:

Usually you need 2-3 before the insurance company will notice, but they'll ding you on your first if you volunteer the information. Pointts and the like are a waste of money, all they do is act as an agent on your behalf to plead the case. If you have some time off, you can do it yourself and get an identical result. You can also send a family member as an 'agent' on your behalf if you can't appear before the JP to enter the guilty plea after you negotiate with the Crown.

Ya right. I got stopped in March 2002, cop gave me 14 over, $50 ticket, no points. First ticket in over 22 years. My insurance on the next 3 contracts had a ticket surcharge of $97 and $97 and $103. Three years of surcharges $297 over a $50 ticket. A$$ H*@!|$. Insurance companies, some, check driver abstracts every 6 months.
Good Luck
Bill

Re: I got snagged for speeding, now what?

Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:25:29 EDT

Desi posted : Back in '03, my dad got a speeding ticket while taking a fare to Sudbury (yes, someone paid for a taxi from Ottawa to Sudbury :D ). We sent it in as a not guilty, and requested a court date. A few weeks later, we got something in the mail from the Renfrew County Courthouse. It was a "Request for Disclosure", it didn't specify anything else on it, just a sheet of paper to sign and mail back. I remembered back to my High School Law classes, and remembered that the Crown MUST share with the defense ANY piece of evidence that they possess; disclosure. So we signed it and sent it back, mainly just to see what the crown has at his disposal. What we got was rather surprising. We got a big thick package with photocopy's of the ticket, officers notes from the scene, and a computer generated report (that I assume was generated at the time, by the officer in the cruiser). This report detailed everything from the events that took place leading to the ticket, weather conditions, traffic conditions, drivers attitude, and a whole hell of a lot more. I think I still have it kickin around here somewhere...

Anyways, you could possibly use this information (if you can get it, this is the only time I have heard of it being sent out) to craft a defence...
--
The User formerly known as Desi StYlE