Need Help with speeding ticket

[mk316]

Guys I got a court date for March 11 for a ticket I got March 10 last year. I got a ticket of $67 for doing 69km/h on a 50km/h street. This occured on Pharmacy avenue just north of lawrence on the downhill section as you're going northbound.

Does anyone have any experience with tickets to help me out. Should I go myself or send in one of those paralegal companies. I hear the prosecutors always want to bargain some cases before court. Mine is a pretty small speeding offence and is also my first one but still nervous obviously since this will result in 3 demerit points if convicted.

[voyager6868]

One thing that seems obvious to me is that it will have been over 12 months between the date of the offense and your court date.

"McCarter was referring to the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in 1992 that eight to 10 months was a reasonable wait for cases to go to trial, which resulted in 50,000 criminal charges being dropped."

Now this Supreme Court ruling *may have* only applied to criminal trials, not traffic court. But you could still try to make the argument that waiting over a year is simply unreasonable, based on this 1992 ruling, and have the charges dropped.

[voyager6868]

Actually I was reading a bit more, and probably since your case isn't a criminal one, the delay argument won't work. The main reason for throwing out a case for an unreasonable delay is because of the stigma associated with being accused of a crime. In this case, I don't think you could argue that you have a reputation to protect after being given a ticket for speeding

[TrevorK]

You were speeding, so suck it up and pay the ticket.

Be a man.

[chivalryx]

You were speeding, so suck it up and pay the ticket.

Be a man.


Either that, or if the traffic laws are the same there as in the GVRD, if the traffic cop doesn't show up to contest your complaint, the charge gets thrown out. Happens a lot too since cops usually have better things to do than go to court for small things like this.

[Rosico]

You were speeding, so suck it up and pay the ticket.

Be a man.

Wow, I bet nobody here has ever gone past the speed limit here! lol.

Get a paralegal's opinion. Then do a cost/benefit analysis on thier costs vs. the cost of your rising insurance. You will likely find out that it is cheaper to fight the ticket with their assistance. My advice is to protect your record!

[gostinger]

I've been to court for a seatbelt ticket and while there many people were caught by the same officer on Pharmacy for speeding and everyone seemed to be able to plead guilty to a lesser charge , one woman was even going over 70 km in 50 zone (school) my ticket for the seatbelt though seemed like i was on a murderous rampage in comparison.You'll be fine in court so it seems, to get it reduced.As for me though i guess due to the fact i may have become a human missile after a collision and may injure someone else or even kill them while in fact I and others can speed around like maniacs and take the chance that we just might get it reduced. :confused:

By the way they will show up for court...the whole docket is theirs and they will be reemed

[rookie]

Just pay it and quit wasting tax money already!

[Cheap Dave]

I agree with others here. I got caught doing 120 in an 80. The tag was like $265 or something. This was my first ticket and I was scared sh*tless. In the end, I listened to the "just pay it and get it over with" plan and all worked out fine. I lost a few points, but got them back a couple years ago.

Just get it over with and try to take it easy on the lead foot.

[SUPERMAN-01]

fight the ticket.
set a date and make the officer go.
they usually dont since it such a small matter.
but if they do just pay it and get it over with. they uisually lower the ticket as well ifu talk to them

[mattwing]

Points not used by the insurace industry. They are only used by the goverenment for establishing mandatory suspensions.

When applying for new insurance they ask how may minor tickets and how many major tickets do you have. You already have a minor ticket, pleading guilty to another offence is the same for insurance purposes, even if it is less points. Look at ay of the websites regarding insurance quotes (kanetix.com for example) they will ask for tickets excluding parking tickets, without ever mentioning points.

Pleading to a lesser offence only helps if you plead a major into a minor, for example reckless driving to into a following to close charge.

Paralegals/Ex-cop companies specializing in traffic tickets often charge only if they win, but they considered having you pleading guilty to a lesser charge as a successful defence. Like I said at the start that is only helpful to you if you have a charge for a major offence. If you have a minor charge, I would get them to represent me only if they totally got me off.

[Canadianpsycho]

Just pay it and quit wasting tax money already!

Like it will stop them from raising taxes regardless.


Best option: Set a court date. Either the cop doesn't show up (highly unlikely nowadays) and you get out of the ticket, or you can go to the prosecutor, and he'll offer you a lower charge (15 over) which is no points and like 40 bucks. If you're a student or whatever, let them know you don't have much money, they'll possibly drop the fine a bit, or at the very least give you even longer to pay it (just dont forget ;) )

I've been ticketed 6-7 times for speeding. Points and X-copper are useless. Especially for a 70 dollar ticket.

[bargain shopper]

I'm not sure why everyone keeps telling you to suck it up and pay, please who hasn't ever gotten a ticket. I think the least you should do is get a price quote from a few ticket fighters. "Ontario Traffic tickets" will pay your fine if you don't win, I hear "ticket advocates" will not charge you anything if they don't win, that means the most you can lose is $67.00, the cost of your ticket. And these 2 places, WIN means 100% discharge, not a lesser offence or reduced points. Go look up in the phone book or internet, "paralegals", there should be tonnes. You don't even actaully have to go in to talk to them, just fax them ur ticket and they can give you a quote.

Hope all goes well for you.

[jm1]

All you'll ever need to know (although it has a bias towards fighting vs. just paying it and don't worry about it):

http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/

[D-3vil]

Since the court date is scheduled more than a year after the offense date, all you have to do is fill out a form (forgot the name of it, but info is available on the net as far as I know) and you're off... the charge will be dropped!

Sorry for the bold, but I know personally that this is true... I personally know worked for various traffic and criminal offenses (from speeding tickets to reckless driving) -- no, it wasn't me who was charged.

If you're unsure about what you need to do, contact an agent. He will charge you a fee, but your record will remain untainted.

[drfritz]

The 1 year delay in the court date will work, if it is from the originally scheduled date of the infraction; that is YOU did not re-schedule.

Also, since the traffit cases are now held in provincial courts, you are entitled to disclosure. That is, all the eveidence the crown will use against you must be provided to you; in order to prepare a proper defense.

I personally have been able to avoid convictions using both methods mentioned above.
In the first case you need to fill in a form and present it to the prosecutor prior to you court date. It states that your rights to a fair and speedy trial have been violated and that you are requesting the case to be dismissed.

In the second case, if the crown fails to provide you with disclosure, you would request that the evidence be disallowed.
Some judges allows this, others *listen* to the crown and will re-schedule a new date with disclosure to be provided. You need to argue that the crown had sufficient opportunity to provide disclosure and that they failed in their obligation.

**If they DID provide disclosure, you might be in a position to know ahead of time some of the flaws in the evidence that will be used in a court of law.
if you feel uncomfortable about this, give the disclosure to one of those para-legals to look at. (Not my choice... paralegals will try to convince you to plead guilty to a reduced charge (speed)... something that you could have done yourself.)

[TrevorK]

I'm not sure why everyone keeps telling you to suck it up and pay, please who hasn't ever gotten a ticket.

He sped, and knew the consequences.

Now he is trying to weasel out of it.

That shows a total lack of responsibility and honesty.


What ever happened to taking responsibility for your actions?

[mattwing]

Hate the game not the player.

[Flux]

Hate the game not the player.

What a completely useless post.

I was more than happy to pay my first (and only) speeding ticket. I knew I was being stupid, I got caught being stupid, so I acted like a big boy and took my medicine. What's so hard about that?

[pangus]

Just search on the web how to fight a speeding tickets. There are tons of advise.

If you go to the court, 1. the case dropped if the officer does not show up.
2. you can contest the charge about over 1 year delay. 3. you can give all those lame excuse (and sometimes those works!!!) 4. even all did not work out, the judge would usually lessen the charge and you got no points.

For those who pay up front, you are missing a lot. Not only the speeding ticket you are paying, but also the raised insurance for years to come and probably points also. The total cost could easily over $1000 over a couple years period! Unless you got pay > $100 an hour, the time you spent in court definitely worth it!!

Anyone ever have go to the transportation office admit the ticket and pay the speeding fine? I went there once, and I saw people working there ACTUALLY keep hinting people to go to court to contest the charges!!

[voyager6868]

He sped, and knew the consequences.

Now he is trying to weasel out of it.

That shows a total lack of responsibility and honesty.


What ever happened to taking responsibility for your actions?

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Let me guess.. If one of your loved ones was on trial for murder and you knew she did it, would you say "You killed and knew the consequences sweetie, so may as well admit to it".

Of course not. Everyone's entitled to a fair trial and is entitled to any legal means at their disposal. If you tell them anything less, you're doing a disservice to our justice system as a whole.

[nano]

tell the judge your sorry you have learned from your mistake then tell them ur a student or you just had a baby and u cant afford to pay the ticket i always say that and i get the charges dropped or reduced to almost nothing.

[Busiu]

I agree with Canadianpsycho, this is the best approach to take



Best option: Set a court date. Either the cop doesn't show up (highly unlikely nowadays) and you get out of the ticket, or you can go to the prosecutor, and he'll offer you a lower charge (15 over) which is no points and like 40 bucks. If you're a student or whatever, let them know you don't have much money, they'll possibly drop the fine a bit, or at the very least give you even longer to pay it (just dont forget ;) )

From a recent experience I've learned to look around the court room for the cop that issued you the ticket. If he's not there you'll be free. If he is there then approach the Prosecutor (As soon as you get any opportunity, He/she will likely be extremely busy just before the scheduled trials and you want to make sure that he/she has to opportunity to hear you out before they start) and ask for a lower charge, In your situation you should bargain for no less than 14km over the posted speed limit as 15km over will cost you 3 points.

I was issued a ticket for "Speeding" 56km\h in a posted 80km\h zone (yes this is what the cop wrote on the ticket and exactly the reason I took it to court) I was under the assumption that this was a Fatal Error and that the ticket would be automatically quashed. This was not the case as the prosecutor asked the JP to "ammend" the charge to 86km\h in a posted 50km\h zone the JP accepted the request and I thought that I was toast! Luckily the cop couldn't get his story straight and the JP noticed my extreme example of food faith for appearing on the first scheduled trial date at a location that was 500km from my home and dismissed the ticket.

[162]

that's a pretty cheap ticket - Sask. is double that!

[TrevorK]

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Let me guess.. If one of your loved ones was on trial for murder and you knew she did it, would you say "You killed and knew the consequences sweetie, so may as well admit to it".

Of course not. Everyone's entitled to a fair trial and is entitled to any legal means at their disposal. If you tell them anything less, you're doing a disservice to our justice system as a whole.

The poster KNOWS he was speeding and is therefore guilty of the ticket, because he knowingly committed the crime.

It's a different story if the poster didn't know or didn't think what they did was wrong.

But what he's doing is trying to get the ticket knocked down to something else, which he is not guilty of, because the fine/demerits are lower.

What is "fair" about that?

Nothing.

It's just cheating the system to avoid accepting responsibilities for your actions.

[pontiac_driver]

depending on your insurance company, they might overlook 1 minor conviction
if your record is clean and your insurance will overlook your offense i would still suggest you attend court yo lower your fines and hope for the officer don't show, if worst case you cant get off, hopfully you got off with a lesser charge for your effort and drive safely

[TrevorK]

depending on your insurance company, they might overlook 1 minor conviction
if your record is clean and your insurance will overlook your offense i would still suggest you attend court yo lower your fines and hope for the officer don't show, if worst case you cant get off, hopfully you got off with a lesser charge for your effort and drive safely

In Alberta, the insurance company doesn't raise the rates (Before our government stepped in - now it's all structured) for a single minor offence....

[voyager6868]

The poster KNOWS he was speeding and is therefore guilty of the ticket, because he knowingly committed the crime.

It's a different story if the poster didn't know or didn't think what they did was wrong.

But what he's doing is trying to get the ticket knocked down to something else, which he is not guilty of, because the fine/demerits are lower.

What is "fair" about that?

Nothing.

It's just cheating the system to avoid accepting responsibilities for your actions.

Actually, he's not "guilty" unless proven so in court. And it's not "cheating" the system. And who ever said laws are fair? Having people go to court is one way to ensure our justice system remains strong.

Why do you care anyways? If they want to charge him court costs, they can. So, no skin off your back.

[mk316]

I appreciate the help. I think I will go to the court and try to bargain down the offence punishment. Now if I can negotiate to drop the speed down to 14Km/h over the speed limit it won't have points. However, will this effect my insurance in any way or even show up on my record??

What can I realistically be expecting to be able to negotiate on my own without a paralegal? As for the Discover thing of getting the evidence I think that is too tough to do since I dunno how you find the prosecutor before the case and how long it will take to get the info from them.

Hope someone can answer my questions who has done this before and as for those who say just go pay it and are posting useless messages stop crapping my thread and go complain in another place about our justice system. I doubt me going 19km/h over the limit will cost the country and society that much since I do pay taxes just like everyone else. You wanna complain about the justice system go yell at your MP for that don't waste valuable screen space.

[mydnyte]

Why do you care anyways? If they want to charge him court costs, they can. So, no skin off your back.

I care because I pay taxes. When these people to goto court and lie or try to cheat the system it costs taxpayers the money that they should be paying to run the courts.

[Busiu]

As for the Discover thing of getting the evidence I think that is too tough to do since I dunno how you find the prosecutor before the case and how long it will take to get the info from them.

This is an example of the letter. Complete it and fax it to the Prosecutors office. If you don't get the documents that you requested in this Disclosure of Evidence request prior to the trial (at least a week or two) You may have grounds to ask the JP for dismissal.

(Your address,
telephone number)

(Date)

Provincial Prosecutor's Office
(Address - copy from ticket or notice of trial)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am scheduled to appear in courtroom #______ on _______, at ________(AM/PM) to answer to a charge of __________________________________________________ .

Please provide complete disclosure of the case against me, with the following items:

1. both sides of the officer's copy of the ticket;
2. the officer's log on the alleged offence day, including all tickets he/she had written on that day,

and any document the Crown may rely on at trial.

As I am sure you realize, I require timely disclosure in order to make full answer and defense to the charge. Thank you for your assistance, and please send me all the information to the above address.

Sincerely yours,


_____________________
(Your name and signature)

[voyager6868]

I care because I pay taxes. When these people to goto court and lie or try to cheat the system it costs taxpayers the money that they should be paying to run the courts.

Who said anything about lying? Give me a break. I would never support someone lying under oath and nothing I've said even remotely suggests I would.

I said that people are entitled to every *legal* option available to them. Note the word *legal*.

If you go to court and the officer doesn't show, or he can't remember what happened, or the judge decides that it just took too damn long to get you to trial, you aren't "cheating" the system. It's the system that's bad, and the system needs to be more reliable. I, for one, don't want a sloppy legal system and I'm willing to give up a few tax dollars to the cause.

What would you have us do? Let police officers act as judge & jury as well? Everyone's entitled to their day in court. Ever hear that one before?

[michelb]

Does anyone have any experience fighting tickets in Quebec?

From experience, I know that they will NOT let you off if the officer doesn't show up (in fact it makes it much worse; when it happened to me the judge made it very clear that since the officer wasn't there to defend himself, there was no way he take my word over the notes the officer left so there was nothing I could argue (and if there was ever a case with holes, it was this one (long sob story coming up): I was driving on my motorcycle (at roughly the speed limit (80km/h)) on a rural hwy in Gatineau/Hull area when I noticed a police car approaching at high speed with his lights on so I pulled over to let him by (I thought he was responding to an emergency call). To my surprise he stopped behind me! He then told me that he was charging me for having driven 140km/h in a 100km/h zone on the main highway about 20km away! I asked him if he had me on radar or something (it didn't not appear that he had a radar on/in his car) and he said no but that he followed me and observed my speed (which is just crazy since if he had been following me, it wouldn't have taken him 20km to catch up to me!!! (Especially since, although I had been on the main highway and I probably was speeding a bit there, I really had been driving at roughly the speed limit on the rural highway - he should have been right behind when I got off (especially since there is a STOP sign at the offramp). I honestly believe that he saw another motorcycle drive by (on the highway, many motorcycles look similar) so tried to catch up to it but eventually just caught up to me!). In any case, he ignores my explanation and gives me my ticket. To make matters worst, after he leaves, I re-read the ticket and notice that not only does it say that my speed was verified by radar BUT THAT I HAD VERIFIED THE READING! (In Quebec, it's just a checkbox that says 'accused has verified the reading' or something to that affect THAT'S FILLED BY THE OFFICER). Going into court, I thought I had 'slam dunk' and there was no way that I was going to have to pay for the ticket - until of course, the judge told me that since the officer wasn't present, he wouldn't hear any of my arguments and so found me guilty! To make matters worse, my only recourse was to file for an appeal WHICH CAN ONLY BE DONE BY A LAWYER! After cooling down for a while (I was quite mad about this even though I'm normally as mellow as people get), I realized that the hassle/cost of hiring a lawyer and going back to court wasn't worth it. They won :( )

Anyway, it seems that I almost only get stopped in Quebec (I've heard conspiracy theories that the SureteDuQuebec specifically target Ontario Drivers (not that hard to do since Quebec cars don't have front plates)) so I was wondering if anyone had any advice or suggestions to fighting tickets there (neither Points or X-Copper will represent clients in Quebec).

Let me know,
Mike

[charger]

Does anyone have any experience fighting tickets in Quebec?



Quebec runs in under french law that states "guilty until proven innocent"

I am not making this up.

Also, usually one speeding ticket will not affect your insurance. I can take 3 demerit points per year without insurance penalty. Thats one speeding ticket per year.

Of course this is in pinko BC

[clarke1866]

I care because I pay taxes. When these people to goto court and lie or try to cheat the system it costs taxpayers the money that they should be paying to run the courts.

I read every post in this thread, no one said anything about lying or cheating... Only to fully exercise your rights as a citizen of Canada. Which is why we pay taxes.

[TrevorK]

Actually, he's not "guilty" unless proven so in court. And it's not "cheating" the system. And who ever said laws are fair? Having people go to court is one way to ensure our justice system remains strong.

Why do you care anyways? If they want to charge him court costs, they can. So, no skin off your back.

He doesn't deny he was speeding. In his mind, he is guilty of doing it.

There's a reason he had to wait 1 year to go to court - because people clog up the courts to fight tickets that they knowingly deserved on the off chance the officer doesn't show up.


I care because it's dishonest, and not the right thing to do. People need to accept responsibility for their actions, not run and hide.

[TrevorK]

This is an example of the letter. Complete it and fax it to the Prosecutors office. If you don't get the documents that you requested in this Disclosure of Evidence request prior to the trial (at least a week or two) You may have grounds to ask the JP for dismissal.

Someone tried that here in Alberta, didn't get it.

So he went to court all happy to get it dismissed.

He brought it up to the judge, the prosecutor said it was waiting at his office for the guy to pick up.....And the judge accepted that answer.

[TrevorK]

What would you have us do? Let police officers act as judge & jury as well? Everyone's entitled to their day in court. Ever hear that one before?

That does not mean what he is doing is morally or ethically right.

It's one thing to fight a charge you feel you aren't guilty of. It's another thing to fight a charge you know you're guilty of, because you want to shy away from the responsibilities of your actions.

[voyager6868]

That does not mean what he is doing is morally or ethically right.

It's one thing to fight a charge you feel you aren't guilty of. It's another thing to fight a charge you know you're guilty of, because you want to shy away from the responsibilities of your actions.

Well, TrevorK, I'm glad you're posting on these boards to inform us all of our moral and ethical obligations. Everyone has their own morals and ethics and it's not your place to impose yours on them. That's why we have a legal system and not some kind of "morality court".

I'm sure I could find someone who finds something you do to be immoral. And I'm sure you wouldn't care. So, excuse us if we don't care about your idea of what's immoral and what's not.

[nightwolf]

trevork's posts instantly reminded me of this fool...

http://www.bork.ca/images/moron.jpg

[jed]

Here, here. I would just love an RPG for every idiot who decides it his/her legal right to SIT in the left lane all day.

My opinion is if you want to speed, go ahead. I'll get out of the way so that the cops can pick you up further down the road if you're being unrestrained.

And, I do go over the posted limit, just not alot over the limit. And use the left lane for passing...

[r0underz]

To the person who opened the thread:

Do not see Paralegals/Ex-cop. If you do end up getting them to go to court for you, BE PRESENT IN THE COURTROOM. You will see that they do nothing at all!!

If there was more than 1 police officer when you got stopped for speeding, they ALL have to be present in the courtroom. If it was a 3 car speeding trap ordeal, all of the cops that were there must be present in order for the ticket to go through.

There is one kind of radar detector cops used that are messed up. I am not sure which kind, but you should definately find out for your court case. If it happens to be that same radar detector that caught you, your case will be dropped.

As some people brought up earlier, because it has been more than 1 year passed the date, it should be dropped the instant you walk into the courtroom.

[TrevorK]

trevork's posts instantly reminded me of this fool...

http://www.bork.ca/images/moron.jpg

Isn't it illegal to do that in most provinces?

[TrevorK]

Well, TrevorK, I'm glad you're posting on these boards to inform us all of our moral and ethical obligations. Everyone has their own morals and ethics and it's not your place to impose yours on them. That's why we have a legal system and not some kind of "morality court".

I'm sure I could find someone who finds something you do to be immoral. And I'm sure you wouldn't care. So, excuse us if we don't care about your idea of what's immoral and what's not.

Eventually you have to stop being a boy, and become a man.

I just feel that people need to realize this.

[nik]

I agree about paying the ticket.

You got caught, so what? It's 69 bucks, don't be a drain on the system, losing in court is worse then just paying it off.

this is stupid, the points do go away after a year anyways.

[KKP_04]

Nik, thats a very ignorant comment.
don't give the guy false information. The offence will show on your abstract for 3 years, and on insurance records for 5 years.

[nik]

Didn't know, just what I was told by the girl doing my insurence, my mistake, but still, my opinion sticks, a small speeding violation is nothing, be a responsible driver, and have some common sense (this includes trying to duck a charge you are guilty of and know it!)

[paulcook]

Here is a question I haven't seen asked before about going to court. Suppose you were speeding but the officer gave you a break and put down a lesser offence. ie you only get charged with 14km/h over the limit instead of the actual 30km/h over you may have been doing. If you go to court could it come out that you in fact were 30km/h over and have you ticket increased?

Paul

[nightwolf]

this is stupid, the points do go away after a year anyways.

points stick around on your record for 2 years. the offence stays there longer. and your insurance will rape you for it for 5 years.

[jwalters69]

Alright.. I read the first page of this, and then skipped to the end to post a reply.. sorry if this was already mentioned in pages 2 and 3...

What you have to do is attack the credibility of the officer. Yes, the officer WILL go to court, ESPECIALLY if it is their day off, because they'll be making killer pay.

What you have to do is attack the credibility of the officer. If you can piss him/her off well enough (as with what happened with my father), the cop will lash out at you in court and your case will be thrown out. In my dad's case, as my dad was questioning the cop with what I gave him, the cop got so angry that he yelled to my dad, "Are you calling me a liar? Are you saying I'm a crooked cop?". At that point, the judge to my dad to STFU and said to the cop, "How dare you imply that this citizen has said that. You are a disgrace to your department and people like you throw the entire justice system into disrepute.". The judge then told my dad to leave the court, without penalty :D

Remember everything you can about that day. Write it down on paper now. Everything from the weather conditions, other traffic on the road, what you were wearing, etc etc etc.

As the cop questions regarding the radar equipment. When was it last serviced, how was it calibrated, WHO calibrated it. If he says that anyone other that him calibrated it, you can just say something like, "How do you know that the device was properly calibrated? What was the calibration procedure? How were the results verified?"

Question the accuracy of the radar device, and argue that it could have been wrong.

Ask the cop these basic questions... if there was anyone else on the road with you, ask them how they can be sure that they did not tag the other car. If there was a car side-by-side with you, argue that instead you believe the cop could have tagged the other car which you KNOW was going faster than you. Tell the judge what kind of car was on the road at the same time as you if the cop says that nobody else was around.

As for the weather and stuff, if the cop gets it wrong (make sure you can prove what the weather was like on that day), you call into question the reliability of the officer's memory. You can say something like, "Your honor, in fact the weather on this day was rainy/cloudy/foggy/etc etc. If the officer cannot remember such a basic environmental question, how can we rely on the rest of the evidence he is about to present?"

DO NOT BE COCKY when you do this.. there is a fine line between confidence and cockiness... you've gotta stay NEAR the line, but do not go over.. or you'll be paying your ticket.

Hope this helps !

[bell02fantasy]

Alright.. I read the first page of this, and then skipped to the end to post a reply.. sorry if this was already mentioned in pages 2 and 3...

What you have to do is attack the credibility of the officer. Yes, the officer WILL go to court, ESPECIALLY if it is their day off, because they'll be making killer pay.

What you have to do is attack the credibility of the officer. If you can piss him/her off well enough (as with what happened with my father), the cop will lash out at you in court and your case will be thrown out. In my dad's case, as my dad was questioning the cop with what I gave him, the cop got so angry that he yelled to my dad, "Are you calling me a liar? Are you saying I'm a crooked cop?". At that point, the judge to my dad to STFU and said to the cop, "How dare you imply that this citizen has said that. You are a disgrace to your department and people like you throw the entire justice system into disrepute.". The judge then told my dad to leave the court, without penalty :D

Remember everything you can about that day. Write it down on paper now. Everything from the weather conditions, other traffic on the road, what you were wearing, etc etc etc.

As the cop questions regarding the radar equipment. When was it last serviced, how was it calibrated, WHO calibrated it. If he says that anyone other that him calibrated it, you can just say something like, "How do you know that the device was properly calibrated? What was the calibration procedure? How were the results verified?"

Question the accuracy of the radar device, and argue that it could have been wrong.

Ask the cop these basic questions... if there was anyone else on the road with you, ask them how they can be sure that they did not tag the other car. If there was a car side-by-side with you, argue that instead you believe the cop could have tagged the other car which you KNOW was going faster than you. Tell the judge what kind of car was on the road at the same time as you if the cop says that nobody else was around.

As for the weather and stuff, if the cop gets it wrong (make sure you can prove what the weather was like on that day), you call into question the reliability of the officer's memory. You can say something like, "Your honor, in fact the weather on this day was rainy/cloudy/foggy/etc etc. If the officer cannot remember such a basic environmental question, how can we rely on the rest of the evidence he is about to present?"

DO NOT BE COCKY when you do this.. there is a fine line between confidence and cockiness... you've gotta stay NEAR the line, but do not go over.. or you'll be paying your ticket.

Hope this helps !


Yeah I got caught on Pharmacy as well, just a little more north at the bridge.

My advice is to go to court, talk to the prosecutor, failing that expalin to the judge this is your first offense,blah, blah....and identify that you a good citizen, ft job etc........the judge will throw it out...
Thats exactly what I did and it worked.
Only go to Xcopper for your DUI's, etc......
Good luck and let me know how it turns out in March.

[voyager6868]

Here is a question I haven't seen asked before about going to court. Suppose you were speeding but the officer gave you a break and put down a lesser offence. ie you only get charged with 14km/h over the limit instead of the actual 30km/h over you may have been doing. If you go to court could it come out that you in fact were 30km/h over and have you ticket increased?

Paul

I've wondered the same thing. Anyone know? I mean if the ticket is stuck at 14, you could simply argue that at least half the drivers go 14 over, and you were just driving safely and keeping up with traffic.

[Freezer]

If you really weren't going 69 in the 50 and you were indeed going 50 or lower. Then I would fight it.

But if you were going to 69 in the 50 and you are trying to fight it.
No sympathy to you. Even if the bill was received late.

[TdotO]

I'm going to court next week to "fight" my speeding ticket.
How do I go about finding the prosecuter?
Was told by the officer to go see the prosecuter and she would reduce the fine.

[mk316]

I'm going to court next week to "fight" my speeding ticket.
How do I go about finding the prosecuter?
Was told by the officer to go see the prosecuter and she would reduce the fine.
I've been told that as soon as you get there they have all the people that are going there for their cases go into the courtroom before the case to talk to the prosecutor on their own. It is very common from what I've been told. I hope mine works out in March.
Let me know how yours goes.

Also I've been told that one offence that is minor which is what will happen to mine after it gets bargained down to 14km over the limit, that this won't effect the insurance. This is from my dad and others who have gone to court and have negotiated them in the past. Is that true??

[TdotO]

So, should I be going to the courts way before my scheduled time in order to have a chance to speak to the prosecutor or does the time indicated on my notice imply time with the prosecutor first before the trial?

And, one more thing hopefully someone can answer.
Is it true if the officer does not show up the ticket is thrown out?
This is the only thing holding me back from accepting the reduced fine.

Not really sure how this will affect my insurance.
Having said that, I really don't think it will affect me too much, but I could be totally wrong.
This is my first traffic ticket in over 15 years. I'm assuming the insurance companies look at history and will realize this is an anomaly and won't punish me by raising my rates 100%.

[TrevorK]

So, should I be going to the courts way before my scheduled time in order to have a chance to speak to the prosecutor or does the time indicated on my notice imply time with the prosecutor first before the trial?

And, one more thing hopefully someone can answer.
Is it true if the officer does not show up the ticket is thrown out?
This is the only thing holding me back from accepting the reduced fine.

Not really sure how this will affect my insurance.
Having said that, I really don't think it will affect me too much, but I could be totally wrong.
This is my first traffic ticket in over 15 years. I'm assuming the insurance companies look at history and will realize this is an anomaly and won't punish me by raising my rates 100%.

In Alberta, when we had completely private insurance most companies would give you a minor ticket as a freebie and not raise your rates.

[jwalters69]

if the officer does not show, yes, you will win. Basically it's a balance of probabilities. If you can prove your case to the judge 51% in your favour, you will win. Since the officer does not show, he/she cannot present the evidence and you can just say "I was not speeding" and there will be no officer there to refute your claim. You win, 100% :)

[Swamper]

Any speeding offence (under 50 km/hr) is considered a minor offence, you will be flagged '1' insurance point - most companies do nothing on the first two - it is the 3rd or 4th that you run into problems.

Offences stay on your insurance record for 3 YEARS from the CONVICTION date (not OFFENCE date) - so - delaying it in the courts is good if you already have some tickets on hand (or are near suspension demerit point wise) - but - it will stay on your insurance record for 3 years after the court date if you're convicted. Demerit points stay on your record for 2 years from the offence date.

For a complete list of minor/major infractions check the Insurance Bureau of Canada's site and view the facts for Ontario (http://www.ibc.ca/pdffiles/regions/ontario/faq.pdf) - its on page 20.

I've had bad luck the past few years, a ticket every year (Feb 2002/March 2003/Apr 2004/Jan 2005) for speeding.. most recently 129 km/hr on the 400.. Ahhh.. if only it was the early 70s again and speed limits were still 120, damn opec.

[tgp]

Ok, I just went through defending myself for a speeding ticket in Ontario court.

Ticket was for 31 over the limit.

The trial date was 9 months after the date I had requested a trial date. I submitted the proper paperwork for challenging the ticket on consitutional grounds (Right to a speedy trial violated). I also submitted paperwork requesting disclosure from the prosecution (about 1 month before trial).

Show up to court. Prosecutor will call you over and start offering plea bargains to most people with no prior history. A simple plead to 15 over and they were done. Some people with 31 over only got offers down to 20 so YMMV. Spome stupid people were actually pleading down to point offences (ie 30 over to 20 over).. I didnt see the point.

When it was my time, the prosecutor said "You will not win based on your consitutional arguments'. I say "Fine, I'll take the deal". But I didnt feel good about siding with the prosecution (after all, they ain't on my side). So I sat and waited for my trial. When the worship asked if I was pleading, I landed up saying no. It was my first ticket and I wanted to see if my arguments would hold up ( I could handle the potential point issue).

Before the real trial started, I stated that I wanted the case thrown out on the grounds that it's been too long since I requested a date. The prosecution submitted the previous case law that says that less than 10 months is not unreasonable. So my motion was denied. ** I have the case law #'s if anyone wants them**..

Next, I motioned that the prosecution did not give me the documents I requested. As the worship/cop/prosecutor worked out a new trial date, I offered to the prosecution to plead to 15 over in 'Order to save court time'. After being yelled at by the worship for 'Making a mockery of this court', she allowed the plea and my $150 ticket turned into a $45 no pointer.

So basically, I got a completely free shot at getting off if 1) The cop didnt know and 2) My undue delay argument worked.

Now, as for the case law that shot down my delay.. The benchmark the law now uses now is about 10 months. It starts from the time you request a court date NOT the offence date.

I advise everyone who gets the unfortunate event of a point offence speeding ticket in ontario to fight it, or atleast show up to court to plead or EVEN plea guilty with explaination. (Honest truth) A lady got up infront of the workship and said 'Oh, I guess I'm too old to drive' for her illegal right turn ticket and the court suspended sentence.

As for the thumpers that say to take your medicine.. The system is rigged AGAINST the motorist. It's a system designed to make 90% of the drivers on the road at anytime eligible for a ticket. Its completely unfair and arbitrary. This country offers us the constitutional right to have our cases heard infront of a judge and if someone wants to do it, I'm all for it. Thats the system we got.

Anyway, a good site for info for speeding tickets in Ontario is FYST although some of the info is outdated. www.magma.ca/~fyst

if you have any other questions/etc let me know and I'll be happy to brain dump anything else..

[hd2002]

nice write up, tgp :D

[Txiasaeia]

Ok, I just went through defending myself for a speeding ticket in Ontario court.

Ticket was for 31 over the limit.

<snip>

As for the thumpers that say to take your medicine.. The system is rigged AGAINST the motorist. It's a system designed to make 90% of the drivers on the road at anytime eligible for a ticket. Its completely unfair and arbitrary. This country offers us the constitutional right to have our cases heard infront of a judge and if someone wants to do it, I'm all for it. Thats the system we got.



I'm glad it all worked out for you, but 31 over the limit? You call that working against the motorist? Unfair and arbitrary? Have you ever *seen* a car wrapped around a telephone pole? I have once, and the image is scarred into my memory: black T-Bird, bloody glass all over the place, wrapped so far around that the bumper and fender were almost touching. Only caused by speed, nothing else (well, no alcohol or drugs, anyway).

If you were going 5 or 10 over the limit then I might agree with you, but 31? No way. Traffic laws are designed to protect motorists, not feed the politicians. If you've read anything else I've written here on RFD you'd know that I rabidly despise politicians, so hopefully that will give you some insight into how strongly I feel about this.

Again, I'm glad you gamed the system, but hopefully this entire experience has taught you to slow down instead of simply being confident that you'll get off next time too.

[CurtisMinBC]

Hi there,

Just got a ticket today and was just wondering if anyone knows if the ticket has to show how fast I was actually going?

Like I mentioned I'm in BC.

RGDS & TIA

Curtis M.

[chickenbones]

Hi there,

Just got a ticket today and was just wondering if anyone knows if the ticket has to show how fast I was actually going?

Like I mentioned I'm in BC.

RGDS & TIA

Curtis M.


:?: Yeah I would think so...


When I was like 19 I did a 46 over on DVP (toronto), went to a Chinese paralegal and the case was withdrawn... Maybe I should have went there myself...But 46 over was a bit much.

[Canadianpsycho]

I'm glad it all worked out for you, but 31 over the limit? You call that working against the motorist? Unfair and arbitrary? Have you ever *seen* a car wrapped around a telephone pole? I have once, and the image is scarred into my memory: black T-Bird, bloody glass all over the place, wrapped so far around that the bumper and fender were almost touching. Only caused by speed, nothing else (well, no alcohol or drugs, anyway).

If you were going 5 or 10 over the limit then I might agree with you, but 31? No way. Traffic laws are designed to protect motorists, not feed the politicians. If you've read anything else I've written here on RFD you'd know that I rabidly despise politicians, so hopefully that will give you some insight into how strongly I feel about this.

Again, I'm glad you gamed the system, but hopefully this entire experience has taught you to slow down instead of simply being confident that you'll get off next time too.

I guarantee you that T-bird was probably going faster then 30 over. Considering speed limits USED to be 120 with older, crappier cars I can't see how 30 km/h is considered so severe. 30 km/h is peanuts, especially when talking about a 400 series highway.

I laugh everytime a cop tells me 25 or 30 over is "Way too fast" to give me a break on a ticket, then one of his fellow officers blows by me doing 140/150 on a major highway and changes lanes without signalling.

[gilboman]

I'm glad it all worked out for you, but 31 over the limit? You call that working against the motorist? Unfair and arbitrary? Have you ever *seen* a car wrapped around a telephone pole? I have once, and the image is scarred into my memory: black T-Bird, bloody glass all over the place, wrapped so far around that the bumper and fender were almost touching. Only caused by speed, nothing else (well, no alcohol or drugs, anyway).

If you were going 5 or 10 over the limit then I might agree with you, but 31? No way. Traffic laws are designed to protect motorists, not feed the politicians. If you've read anything else I've written here on RFD you'd know that I rabidly despise politicians, so hopefully that will give you some insight into how strongly I feel about this.

Again, I'm glad you gamed the system, but hopefully this entire experience has taught you to slow down instead of simply being confident that you'll get off next time too.


what does a car collision have anything to do with it? you could be doing the speed limit and still get into a bad wreck, the police propaganda getting to you?

how naive to think its about safety :razz:

Traffic laws are first and foremost a revenue generator and not about safety. Engineeres have long maintained that our roads/highways were designed for much higher speeds than posted speed limits (or do you really think 60km/h on an arterial road is about safety?), do you find it strange that politicans tell us how fast we can go and not engineers who designed it? do you even know why the highways have 100km/h limits? hint..it is most certainly not about safety.

[Hippak]

what does a car collision have anything to do with it? you could be doing the speed limit and still get into a bad wreck, the police propaganda getting to you?

how naive to think its about safety :razz:

Traffic laws are first and foremost a revenue generator and not about safety. Engineeres have long maintained that our roads/highways were designed for much higher speeds than posted speed limits (or do you really think 60km/h on an arterial road is about safety?), do you find it strange that politicans tell us how fast we can go and not engineers who designed it? do you even know why the highways have 100km/h limits? hint..it is most certainly not about safety.


Speed limit was 80km/h on the 400 series in 1968. It was then raised to 112km/h. In 1976 the speed was reduced to 100km/h (due to energy crisis and fuel consumption). Deaths on the highway reduced from 1800 to 1200 in one year. Fatality rate is now about 850 a year but thats likely due to better safety in cars.

Just because a highway was designed for a specific speed doesn't mean anything. You've got to remember that its not just one person on the road. Have you ever though about the limitations of human reaction time and how its related to higher speeds? Have you ever considered how increase in speed effects safety features in cars and how limitations occur at higher speeds? Especially when no manufacturer tests for these higher speeds? What about increases in stopping distance in relation to speed?

Do you even know the relationship between Energy/Force and speed? Look it up and maybe you'll understand why that 30km/h extra you're travelling makes a huge difference. And hypothetically if the speed limit was increased to say 120km/h people would probabaly travel at around 140-150km/h. Again add this factor to your energy equation and see what happens. To prevent this from happening the government would probably have to install speed camera and set them for Anything over 12X. And if this was the case people would probably complain about that too.

EDIT: Also the speed limits are also in place to keep flow of traffic steady. Lets take the 401 West after Dufferin for example. If everyone is travelling quick we'd get an influx of traffic volume into one of the largest bottlenecks in Toronto. The size of the highway wouldn't be able to support the influx in volume (which it can't support now anyway). This is gonna cause an even larger bottleneck. So effectively we've increased the speed limit and also increased the traffic. But nobody ever thinks about that eh?

[tgp]

Fatality rate is now about 850 a year but thats likely due to better safety in cars.

I got news for you. As of this second, nobody on the 401 is doing 100km/h. The average speed is 120-130km/h. 20-30 over our precious 100 speed limit and the fatality rate is dropping you say? So people are driving FASTER than previous generations and the fatality rate is dropping. Thanks for rebutting your own argument, it saves my fingers the typing.

nd hypothetically if the speed limit was increased to say 120km/h people would probabaly travel at around 140-150km/h.

Ahh, the argument of the person who doesn't know what they are talking about. Read the arguments at FYST
http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/appndxd.htm , he makes a far better point that I will in this thread. Anyway, I say raise the speed limit to 120 so that I'm not breaking the law when Im driving home every night and keep the same point/offence system for 135km/h+. There you go. People won't be driving 150 and if they do, they'll get nailed just like they are now. Except now you dont get that ticket for 120.

The next person that wants to talk about speed kills, please read this line and respond to it first..

do you find it strange that politicans tell us how fast we can go and not engineers who designed it?

Explain to me why the hell that's true? And if politicians are the omiscents of this world, why don't we get their technical opinions on building construction, or sending people to the moon or fighting cancer?



As for that guy asking if the ticket needs to show the speed, the ticket needs to tell you what section of the law you broke. I don't believe an actual speed needs to be recorded on the ticket but if it's not there you may have grounds to get the ticket thrown out.

[windough]

CBC story on why you should fight your ticket in court

http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/cars/tickets/

[psiwashing]

I take a one month sabbatical from RFD, come back, and once again I find the usuall:

Help me with my speeding ticket
What should I say at my Staples interview
Anyone else having trouble signing in with MSN?


Anyways, if you are truly not guilty of any thing you've been charged with, then fight it, but if you were going the same speed as the cop says, just pay the ticket.

[Hippak]

I got news for you. As of this second, nobody on the 401 is doing 100km/h. The average speed is 120-130km/h. 20-30 over our precious 100 speed limit and the fatality rate is dropping you say? So people are driving FASTER than previous generations and the fatality rate is dropping. Thanks for rebutting your own argument, it saves my fingers the typing.


Funny how you state that people now drive 120 to 130 over the limit but you dont think that that occured back when the speed limit was higher. So you just assume that in the year 2000 people have all of a sudden decided that 20 over the speed limit is okay but back when the speed limit was 112 people actually travelled at that speed and not 20-30 over the limit.

Way to prove your point there with excellent bias.


Ahh, the argument of the person who doesn't know what they are talking about. Read the arguments at FYST
http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/appndxd.htm , he makes a far better point that I will in this thread. Anyway, I say raise the speed limit to 120 so that I'm not breaking the law when Im driving home every night and keep the same point/offence system for 135km/h+. There you go. People won't be driving 150 and if they do, they'll get nailed just like they are now. Except now you dont get that ticket for 120.

The next person that wants to talk about speed kills, please read this line and respond to it first..


Where in my statement did I say that speed is directly the cause of trafic fatalties. Funny how you just assume that is what I meant. The first rule in research is correlation does not mean causation. Sure speed may have been the direct cause of the reduction in road fatalities, or if could have been the fact that individuals were able to see better at lower speeds or some third variable.

And its funny how you dont quote my examples of why you can't just look superficially at how the road was built and assume that we can go faster. Why dont you answer my post about human reaction or car safety? Probably because even biased research wouldn't dare refute those claims.

The fact of the matter is (and what the point I was making) is that in an accident those extra km/h you're travelling when you hit someone makes a huge difference. Its the difference between life and death.

For example tell me why our residential roads are 40km/h and nothing higher then that? You'll be able to answer since you know everything about speeding.

Keep travelling Xkm/h on the highway, if god forbid one day you need that extra split second to react or to stop to save a life you'll be happy knowing that you got home from work 2 minutes early everytime before that. Can you honestly tell me you enjoy having a 18 wheller travelling behind knowing that its essentially impossible for it to stop without first hitting your car and killing you? Do the math, at 120km/h a 18 wheeler isn't stopping anytime soon.



Explain to me why the hell that's true? And if politicians are the omiscents of this world, why don't we get their technical opinions on building construction, or sending people to the moon or fighting cancer?


I am an engineer and at school we work directly with civil engineers and I can tell you right now that none of us have the traning to determine what speeds are correct for roads. I can you that a car will be able to grip the road up to a certain speed, and I can tell you that the road with withsand a certain force but myself and none of my colleagues can tell you or anyone else what the correct speed on roads should be. So i'm not sure where you and the last poster are getting the statement that engineers should dictate what speeds we travel at. And do you really believe that some politician just arbitrarilly decided off the top of his head that the speed limit should be X? LOL

If you're going to pick apart my post please answer my statements in full. Dont pick and choose what you need to in order to further your cause.

We have laws in Canada. If you wanna speed you're free to do so. But if your man enough to speed be a man and pay your fine without moaning and complaining. But I guess in this society we never take responsibilites for our own actions. Which is exactly why if you were speeding and couldn't react to save a life (as a result of your speed) you probably wouldn't blame yourself anyway!

:)

[tgp]

We have laws in Canada. If you wanna speed you're free to do so. But if your man enough to speed be a man and pay your fine without moaning and complaining. But I guess in this society we never take responsibilites for our own actions.

I'm all for *you* paying the extra tax whenever you get nailed for driving infractions. This is red flag deals where we look to save money on anything. I just want people to ignore the moral attitude that people have towards these tickets and use their legal rights to go fight it. You WILL get a deal and you WILL save money and insurance costs.

If you don't want to use them, thats ALSO your right, but please don't give us the morality speech about how we should. It's our rights.

As for all your other arguments, I agree to disagree.

[Hippak]

As for all your other arguments, I agree to disagree.

pretty strong argument coming from a guy who is telling other's " Ahh, the argument of the person who doesn't know what they are talking about."


:)

[mk316]

Some guy posted that he was going to fight his ticked in february I think I forgot who you are. Anyway how did it go and what happened. I decided to go fight my own ticket myself. I hear it is pretty simple to negotiate down the 3 points and after it is without points it is called minor offence and the insurance won't go up as a result of just one. Just letting those that care know what's goin on.

Also for those posting the long philosophical essays about how much of a criminal I am since I want to not pay an extra grand in insurance all I got to say is keep your mouth shut and if you don't like it well then go write your mp and complain about how our justice system should no longer exist and we should change things around to being Guilty until proven innocent. You honestly think that everyone accused of an offence is actually guilty. If this was true then why would we have lawyers or courts for that matter......

[TrevorK]

Also for those posting the long philosophical essays about how much of a criminal I am since I want to not pay an extra grand in insurance all I got to say is keep your mouth shut and if you don't like it well then go write your mp and complain about how our justice system should no longer exist and we should change things around to being Guilty until proven innocent. You honestly think that everyone accused of an offence is actually guilty. If this was true then why would we have lawyers or courts for that matter......


You've never denied the fact that you were guilty of speeding - you've just decided to take on the irresponsible child-like attitude of trying to weasel your way out of taking responsibility for your actions.

Congratulations, you are now classified as a drain on society.

[mk316]

You've never denied the fact that you were guilty of speeding - you've just decided to take on the irresponsible child-like attitude of trying to weasel your way out of taking responsibility for your actions.

Congratulations, you are now classified as a drain on society.
Dumbass how am I a drain. What will society gain from my 3 points NOTHING. Do I get free welfare or free money no. I guess you'll start calling people who get unemployment a drain. The only people that will gain in society are the overly rich insurance companies. Oh can you explain to me also why it is sooo necessary for a driver to get insurance then when they submit a claim they get their rates raised. HMMM i thought the point of insurance is to insure against an accident so if that happens then why would rates increase. Aren't they a drain on society taking all our money and adjusting the law so we are forced to get insurance!!!! SOOO until the law changes and the penalties punish drivers like in the states where there is driver education classes to be attended by violators (without insurance increasing). Everyone except for you ofcourse will end up going to court to fight a ticket.

[aquariaguy]

FIGHT THE TICKET.

This is what you do.

Go to XCOPPERS. I went there when a friend of mine got a ticket. He paid $550. Thats if they won. It wasn't guaranteed to win. But, the guy did win.
He was going 131km/h in 100km/h on the way to montreal. Also if we had to fight it, we'd have to go to Ottawa which is gay. So we paid that guy that paid the other branch in Ottawa to go.

Basically he got this. Minor offense. 5+ over the limit. Nothing to pay. No points lost, since it was minor. His insurance didn't go up at all cuz it was basically negligible.

The ticket was approx $380 i think if he were to pay it, and lose 4 demerits (i'm not sure how many). So go fight it. If you don't, insurance is gonna screw you up the ass.

[Invincible]

Well... as of today I now have reason to join this thread. Not 3 minutes after leaving Waterloo residence this morning on my way back home - I get pulled over for apparently doing 79 in a 50 zone (university st.)

There were at least 3 cop cars on a side street with a radar out just basically signaling every other person off the road. Someone tell me they're not out for revenue...

Anyway, this is my first ticket and I haven't really looked it over yet (I'm a little peeved, especially since I can't be sure I was going that much over. The cop asked me if I had a valid excuse, but I couldn't really think of anything off the bad. I was too shocked to find out I was speeding (I thought it was some DRIVE program or something - wow, I'm naive lol)

So... $138, and I'm not sure how many points yet (like I said, I haven't looked at it closely yet). Now I presume that if I were to set a court date, it could only be in the Kitchener/Waterloo area then? That's 9 hours away from my home... would they really expect me to travel that far?

I'm tempted just to pay it, but the thought of lessening the charge to something probably more realistic (ie - to what I was really doing) would be really nice.

Edit:
Interestingly enough now that I read it over... apparently I'm driving a 2006 Honda Accord. As nice as that would be... it's a little off. I doubt that this would be enough to argue though would it? Then again, if he can't copy the year of my car down, how can I trust him to get an accurate radar reading?

[TrevorK]

Dumbass how am I a drain. What will society gain from my 3 points NOTHING. Do I get free welfare or free money no. I guess you'll start calling people who get unemployment a drain. The only people that will gain in society are the overly rich insurance companies. Oh can you explain to me also why it is sooo necessary for a driver to get insurance then when they submit a claim they get their rates raised. HMMM i thought the point of insurance is to insure against an accident so if that happens then why would rates increase. Aren't they a drain on society taking all our money and adjusting the law so we are forced to get insurance!!!! SOOO until the law changes and the penalties punish drivers like in the states where there is driver education classes to be attended by violators (without insurance increasing). Everyone except for you ofcourse will end up going to court to fight a ticket.

You are a drain because you are knowingly going to court, and fighting a ticket for which you know you are guilty of. You are just trying to weasel out of it - don't you think the courts have better things to do?

Your rates would get raised because it is a reasonable assumption that a driver who gets speeding tickets frequently is a higher risk driver than one who doesn't. I know here most ins. companies will throw out your first ticket, other people in Ontario who have posted in these threads before said they've had the same treatment.

I wouldn't be posting this if you were stating that you weren't speeding - but it's obvious now that you were.

Perhaps you should grow up and become a man?

[TrevorK]

Edit:
Interestingly enough now that I read it over... apparently I'm driving a 2006 Honda Accord. As nice as that would be... it's a little off. I doubt that this would be enough to argue though would it? Then again, if he can't copy the year of my car down, how can I trust him to get an accurate radar reading?

In Alberta that's not enough to get you off - it's just a minor detail.

As for your ticket - were you going with the flow of traffic or were there many people speeding by you (So your reading could have possibly been the wrong car)?

As well, you appear to have a newer car - do you have a different sized set of tires that would throw your speedo off?

[akito925]

question about a Vehicle Permit.. does a photocopied Vehicle Permit has to be doubled sided?? cuz I got a ticket for a failed to supply Vehicle Permit.. witch i did,, cop busted me.. saying its not vailded cuz its single sided copy..

is there any where on the internet to look what that law is?

[DragonZealot]

question about a Vehicle Permit.. does a photocopied Vehicle Permit has to be doubled sided?? cuz I got a ticket for a failed to supply Vehicle Permit.. witch i did,, cop busted me.. saying its not vailded cuz its single sided copy..

is there any where on the internet to look what that law is?

The law is here (http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90h08_e.htm#7.(5)) .

[flame02]

You are a drain because you are knowingly going to court, and fighting a ticket for which you know you are guilty of. You are just trying to weasel out of it - don't you think the courts have better things to do?

Your rates would get raised because it is a reasonable assumption that a driver who gets speeding tickets frequently is a higher risk driver than one who doesn't. I know here most ins. companies will throw out your first ticket, other people in Ontario who have posted in these threads before said they've had the same treatment.

I wouldn't be posting this if you were stating that you weren't speeding - but it's obvious now that you were.

Perhaps you should grow up and become a man?


TREVORK STFU ... ure one of the ppl who killed my thread and now you are doing it again! buzz off! he made the thread to help the situation ... and im sure u always go the designated speed limit! hipocrite! your endless rants are disturbing and pointless so please do RFD a favour and go away! Maybe there is more to this case then you think? maybe he has other issues to deal with?

Places where ppl always go 20+ the speed limit that i have witnessed ... steeles ave, Hwy 404, Hwy 7 and yonge street .. the odd times not

and whats more "grown up" then being a man and fighting the case? goin to court and appealing something you beleive unworthy of that offence?

mk316 don't listen to this hipocrite ... do what you feel necessary ...and other members try and help they guy, not make the situation worse! Im sure he would appreciate and you too for doing something worthwhile.

[TrevorK]

TREVORK STFU ... ure one of the ppl who killed my thread and now you are doing it again! buzz off! he made the thread to help the situation ... and im sure u always go the designated speed limit! hipocrite! your endless rants are disturbing and pointless so please do RFD a favour and go away! Maybe there is more to this case then you think? maybe he has other issues to deal with? [/b]

So he can freely break the rules of the road because he has something "to deal with"? The excuses keep getting worse


and whats more "grown up" then being a man and fighting the case? goin to court and appealing something you beleive unworthy of that offence?

He knew the consequences of speeding.
He was caught speeding.
He doesn't deny he was speeding.

Yet he feels the need to go to court and convince the legal system that he was not speeding? It's dishonest and childish.

What's wrong with accepting the results of your actions? You keep wanting to shy away from this responsibility...

[mrmoe]

All tickets should be fought.
the money that is wasted in the PD is unreal. lets put them in the courtroom so thay dont have to sit at tims.

[akito925]

anyone recommend any services that fight tickets that you guys used?

have anyone used www.torontotraffictickets.com

they say they can elimated your ticket completely.. thats what I want..

I got a ticket.. and I was just going with the flow of traffic.. 120km in a 100km highway.


anyone recommend any paralegal in the hamilton area?

[mk316]

TREVORK STFU ... ure one of the ppl who killed my thread and now you are doing it again! buzz off! he made the thread to help the situation ... and im sure u always go the designated speed limit! hipocrite! your endless rants are disturbing and pointless so please do RFD a favour and go away! Maybe there is more to this case then you think? maybe he has other issues to deal with?

Places where ppl always go 20+ the speed limit that i have witnessed ... steeles ave, Hwy 404, Hwy 7 and yonge street .. the odd times not

and whats more "grown up" then being a man and fighting the case? goin to court and appealing something you beleive unworthy of that offence?

mk316 don't listen to this hipocrite ... do what you feel necessary ...and other members try and help they guy, not make the situation worse! Im sure he would appreciate and you too for doing something worthwhile.
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate someone who actually notices the point of a thread. I needed help so I asked for it. I was never gonna listen to that moron and anyone who does listen to him is not doing themselves any favours. I plan to go myself and see what I can do. If anyone has had experiences please continue to post about what happens in the court when you arrive or whatever.

Thanks again guys.

[TrevorK]

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate someone who actually notices the point of a thread. I needed help so I asked for it. I was never gonna listen to that moron and anyone who does listen to him is not doing themselves any favours. I plan to go myself and see what I can do. If anyone has had experiences please continue to post about what happens in the court when you arrive or whatever.

Thanks again guys.

Good luck defrauding the legal system!

[flame02]

Good luck defrauding the legal system!

defrauding? do you have any idea what police corruption is? oh and this is WAY more costly to the legal system then a traffic offence ... you fail to prove you point by stating a 19 over speeding ticket it "fraud" once appealed ... choose better words please!

Your comments ... IMO... are hilarious in the fact that they are un-educated and rediculus! ... yet ... you seem to persist your rants! You want to see fraud, go and see an officer beat the living CRUD out of a 15 year old because he is holding a knife to cut his food with! This happens everywhere! yet a speeding ticket at full is unjustified because if one were to go 10 over, would they get a ticket?? NO! so whats fair is a 9 over ticket at the MOST.

[Hippak]

mk316: I'm not gonna post anything regarding your situation. I only posted my above statements and previous ones to correct some of the invalid arguments concerning speed in the thread.

defrauding? do you have any idea what police corruption is? oh and this is WAY more costly to the legal system then a traffic offence ...

Wonderful, :) Society as a whole shouldn't have morals because police corruption is so rampant. I remember reading a thread about you being in eng (correct me if I'm wrong). Have you taken an discrete mathematic course yet or an ethics course for that matter...


You want to see fraud, go and see an officer beat the living CRUD out of a 15 year old because he is holding a knife to cut his food with! This happens everywhere!


How is this an example of fraud? Also you make this statement as if its happening all the time. Could you kindly point me to some examples of these incidents.

[TrevorK]

defrauding? do you have any idea what police corruption is? oh and this is WAY more costly to the legal system then a traffic offence ... you fail to prove you point by stating a 19 over speeding ticket it "fraud" once appealed ... choose better words please! [/b]

And what does that have to do with what the poster is doing?

Nothing.

It doesn't change the fact that he is guilty, yet is willing to stand in front of a court to proclaim his innocence.

[b]
Your comments ... IMO... are hilarious in the fact that they are un-educated and rediculus! ... yet ... you seem to persist your rants! You want to see fraud, go and see an officer beat the living CRUD out of a 15 year old because he is holding a knife to cut his food with! This happens everywhere! yet a speeding ticket at full is unjustified because if one were to go 10 over, would they get a ticket?? NO! so whats fair is a 9 over ticket at the MOST.

Uneducated? That's a laugh.

Your logic makes no sense - you really need to sit down and think.

Why does the officer give you a break for the first 10KM? Is it because their equipment is 20% inaccurate (As in this example, where the poster was in a 50KM/H zone, and they usually don't ticket until 60KM+/h)? Do you really believe that?

[Invincible]

In Alberta that's not enough to get you off - it's just a minor detail.

As for your ticket - were you going with the flow of traffic or were there many people speeding by you (So your reading could have possibly been the wrong car)?

As well, you appear to have a newer car - do you have a different sized set of tires that would throw your speedo off?

I did a little research, and in Ontario it isn't either. I was... hrmm. Actually I kinda jumped out ahead of traffic after a stop light. There was one guy in front of me, he merged to the right lane and I had to do the same because my exit was coming up. So I sped up a little to get in front of him as there was no room to merge directly beside me. I later managed to talk to the guy I was trying to get in front of, and apparently he was going over the speedlimit as well. No wonder I had to go that much faster to get over.

You bring up a very interesting point. I do have massive all season tires on my car (look more like truck tires) that I'm sure are bigger than the original tires. I think I will explore that idea.

In the meantime, I am waiting for a mailing which is supposed to include the date for my first attendence meeting. They're apparently booked until late April, so I have a bit of time to prepare a case.

I hope I'm not hijacking the thread here. IMHO any advise given here may help someone else as well.

[gilboman]

mk316: I'm not gonna post anything regarding your situation. I only posted my above statements and previous ones to correct some of the invalid arguments concerning speed in the thread.



Wonderful, :) Society as a whole shouldn't have morals because police corruption is so rampant. I remember reading a thread about you being in eng (correct me if I'm wrong). Have you taken an discrete mathematic course yet or an ethics course for that matter...



How is this an example of fraud? Also you make this statement as if its happening all the time. Could you kindly point me to some examples of these incidents.

you havent corrected anything regarding speed on highways and safety. You said the speedlimit decreased in the past and the next year fatalities declined, correlation is not causation.. any student in post secondary education should know that, especially if you are an engineering student.

you did not mention/find out any other changes that could've contributed to decline in fatalities.

your energy and speed rant is great except it doesnt mean anything for speed limits. sure 130km/h and 100km/h there is difference in the energy in a collison but unless you hit a brickwall on the highway its a moot point.

i can use that argument to say that since most people travel at 120km/h, if i travel at 100 km/h and we collide there is 20km/h of energy to absorb but if i was going 130, its only 10km/h that is transferred

lastly you as an engineering student dont know what the speed limit should be on roads... fine, so does that mean if an engineering student doesnt know something, a politican is better qualified to judge what the speed limit should be?

maybe next time i dont know how to solve a calculus equation i pass it on to the garbageman to do it, thats same as you saying engineering students dont know what speed limit should be so lets let politicans decide.

[TrevorK]

You bring up a very interesting point. I do have massive all season tires on my car (look more like truck tires) that I'm sure are bigger than the original tires. I think I will explore that idea.


When I bought a car the owner put on low profile 14" tires which threw the speedo off by ~10% - so tire size will definetely make a difference.

You should be able to call around and find someone who is able to calibrate your speedo, or at least tell you how much you're off.

If you have a friend with an almost new car (Who hasn't modified the tires) get them to drive beside you, call each other and see what speeds you each get.

<Note - only do this on a road that is dead quiet with no one around>

[Hippak]

i can use that argument to say that since most people travel at 120km/h, if i travel at 100 km/h and we collide there is 20km/h of energy to absorb but if i was going 130, its only 10km/h that is transferred


Do you really believe that accidents where fatalities occur only happen in these types of circumstances? Can anyone here post if they've been in an accident where they were travelling at 100km/h and someone hit them at 120km/h and they were severaly injured? Often fatalities that take place involve stationary vehicles and or vehicles that could not stop in time. Also they involve cars which lost control at higher speeds. So my reasoning still stands.

I ask again can you honestly tell me that you'd like a 18 wheeler travelling at 120km/h right behind you on the highway?



lastly you as an engineering student dont know what the speed limit should be on roads... fine, so does that mean if an engineering student doesnt know something, a politican is better qualified to judge what the speed limit should be?

maybe next time i dont know how to solve a calculus equation i pass it on to the garbageman to do it, thats same as you saying engineering students dont know what speed limit should be so lets let politicans decide.

Can you tell me what type of engineer learns about human physiology and the limits and types of forces a human body can withstand. I wasn't aware that a civil engineering degree required this type of knowledge /sarcasm

And again. If you really think that a politician sits down and decides hey I guess the roads should be this speed limit without any research then there's really not point in contesting that type of thinking. Infact if you really think that is the case then why would you trust anything. The food labels in canada may have been arbitrarily decided by some politician, are you gonna trust that you're getting everything your body needs?

You chose not to answer my points about reaction time, stoping distance, safety limits in cars and congestion on the road. Like the previous poster who said that I dont know anything about speeding or what i'm talking about you chose to ignore all these points. Way to go! :)

[vvv1]

This message thread and the http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/ website have helped me a lot in regard to what to expect, which is great.

Just for reference.. if you change your court date I was told you have to go in and fill out a form in person.

For the disclosure letter posted... or people who have mailed disclosure letters, do you address it to the court house that sent the "Notice of Trial"?
Also I'm not sure where I am supposed to send a public records request. If no one can help me with this, I suppose that I will just end up phoning the court and asking them...

Also, I'm not very clear on people's replys with "approach the Prosecutor" or "Prosecutor will call you over and start offering plea bargains to most people with no prior history." So.. do you go to them, or do they call you? Is this BEFORE the trial time on the "notice of trial"?

Thanks.

[weedb0y]

Does anyone have any experience fighting tickets in Quebec?

From experience, I know that they will NOT let you off if the officer doesn't show up (in fact it makes it much worse; when it happened to me the judge made it very clear that since the officer wasn't there to defend himself, there was no way he take my word over the notes the officer left so there was nothing I could argue (and if there was ever a case with holes, it was this one (long sob story coming up): Quebec).

Let me know,
Mike

in Ontario, THEY WILL LET YOU OFF. It has recently happened to me. To the guy who is fighting the ticket, just PM me for more info. Stop listening to people who are telling you to go to paralegals or pay it up. Its a minor ticket which you can fight easily. There isn't a lower change than yours for speeding.

In the mean time, do send a registered letter asking for disclosure.

[vvv1]

When I phoned and talked to them at the court house, the answers to my questions were this:

1. disclosure letter was sent to the court house.

2. in order to find out where to send my public records request I have to call some police station number... where I have to call also in order to find out the officers name, since I can't read it on the ticket.

3. maybe people talk to the procesutor on the court date before the trial, but the person I talked to said I talk to them on the phone before ever going in court, and they will look at my record and talk to the officer to see if I behaved myself when pulled over and stuff like that, and of course "anything you say can and will be used against you" in court if you are unable to settle before your court date.

[vvv1]

Ok, here is the update.

I had to phone the court house for the information. The disclosure was mailed to the court house by xpresspost (so it was "registered"). I did not recieve my disclosure before the court date. As for the public records request, they forwarded my call a couple times and I ended up with an address for the Police Service with Attn: Freedom of Information Act. I did not bother to send that one in as it has to be mailed 30 days in advance, with a $5 application fee.

When I called the court house and asked them about talking to the prosecuter on the day of the trial to reach a "settlement", they said that it has to be done before hand. She asked me for my court room number and then gave me the name and phone number of the prosecutor. I called and got an answering machine, but also located his e-mail address on the internet. I shot off an email to him telling him my story... the circumstances and why I wanted the charge reduced.. without admitting to anything in my email. He phoned, confirmed that this was my first offense..and some other details... talked to the officer... and then offered me a reduced charge. I still had to go to the court house, and I did not see him call anyone up and offer them any deal. I did not stick around to see how the rest of the cases proceeded... although it would have been a little interesting, I was just happy to get the reduced fine and wanted to get out of there and do other things... anyway... I talked to him for a second before the judge came in, and he said to just plead guilty to the reduced charge, so after a while of going over other rescheduling and such things, and some other people were called up for things (not actual trials), then I was called up and the prosecutor said they wanted to change the charge to whatever, and would I plead guilty giving up my right to a trial and I said yes and thank you... ok.. I stumbled through saying "your magesty" once, as it felt really weird cause I come from a religious past.

Anyway, for people in Ottawa like me who may not be aware of it... the new Ottawa court house building is right behind the baseline transitway (ie bus 95). It's basically the transitway stop, a fence, a path, another fence, a large parking lot and then the building. Towards the north there is a "break" in the fences where you can walk through to the parking lot. However, I'm sure most people would be driving to the courthouse... just that usually I DON'T have a car.

Anyway... this thread and fyst were just really helpful so that I somewhat knew what to expect and what to do... if not for either of them, I would not have had any idea to contact the prosecutor before hand, request disclosure etc, and I really don't know what I would have done... probably looked stupid in court. :| They need to have more helpful information on the net.

Anyway, I hope that might be a little helpful to others. I just recommend that you call up the court house as soon as you get your notice, and ask them for the information with where to send the disclosure, public records request, and how to contact the prosecutor... I waited longer than I should have.