trickydisco

I was driving uphill Northbound on Don Mills Rd and Graydon Hall.
Just over the crest appears officer approaching Southbound.
Less than 1.5 seconds visual contact, he brakes, makes a U
and pulls me over.

He tells me I was doing 84kph in a 60.

I tell him I was not speeding (I was barely doing 70...did not say this).

I ask to see the radar gun reading. He refused.
I tell him there was a car next to me the whole time - how
does he know it was me. He says he just knows.

WTF... this is my very first speeding ticket, and I wasnt
even speeding. That is messed up.

theiceman

Barrington

be carefull here if you were " barely doing 70 " you were speeding.

But the fact the cop would not show you the radar reading I would DEFINITELY challenge it in court , as well as the cop saying " I just new it was you". Take it to court saying the cop could not show you evidence. I hope you did not appologize when the cop pulled you over , if you did you admited guilt.

good luck

Rob951

If I were you, which I'm not, but if I were, I'd fight it. Here's the thing though, you need to prove that during the 1.5 seconds (which is more than enough time), you were not the only vehicle in the radar beam, when and if he locked it in. I'm assuming that the cop came over the hill, saw you and whoever coming at him, locked in the speed. So, if, for example, the copper can articulate that you were, say, passing (or even being passed by) the other vehicle, therefore blocking him from said beam, it was deffinately you speeding. If he can't though, you may win.
As for him not letting you see the screen, I wouldn't bring that up (or try; they'll explain the following). He doesn't have to. Not for a second. If, he were to show you that would mean you have to get outta your sweet Porsche. Now, I luv watchin those police vids online and on TV. You know, with the fights and chases and tazerings. In all the ones I've ever seen, no fight has ever occured where the violator stayed in the V (except for the few where the cop wanted the person out). And considering you're probably a little pissed 'bout the ticket, he wants you in your car. Secondly, if some frikin' drunk is gonna aim at the pretty flashin' lights atop his cruiser, you're again better off in your car. If he invites you out to see the screen and you get plowed, he's responsible. Then you could fight the ticket, and see him later in civil court. Ain't no law that states you get to see the screen. It may not even be on the screen anymore anyway. All he needs to do is to see the speed flash up to confirm his visual estimation of your speed.
If you think he's lying and making up some arbitrary speed, fight it, by being honest, which you didn't with the badge, which may work against you now. "Your honour, I was doing 70, even though the police man's notes (and maybe visual/audio recording) quote me saying I wasn't speeding" Let that part be a lesson. Anyway's, good luck.
Also, at your first appearance, request full disclosure, including but not limited to his notes, and the radar unit's certs (they have to be current within 1 year I believe) and tuning fork test's (if it uses forks still)...

BruceP

Some guys watch too much TV.

Fight the ticket. Two options: First, you show up yourself. There is an extremely high likelihood that the prosecutor will call your name before the court is in session and offer to write the ticket down to 15 over. If you could live with a no-points ticket, it's a chance maybe worth taking.

Second option, hire a court agent to fight it for you (people like X-Coppers etc). This is the one to choose if you're super worried about insurance. Their record at killing or reducing tickets is very good, but it will cost you money. Also, FYI, they don't fight the tickets the way a lawyer would fight a criminal prosecution. It's all done on technicalities. A speeding ticket like the one you describe almost never gets tried in court, since officer evidence is generally considered prima facie. There would have to be a huge screw up on the officer's part, independently verifiable and witnessed. Speeding is a summary conviction offence, so all that presumption of innocence stuff is irrelevant.

The other benefit of fighting it either way is that the ticket doesn't get recorded until after conviction, so you could go another year before your insurance company even knows it happened. And it's not unheard of that tickets get tossed for taking too long to go to court.

But don't waste gut acid getting all CSI on this one. The court can't afford to care or listen with speeding tickets. Get 'em in, get 'em out...

NOBLEGT3

next time do what chicks do...blow him in the back of his car..

trickydisco

Hi guys,

thanks for the feedback/advice ... oral or otherwise.
No, I did not tell him I wasnt speeding; I did not tell
him anything. He didnt want to converse with me at
all. It was just "licence & registration" ... then he
came back with presents.
No, he didnt lock the speed in. He said that is the
reason he cant show me the speed.

So, now I guess I have to go through the long arduous
process. I will, of course, be requesting a court date
and plead "not guilty".

Oh well, another ball to juggle...

thanks again, all.

Christien

I'm challenging a ticket on almost exactly the same grounds. I asked to see the radar reading, he took me back to the cruiser and indicated the device on the dashboard, which was reading a hyphen. He said 'oh, it must've cleared itself'. So no evidence should mean innocent, but of course we all know that isn't the case with speeding tickets.

Just keep one thing in mind - as far as your insurance co. is concerned, a conviction is a conviction, no matter if it was 1 over or 40 over, so accepting the plea deal to lower it to no points could still affect your insurance.

Mark Lue

I've heard that the conviction stays on the Provincial system for 3 years but once the Insurance company finds out about the conviction they keep it on file for much longer... how much longer who knows.

theiceman

Christien is bang on, if insurance is your worry , don't plead it down as it is still a conviction. The days of the " no point ticket" meaning anything are gone. Sure it counts against the ministry but gives a F--- about them, it is the insurance companies that are the ones to watch out for.

BruceP

Insurance companies actually have a lot of latitude on this. If you say they don't care whether you got points or not, then I have no reason to doubt that this is your experience. But I've also seen otherwise where a customer is valuable enough.

Mark, you're right, the Province keeps the offense on record for three years. Insurance companies remember it for five years.

Mark Lue

This can't be good for anyone but the Insurance company.

theiceman

I would say if you have a broker you deal with you have a lot more latitude than you do with dealing with an insurance company directly. It is simply churned out by the computer as your quote shows convictions and the surcharges related to them on renewal. My insurance company tracks tickets for three years, the goverment tracks it for two. and accidents for 5.

webbie

http://www.gtamotorcycle.com/vbforum...ead.php?t=1039

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

Bedtime reading, especially the first one.

NOBLEGT3

[QUOTE=trickydisco]


Oh well, another ball to juggle...

QUOTE]

thats what i told you to do in the first place!!

Brian 162

A friend of mine is a traffic officer. He drives an unmarked car with laser,radar, and moving radar.
He always tells me to fight the ticket.
If you fight it on your own go for night court. Your odds are greater the officer won't show up.
During the day they are scheduled to attend court.
I got a ticket in Nov. 2005 on an off ramp (W/B Gardiner at Park Lawn). I hired Pointts. I went to court Dec. 2006. The court tries to plead everyone down to small fine.
With the amount of people at court 2 people wanted to go to trial (myself included).
By the time they got to my case there was no time to hear my case. Instead of throwing it out I have to go back this July.
Good luck in fighting your ticket.