Threat of death as a resonable defence?

[Bignoga]

Hey,

I received a speeding ticket from a police officer doing radar just south of Burnhamthorpe on Winstin Churchill.

The reason for my speeding was I had a cager almost kill me twice in a matter of 1 minute and wanted to get the hell out of there. I was traveling on Winstin in blocking position in the left hand land(2 Lane road) it was 6:15ish on Thursday afternoon so there was still a decent amount of traffic on the roads. While traveling southbound a silver accord turned into my lane without seeing me and I was forced to swerve in my lane and honk my horn to get him to move back over which he did. Didn't reall bug me that much happens all the time on the bike. After waiting for a gap he then moved in behind me. Upon approaching Burnhamthorpe I got the red light and ended up stopping in the #1 position of the queue. Buddy in the silver accord behind me isn't paying attention and locks up his tires when he realizes we are stopping. Luckily I was paying attention as I had to scoot forward a couple feet otherwise he would have hit me(Stopped about 1-1.5 feet behind me). After this second close call I'm worried about this crazy driver hitting me so when the light turns green I accelerate and change lanes to put as much distance as I can between me and him. The police officer was doing radar approximately 350 meters down the road and I was ticketed for 105 in a 60. I told him what had happened and he suggested I speak to the prosecutor before a trial to see what they can reduce it too.

My question is if I take this to trial will I be able to use this situation as my defense? I'm sure there had to be some kind of exception in life threatening situations. While I sure many people and the police officer told me to slow down to get away from him that wasn't really an option with him being behind me.

If anyone has any input I would appreciate it.

Thanks
Kyle

[boooya]

I dont see that working in your favor.

[PLau]

I'd say you would have a hard time proving it.

[OpenGambit]

it doesn't matter if you can prove it or not, HTA offences are not subject to mens rea type defenses and this is one of them. so if you end up in front of a JP with this, you won't get off scott free (because you are essentially admitting to the offense in your defense)

That being said. if the prosecutor chooses to drop/reduce it because he is kind of a nice guy, that is completely different. And yes he can do that.

[Markovic]

They will usually reduce it to avoid trial...

[FiReSTaRT]

They will usually reduce it to avoid trial...

And you'll still end up with a conviction on your record. Fight it all the way. For this ticket dollar amount, it might pay off to hire Redline.

[Rob MacLennan]

Unfortunately that will work out to "guilty, with an explanation" which would act to potentially reduce the fine, but not the infraction. It's worth a try to either plead it down, or get representation.

[LoneRonin]

defense of necessity maybe? Lets say there was a crazy guy waving a gun at you from his car and you speed away and get pulled over, I don't see why its not a legit defense...but how the hell can I prove it unless I got a GoPro?

[whetaus-tr]

I was ticketed for 105 in a 60.

Wow that's close.....

[turbodish]

My question is if I take this to trial will I be able to use this situation as my defense? I'm sure there had to be some kind of exception in life threatening situations. While I sure many people and the police officer told me to slow down to get away from him that wasn't really an option with him being behind me.

Defence of necessity implies that there was no legal alternative. In this case the Accord was not waving a gun at you or otherwise trying to cause you deliberate harm, so there were plenty of alternatives. You were in the number 1 position of the left lane? You could have accelerated off the line on the green and immediately moved over to the right lane to let that Accord by. That would be the more reasonable thing to do and would eliminate the "threat" without you having to exceed the speed limit at all.

[imnothng]

OP could plead guilty with explanation, maybe get it reduced to a 15 over and get no points. So he'd still pay a fine but not suffer for years after from the insurance.

dude.... Insurance don't care about points. Depending on the company, he could suffer for 1km/hr over.

[OpenGambit]

dude.... Insurance don't care about points. Depending on the company, he could suffer for 1km/hr over.

You might want to read the whole paragraph. Not only are you quoting out of context, you twisted his meaning.

[EngineerJoe]

Kyle, a couple points...

1. Your reaction was voluntary
2. Your reaction was not your ONLY reasonable option to remove yourself from the danger
3. The danger wasn't an immediate danger

All these things are working against you.

Hate to say it, but I only see the prosecutor reducing (not dismissing) the charge.

[Bignoga]

Hey everyone,

Thanks for the responses. I have put in a request to see the prosecutor any depending on what they can can offer me I will decide to move to a trial or not. I'm basically looking to see it reduced to a non moving violation however based on the responses I doubt it will be coming that low.

Kind of upsetting that this will probably end up costing me 4000 bucks in ticket/insurance increase over 3 years, for what I personally feel shouldn't have been an issue. Oh well.

Thanks again,
Kyle

[FiReSTaRT]

He won't make it a non-moving violation. If you accept anything more, even a 1km/h over ticket, it will look the same as what you already got to your insurance company. Hire Redline. I don't work for them or get paid by them or have any affiliations with them other than being a satisfied customer.