Ineligible disclosure | GTAMotorcycle.com

Ineligible disclosure

daught

daught

Well-known member
I got an illegible disclosure. In my disclosure request I requested his notes are typed. I really can't read any of his chicken scratch. Any idea how I can proceed?
Should I make my request again at trial and ask for an adjournment?


General Request

With regard to the above matter and in light of the guidelines set out in R. v. Stinchcombe, 1991 CANLII

45 (S.C.C.), and subsequent cases, I am requesting that you provide me with all relevant information and

documentation so that I may prepare my defence against the above charge and make full answer.

Specific Request

Without limiting the generality of the above request, I ask that you also include:

1. Copies of all witness statements, including explanations of shorthand, or coded notes by

officers.

2. The officer’s notes regarding the alleged infractions, including explanations or shorthand, or

coded notes by the officer.

3. A typed version of any hand written notes.

4. Both sides of the officer’s copy of the Ticket.

5. Information about any speed monitoring devices used in the alleged offence.

6. A copy of the officer’s training record, or certificate of qualification specific to said speedmonitoring device, or speed estimation device.

7. A copy of the calibration, and repair history of any speed-monitoring device used in this alleged

offence.

8. A copy of the operator’s manual for said speed-monitoring device.

9. A copy of the officers call sheet from the day of the allegation.

10. And any other document that the Crown, or Crown’s witness, may rely on at trial.

Missing Information

I also request that you advise me of any information, which is not being disclosed and an explanation for

such non-disclosure.
 
Last edited:
You mean illegible disclosure, I think
 
Make a Further Disclosure Request, with the Prosecutor's Office, for the missing information on Monday. Chances are that if your court date is within the next 8 weeks, that you will not receive the further disclosure in time for your court date. When you go to court you will then ask that the case be stayed due to lack of complete disclosure. The JP will probably deny the stay, if so request an adjournment until you can receive and review a disclosure that meets the requirements to prepare a proper defense.
 
The prosecutor & pork chop are under no obligation to make sure you understand their disclosure, and in most instances it's against their interests so they will just tell you to pound sand, or give you 5mins before trial in the hallway with the officer to clarify anything you can't read. Um yeah, thanks.

It's up to the JP's discretion whether you will get an adjournment or not based on chicken scratch, but if this is your first appearance usually they have no problems agreeing to an order that the officer types it up. Keep the original chicken scratch copy though, a lot of times they are so used to just making things up as they go along there can be some big discrepancies between the two that you can use at trial.
 
SLaP said:
Make a Further Disclosure Request, with the Prosecutor's Office, for the missing information on Monday. Chances are that if your court date is within the next 8 weeks, that you will not receive the further disclosure in time for your court date. When you go to court you will then ask that the case be stayed due to lack of complete disclosure. The JP will probably deny the stay, if so request an adjournment until you can receive and review a disclosure that meets the requirements to prepare a proper defense.
Click to expand...

This is the correct answer.
 
Thx for the info.

I got his notes, a copy of the ticket, and surprisingly the RD manual.
 
Last edited:
daught said:
Thx for the info.

I got his notes, a copy of the ticket, and surprisingly the RD manual.
Click to expand...
I can tell you that you wont be getting his call history for the day. Not only is it irrelevant, it is none of your business. Even if some JP, somewhere thought it was relevant; read: Never going to happen; it would be vetted to ***** and wouldn't make any sense to you...
 
Rob MacLennan said:
This is the correct answer.
Click to expand...

Show me where the prosecutor is obligated to provide a transcribed copy of an officer's notes?
They might do it, or they might not. If the Crown/LEO does not, a JP might grant an adjournment & judicial order for transcribed notes...but it is entirely discretionary. I've had a pro-LEO JP that got up on the wrong side of the bed that day only adjourn for 5mins so that the officer could clarify any points I couldn't make out in his notes.

But it is an opening for an appeal.
 
Dilligaf0220 said:
Show me where the prosecutor is obligated to provide a transcribed copy of an officer's notes?
They might do it, or they might not. If the Crown/LEO does not, a JP might grant an adjournment & judicial order for transcribed notes...but it is entirely discretionary. I've had a pro-LEO JP that got up on the wrong side of the bed that day only adjourn for 5mins so that the officer could clarify any points I couldn't make out in his notes.

But it is an opening for an appeal.
Click to expand...

Disclosure that is indecipherable isn't disclosure and 5 minutes is insufficient time to prepare for trial. Both are reasons for successful appeal, which means that those are the rules.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Disclosure that is indecipherable isn't disclosure and 5 minutes is insufficient time to prepare for trial. Both are reasons for successful appeal, which means that those are the rules.
Click to expand...

Indecipherable by whom? It comes down to the JP's discretion.
9/10 the OP will get a judicial order & adjournment so the officer can transcribe his notes. But there is a small chance he won't, and he should be prepared for that. I've even had a clerk look over my disclosure request and say "we don't do that" to my face. So don't present transcribed notes as gospel, because it's not.
 
Dilligaf0220 said:
Indecipherable by whom? It comes down to the JP's discretion.
Click to expand...

With the further disclosure request sent prior to the court case you are making an effort to receive full disclosure in order to prepare a defense.
If you have not yet received the further disclosure in a reasonable amount of time before the court date, and if there is any objection to the legibility of the officers notes, ask the prosecutor to read the notes aloud in court and explain the meaning of the abbreviations used in the notes. They will more than likely turn down the offer. If they ask you to step outside of the court to have the officer provide explaination of the notes to you line by line, you can agree to this provided that you are provided an adjournment to fully review the notes and prepare a defense.

http://canlii.org/eliisa/highlight..../bcsc/doc/2001/2001bcsc1882/2001bcsc1882.html
 
SLaP said:
With the further disclosure request sent prior to the court case you are making an effort to receive full disclosure in order to prepare a defense.
If you have not yet received the further disclosure in a reasonable amount of time before the court date, and if there is any objection to the legibility of the officers notes, ask the prosecutor to read the notes aloud in court and explain the meaning of the abbreviations used in the notes. They will more than likely turn down the offer. If they ask you to step outside of the court to have the officer provide explaination of the notes to you line by line, you can agree to this provided that you are provided an adjournment to fully review the notes and prepare a defense.

http://canlii.org/eliisa/highlight..../bcsc/doc/2001/2001bcsc1882/2001bcsc1882.html
Click to expand...

Well you demonstrated my point, and then some. One case, three JP's, two of whom refused an adjournment because of chicken scratch notes, and toss in one miffed traffic cop that deliberately obfuscated a judicial order.
 
Dilligaf0220 said:
Well you demonstrated my point, and then some. One case, three JP's, two of whom refused an adjournment because of chicken scratch notes, and toss in one miffed traffic cop that deliberately obfuscated a judicial order.
Click to expand...

Actually he quite effectively demonstrated why you were wrong. That's two JPs who were overridden by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, thereby creating precedent.
 
Dilligaf0220 said:
Indecipherable by whom? It comes down to the JP's discretion.
9/10 the OP will get a judicial order & adjournment so the officer can transcribe his notes. But there is a small chance he won't, and he should be prepared for that. I've even had a clerk look over my disclosure request and say "we don't do that" to my face. So don't present transcribed notes as gospel, because it's not.
Click to expand...

You guys are spoiled in the GTA If you get typed notes for traffic court. The notes are the officers, to refresh his memory long after the events. Around here I don't think even the defence gets a typed copy for criminal matters (ie impaireds)
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Actually he quite effectively demonstrated why you were wrong. That's two JPs who were overridden by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, thereby creating precedent.
Click to expand...

Some other interesting cases...

R. v. Bidyk, 2003 SKPC 124 (CanLII)
http://canlii.ca/en/sk/skpc/doc/2003/2003skpc124/2003skpc124.html

R. v. Abrey, 2007 SKQB 213 (CanLII)
http://canlii.ca/en/sk/skqb/doc/2007/2007skqb213/2007skqb213.html

Dilligaf0220 said:
I've even had a clerk look over my disclosure request and say "we don't do that" to my face. So don't present transcribed notes as gospel, because it's not.
Click to expand...

Dilligaf0220 said:
I've had a pro-LEO JP that got up on the wrong side of the bed that day only adjourn for 5mins so that the officer could clarify any points I couldn't make out in his notes.
Click to expand...

If one goes to court with the proper preparation and information they will not have to take the word of a clerk, or even a "pro-LEO JP", as gospel.
A Justice of the Peace, in Ontario, doesn't even have to have a law degree. Qualifications may include a university degree or college diploma and 10 years of paid or volunteer work experience. http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/jpaac/qualifications/
 
Rob MacLennan said:
I'm beginning to think that we need a sticky thread, that cites precedent setting cases.
Click to expand...

That would be a nice touch.

daught said:
Which makes the the most useless pricks. I cant stand those arrogant bastards. "your worship"... Sheeesh.
Click to expand...

In some instances they may actually have a law degree, I have appeared before a JP who retired as a lawyer and the wife wanted him out of the house, so he took a position as a JP... BUT that is VERY VERY rare. In the end they may be an idiot in your eyes, but unless their ruling is appealed, it will stand as a conviction, regardless of what we think of it...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom