Advice needed – What to request in a disclosure | Page 5 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Advice needed – What to request in a disclosure

Krime

Well-known member
Site Supporter
As to the "approaching" setting on the radar unit, (I haven't looked at the manual for that specific model), but normally that is for radar units which can also be used while the patrol unit is in motion. The setting then, calculates, the patrol units speed, the target vehicles speed, and displays the differential. But don't quote me on that one...lol
From the user manual:
Q. Will my radar work while my vehicle is moving?
A No, the GHD and SCOUT radar guns are a stationary only models,
so your vehicle should be parked You need to hold the radar
steady while operating it

Funny, although he mentioned it as "approach" mode, in the manual it's actually referred to "towards" mode.

Also noticed these details in the manual under interference sources:

7.2.2 Fan Interference
Fan interference is the most common form of interference that you
are likely to experience It is caused when the radar measures the
speed of the vehicle blower fan Changing the fan speed causes a
proportional change in the display speed

So if they had the heater on in their patrol car it could mess up the readings?? That sounds like a joke.

and,

7.2.7 Scanning
The GHD and SCOUT are designed to be used while attached
to a solid mount or hand-held in a steady position. Moving or
“scanning” the antenna past stationary objects can cause the
system to detect motion Obtaining a speed reading from scanning
will not happen when you properly use the radar

So is this saying that you can't scan or move the radar device or else you'll get inaccurate readings? Funny, because I'd imagine the officer would have had to scan the radar to follow my car through the curve.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
The crown and JP will NOT permit you, (unless you recorded it with the officer's permission), what the officer said verbally. You simply can't testify to what was said, much the same, as the officer wouldn't be permitted to say. The accused admitted that he was knew he was speeding. The reasoning behind this is there is NO way to prove what was or wasn't said. In the eyes of the court, if the officer denies any verbal statements, the court will accept that Your bringing up conflicting statements, benefits you, whereas the accepted view is the officer has nothing to gain or lose, by not telling the truth, in this case it will only benefit you.

As I said earlier, and Evoex, pointed out the location, will in all likelihood, be a non starter for the court. If you begin "throwing everything at the wall, to see what sticks" is likely to be viewed as such, and rejected quickly be the JP. Best if you had ONE point, and go at it, unfortunately, I don't see one point, which by itself will achieve your goal.

Also, the JP isn't going to permit, 3 hours to hear this case, You WILL be lucky if your given 3 - 5 minutes, as I said the court will have WAY too many cases to devote that amount of time. The way the system views it, (using a sports metaphor), if you can't land that knock out punch in the first 30 seconds, they are going to allow you a full 15 rounds to wear the officer down...lol

You asked earlier about "cross examination." You have to be careful, as to what you ask and don't. As I said earlier, once you go down a path, you WILL expose yourself to examination by the crown. Again, they do this all day, and they will know EXACTLY what to ask to get the reply that benefits them...LOL

Again not trying to discourage you, just give you the BEST possible advice, to be successful. BEST of luck. BTW dress respectfully. iof you go in looking like you have been living on the streets for years, you will be dismissed much more quickly. Yes, JP's also have perception bias, as does every other human being...lol
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
The term approach and towards will be seen as interchangeable, so not a fatal error. Yes fan interference IS an issue, but in my vast experience the ONLY way it becomes an issue if if the radar gun is actually pointed directly at vehicle dash board. We used to "test" this by pointing the radar out the window, IF it was raining and you pointed the radar thru a closed window, you would still get an accurate reading BUT, the vehicle had to be MUCH closer to the unit that if out an open window. The reading was still the same just needed longer to lock on.

ANY officer who has done more than 10 minutes of radar operation will be able to advise, that the vehicle fan is NOT an issue, (doing radar IS boring, so you tend to play with it...lol Just as an effective method was park on the shoulder of the road, then set the radar on the window ledge and read the readings via the side rear view mirror. (meant you had to learn to read inverted numerals....lol

From the user manual:
Q. Will my radar work while my vehicle is moving?
A No, the GHD and SCOUT radar guns are a stationary only models,
so your vehicle should be parked You need to hold the radar
steady while operating it

Funny, although he mentioned it as "approach" mode, in the manual it's actually referred to "towards" mode.

Also noticed these details in the manual under interference sources:

7.2.2 Fan Interference
Fan interference is the most common form of interference that you
are likely to experience It is caused when the radar measures the
speed of the vehicle blower fan Changing the fan speed causes a
proportional change in the display speed

So if they had the heater on in their patrol car it could mess up the readings?? That sounds like a joke.

and,

7.2.7 Scanning
The GHD and SCOUT are designed to be used while attached
to a solid mount or hand-held in a steady position. Moving or
“scanning” the antenna past stationary objects can cause the
system to detect motion Obtaining a speed reading from scanning
will not happen when you properly use the radar

So is this saying that you can't scan or move the radar device or else you'll get inaccurate readings? Funny, because I'd imagine the officer would have had to scan the radar to follow my car through the curve.
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
The crown and JP will NOT permit you, (unless you recorded it with the officer's permission), what the officer said verbally.
I don't believe you need anyone's permission to record in public.

Why could this conversation not be entered into evidence?
 

Krime

Well-known member
Site Supporter
The term approach and towards will be seen as interchangeable, so not a fatal error. Yes fan interference IS an issue, but in my vast experience the ONLY way it becomes an issue if if the radar gun is actually pointed directly at vehicle dash board. We used to "test" this by pointing the radar out the window, IF it was raining and you pointed the radar thru a closed window, you would still get an accurate reading BUT, the vehicle had to be MUCH closer to the unit that if out an open window. The reading was still the same just needed longer to lock on.

ANY officer who has done more than 10 minutes of radar operation will be able to advise, that the vehicle fan is NOT an issue, (doing radar IS boring, so you tend to play with it...lol Just as an effective method was park on the shoulder of the road, then set the radar on the window ledge and read the readings via the side rear view mirror. (meant you had to learn to read inverted numerals....lol
Well this is interesting. He didn’t have his window down. Based on the way he was parked I would have been approaching from his front right direction which would have had him pointing (he acknowledges pointing the hand held at me as he was monitoring left and right traffic) through the windshield or window at best. It would have been colder in November so his windows were definetly up as I recall. He also would have had his fellow officer and the A pillar as potential obstructions blocking him from the right, so I’m all likelihood it was taken pointed in front of or over the dash at an angle which sounds like it would have made fan interference a factor if the fan was on or taken longer to lock on in the shorter time I came into view.
 

Robbo

Well-known member
Well this is interesting. He didn’t have his window down. Based on the way he was parked I would have been approaching from his front right direction which would have had him pointing (he acknowledges pointing the hand held at me as he was monitoring left and right traffic) through the windshield or window at best. It would have been colder in November so his windows were definetly up as I recall. He also would have had his fellow officer and the A pillar as potential obstructions blocking him from the right, so I’m all likelihood it was taken pointed in front of or over the dash at an angle which sounds like it would have made fan interference a factor if the fan was on or taken longer to lock on in the shorter time I came into view.
If there was sufficient interference, the radar gun (by design) would not take a reading at all. That is not what happened to you.

In your specific case, it did record your speed (possibly with bias in your favour due to the curve).

Regarding potential obstructions...again, the radar gun would not have been able to take a reading. It did...so you can forget that argument too.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Krime

Well-known member
Site Supporter
At the courthouse now waiting for my trial. Officer is in attendance. For those interested it may be surprising to know that they still offered the original reduced ticket with no points on the spot, and if I proceeded to trial I’d be charged wth the original offence (an extra $90 and the 3 points). Nothing to lose, here goes nothing.
 

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
At the courthouse now waiting for my trial. Officer is in attendance. For those interested it may be surprising to know that they still offered the original reduced ticket with no points on the spot, and if I proceeded to trial I’d be charged wth the original offence (an extra $90 and the 3 points). Nothing to lose, here goes nothing.
Good luck, let us know how it goes. Worst-case you can be entertained by people that fight the ticket with the "I didn't do it" approach with no support or plan B.
 

Krime

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Withdrawn!!!

I have absolutely no idea what really happened but no cases went to trial.

Here’s what happened from my perspective.

Entered a packed courtroom, at least 15 officers lined the back wall including mine. They handled all the guilty pleas and the room went to over half empty. Went to recess and came back in ready for trial. Crown prosecutor is reviewing evidence videos and discussing notes with officers. My officer goes up to her with his disclosure notes in hand and they whisper in conversation. I hear the convo end with her saying, you okay? He reponds yes. I’d assumed she was asking if he’s good to go for the trial.

I’m back head down in my notes getting ready to defend, and notice paralegals are somehow getting their cases withdrawn by the prosecutor... like everything. I’m at the front and look back to notice an empty courtroom with no cops in sight. Just the one other lady with a file folder next to me ready to go to trial.

Sure enough she gets called up, and charges withdrawn. I’m next and last up, same deal - prosecutor says after discussing with the officer we have decided to withdraw the charge! I thank them all and walk out with a smile of confusion.

I noticed my officer hanging out in the hallway outside taking to a colleague. So not like he was a rush to go anywhere.

Feeling very fortunate. Thanks for the support/direction to all who chimed in.
 
Last edited:

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
Good luck, let us know how it goes. Worst-case you can be entertained by people that fight the ticket with the "I didn't do it" approach with no support or plan B.
My favorite so far is the guy who got thrown out for repeatedly using his blackberry and eating in the court room.
 

Krime

Well-known member
Site Supporter
My favorite so far is the guy who got thrown out for repeatedly using his blackberry and eating in the court room.
I was in awe of one guy that came to represent his wife but couldn't act on anything, he was just massively stressed and couldn't give any answers to the crown or the JP. They were extremely patient and forgiving with him. He was trying to get a 29km/h ticket dropped, when it was previously set to 49km/h which was noted as being reduced from 54km/h over. The crown mentioned how the officer should have towed her vehicle and how lucky his wife was... the officer just stood there rolling his eyes and looking at me in disbelief that the guy didn't know what to do after all the leniency that was already granted. His wife must have an abysmal driving record, otherwise why not just pay the $140 charge and 3 points, she had already gotten off a much worse scenario. The judge ended up throwing an adjournment his way to allow him to better converse with his wife on what she wants to do.

I do have to say, the JP was awesome.
 

smergy

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Lucky for you. It's a circus on the best of days.
 

HarleyHare

Well-known member
I'm thinking that it took 1.5 years since charged, and the other paralegal cases were also likely stale-dated. And the crown grouped these into the same courtroom and literally flushed them, knowing that the chances of a fair trial are remote, as you just need to ask the officer how good is his memory and his notes after performing 20 or more traffic stops a day over the last 500 days?! Answer? Sketchy at best. A good defence will or should blow holes right through anything remotely intelligent that the officer may utter.

It's the old - "Justice delayed is justice denied". Case closed.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Excellent out come for you. Sure you wasted your day in court, but sitting and observing is quite an educational experience, as you seen with the guy there for his wife, as what NOT to do..lol

The discussion between the crown and the officer was likely that, for what ever reason, the crown was withdrawing the charge and just wanted to confirm with the officer that he was ok with that decision. Crown, has the final say, but they also don't want to tick off officers. They NEED a good relationship with officers to keep the system rolling.

The crown, also knows which officers are simply ok on the stand and which are rock stars. They also know which officers could care less about a dropped charge and which ones need to be "massaged"

I recall, one case, (it was an impaired, so in front of a judge, not a JP). I had testified numerous times, before this judge, (It was rural NB, so few judges and few crowns). The defense attorney, was trying his damnest, to try to trip me up, (he and I had never gone up against each other previously). After about 20 minutes, of his fumbling and asking the same questions in various forms, hoping it would confuse me. At the time I held the record for the most impaired cases 2 years running, so I KNEW what I was doing. I also knew exactly what the crown, wanted and needed, as well as knowing what this judge looked for.

Finally, the judge stepped in and asked the defense if he had ANY other questions as I had obviously answered his question in all the various forms it was put to me. The defense, didn't even get a chance to reply when the judge said, "this officer has testified before me on MANY occasions, he is always well presented, either while in uniform or his civilian clothes, (I always wore a suit and tie), This officer gives exemplary evidence. I highly doubt this officer got out of bed this morning just to come here to lie to us about the interaction with your client." "So unless you have anything further I am ready to pass my judgment, please have your client stand" He was convicted..lol

After the session wrapped, the crown called me over. He said as you know this judge is fair, but can be a ball buster as well, (especially when officers mess things up). In almost 20 years of working with him I have never seen him compliment an officer in that manner. Congrats.

Three weeks later, I got called off the road and advised the commander wanted me in his office. Of course my mind was racing...ok what did I screw up this time..lol He handed me 2 letters one from the crown and one from the judge. They were letters of commendation, spelling out my performance in the case.

The word spread among all the defence attorney's in town. After that, for the next 3 years until I transferred out I had only 2 impaired charges which went to trial. I would see defence attorneys say to their clients, Nope the officer is here and we are going to be changing our plea to guilty, and hope the court goes easy on us...lol

So that is likely what the crown/officer "chat" was about. Again congrats, a win is a win, in court regardless of how it came to be for you. (y)(y)(y)
 

Krime

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Excellent out come for you. Sure you wasted your day in court, but sitting and observing is quite an educational experience, as you seen with the guy there for his wife, as what NOT to do..lol

The discussion between the crown and the officer was likely that, for what ever reason, the crown was withdrawing the charge and just wanted to confirm with the officer that he was ok with that decision. Crown, has the final say, but they also don't want to tick off officers. They NEED a good relationship with officers to keep the system rolling.

The crown, also knows which officers are simply ok on the stand and which are rock stars. They also know which officers could care less about a dropped charge and which ones need to be "massaged"

I recall, one case, (it was an impaired, so in front of a judge, not a JP). I had testified numerous times, before this judge, (It was rural NB, so few judges and few crowns). The defense attorney, was trying his damnest, to try to trip me up, (he and I had never gone up against each other previously). After about 20 minutes, of his fumbling and asking the same questions in various forms, hoping it would confuse me. At the time I held the record for the most impaired cases 2 years running, so I KNEW what I was doing. I also knew exactly what the crown, wanted and needed, as well as knowing what this judge looked for.

Finally, the judge stepped in and asked the defense if he had ANY other questions as I had obviously answered his question in all the various forms it was put to me. The defense, didn't even get a chance to reply when the judge said, "this officer has testified before me on MANY occasions, he is always well presented, either while in uniform or his civilian clothes, (I always wore a suit and tie), This officer gives exemplary evidence. I highly doubt this officer got out of bed this morning just to come here to lie to us about the interaction with your client." "So unless you have anything further I am ready to pass my judgment, please have your client stand" He was convicted..lol

After the session wrapped, the crown called me over. He said as you know this judge is fair, but can be a ball buster as well, (especially when officers mess things up). In almost 20 years of working with him I have never seen him compliment an officer in that manner. Congrats.

Three weeks later, I got called off the road and advised the commander wanted me in his office. Of course my mind was racing...ok what did I screw up this time..lol He handed me 2 letters one from the crown and one from the judge. They were letters of commendation, spelling out my performance in the case.

The word spread among all the defence attorney's in town. After that, for the next 3 years until I transferred out I had only 2 impaired charges which went to trial. I would see defence attorneys say to their clients, Nope the officer is here and we are going to be changing our plea to guilty, and hope the court goes easy on us...lol

So that is likely what the crown/officer "chat" was about. Again congrats, a win is a win, in court regardless of how it came to be for you. (y)(y)(y)
Thank you! Great to get more context. It's interesting how you mentioned that the crown knows how the officers preform on the stand. I was curious myself and thought I may have a chance based on how I recalled my interaction with the officer during the traffic stop. He was fairly young, and came across as being somewhat rookie-ish in terms of how he interacted with me. Very scripted, slow to respond to my questions and didn't have a seasoned way about him if you know what I mean. Based on that initial impression I wouldn't have been surprised if when on the stand, he would be very scripted and find in more challenging to respond to on the fly questions that would have put his notes in question. I could have been completely wrong, but I'm glad I didn't have to find out one way or another in the end!

An even bigger congrats on your career milestone. There is nothing worse than an impaired driver. About 10 years ago my friend and I called one in around midnight in Richmond Hill. He almost hit us head on, so we U-turned and followed him. He was on Bayview Ave and trying to make a left turn into a subdivision... almost taking out other cars and driving right over the median just missing the traffic light post in the process. We followed him, flashing our headlights and hazards to warn other oncoming motorists. We called 911 and stayed on the line to describe every turn the guy made, driving up and over the curb multiple times. The cops arrived about 5 minutes later, we had to wave the first officer on because my friend was driving a blacked out out Impala that looked like an unmarked car. We ended up spending about 2 hours at the scene after probably 4-5 cops showed up... we gave our individual statements in the back of the cop car (fun times if you're 6'4).

After we gave our contact details, they mentioned that we'd be called as witnesses if the case goes to trial. We never received that call, so wonder if he ended up pleading guilty in the end. I'm hoping he did, someone like that has no business on the roads if he's willing to do what he did.
 

HarleyHare

Well-known member
It's interesting how you mentioned that the crown knows how the officers perform on the stand. I was curious myself and thought I may have a chance based on how I recalled my interaction with the officer during the traffic stop. He was fairly young and came across as being somewhat rookie-ish in terms of how he interacted with me. Very scripted, slow to respond to my questions and didn't have a seasoned way about him
Maybe seemingly young and "rookie-ish" and some of it may have been amateurish, but limiting conversation and slow to respond may be a style this officer feels works for him. Say a military style that says, "I'm in charge, I'm going to write you a ticket, and I'll speak to you only as far as is necessary to give you this ticket". It limits idle friendly dialogue and the potential for bartering back and forth on reducing the charge.

Cops are like people, there are all kinds of them.
 

Top Bottom