Caught an L with Speeding ticket (49 over) | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Caught an L with Speeding ticket (49 over)

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
Man, I was debating on getting back into street riding then I saw this thread.

**** that! Never had a speeding ticket but I really don't like the idea of how many ****** up speed zone drops exist.
buy a Grom, WOT all day long and the cops just point and laugh.
 

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
I always wondered - when you meet the crown in an early resolution meeting, do you admit to the charge when plea bargaining? And if you can't reach a mutually agreeable plea and opt for a trial, can they use what you said against you?
In my experience they don't look you in the eye and ask you for the record if you`re admitting to it. It was a frank discussion about what they would be willing to do if i plead guilty to save us all the hassle.

They can certainly tell the JP you had an agreement.

It's always your choice to decide on how to go up until the JP asks you, it's on you to challenge the evidence. What the JP decides to use/listen to is another matter as you have to remember they are not legally trained judges.
 
Last edited:

Evoex

The God
Site Supporter
Yeah seems like im gonna go with the 2nd option and just try to reduce it as much as i can.
Oh ok i thought they would be discussing the 160km/h , could be that he forgot to put an R on my ticket.
Just remember, this incident is now on file with the police. You may not be so lucky with any future interaction, you dodged a big time bullet.
 

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
buy a Grom, WOT all day long and the cops just point and laugh.
Everybody points and laughs. I saw one going through Dundas and a bunch of guys started cheering because they thought it was someone on a pocket rocket. I like them.
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Speaking strictly in a technical term, Yes the crown "could" use what is said during a negotiation in court, When you go in for a first appearance meeting with the crown, there are signs in the room stating that the meeting IS being recorded, and generally the crown, will also advise you that the meeting is being recorded. *** They are recorded NOT to use what you say against you, BUT rather to "protect" the crown, so that you don't get up in open court and say the crown said if you had sex with him/her, they would drop the charges. ***

So, in real world practical terms, NO what you say during the meeting with the crown is NOT used against you. Remember, the whole idea of the meeting is to offer you a "deal" in hopes you will accept it, to prevent a complete clogging of the court system. Therefore, it wouldn't be in the best interest of the crown to begin using statements from the meeting against the defendant in court, as MOST people would simply not take the meeting, and cause the courts to clog up.

Now, to the OP. As someone who has spent countless hours sitting and testifying in traffic courts, "MOST" paralegals, and attorney's, (unless there is a GLARING issue with the ticket), are going to go for the "win" which means they get you a reduction in the charge and/or in the penalty. Something you too can accomplish via the first appearance meeting with the crown.

Again, without seeing the disclosure, no one here, (including me), can tell you if this is a winnable case. Anyone, (including a paralegal, ex coppers, lawyer), who tells you they can "win" your case without seeing the disclosure is simply NOT being honest, and stringing you along to get the cash from your pocket to theirs...lol

Should you decide to go it alone, in a first appearance meeting with the crown, be POLITE, RESPECTFUL, and dress in casual manner, (preferably not jeans and a wife beater). Listen, to what the crown is offering, then "explain: your issue" (the change in speed limit). and say along the lines of I know I screwed up, but I have LEARNED a valuable lesson about watching for speed limit signs more closely, and respecting the limits. If they offer to go from 49 over, (assuming the officer hasn't noted the "actual speed" on the ticket), to 39 over, again be respectful, and restate the change in limits, and that you would be prepared "not to waste the courts time, and enter a plea, if the charge went to 29 over. At that point your simply trying to lower the fine, (although the points would also be dropped, that is of No consequence, unless one is on the verge, of having to go to a meeting with MTO, over accumulated point loss).

Whatever happens be very aware of your speed in the future, and above all GOOD luck in court.

I always wondered - when you meet the crown in an early resolution meeting, do you admit to the charge when plea bargaining? And if you can't reach a mutually agreeable plea and opt for a trial, can they use what you said against you?
 

kiwi

Well-known member
I'm reading this thread with my girlfriend sitting beside me, who is a licensed paralegal. She wants me to let you know that whoever you spoke to didn't exactly provide you with the correct information...until you review the officers notes/disclosure you can't really make a proper determination of the outcome. He's guessing. A good representative will look for any opportunities to debunk the evidence, eg.: when was the radar last calibrated, did he properly document your info, etc.

That's a big ticket, 6 points and a huge fine. You might want to shop around and see what other paralegals have to say about the situation. But definitely have a professional fight it for you, preferably someone who works in the Brampton courts who may be familiar with the prosecutors.
the radar calibration question will made the court laugh. Every tom dick and harry tries that same line of questioning every time.
 

Michael0124

Well-known member
the radar calibration question will made the court laugh. Every tom dick and harry tries that same line of questioning every time.
Really? I asked two experienced paralegals about this. They both told me that they have had charges dismissed because of lack of or inaccurate documentation of calibration/testing the device.

I'm not sure what you mean by line of questioning, if you mean blurting out the question in court and being shown yes its accurate, then I can see being "laughed at". If you know it's not accurate based on the disclosure and present it as such then the court will listen.

Granted, it's not common, the officers are usually pretty good about ensuring it is accurate. But it does happen and it's the first variable to look at when formulating a defense against radar/laser charges.

The Crown relies on that very evidence to prove their case, and you can use the lack of it to prove yours.



 

dr_sarcasm

Well-known member
Have never once been disappointed by hiring a firm to represent me in court for traffic infractions (I have always used either x-copper or hwy-law.com). My experience suggests you're paying a lot of these firms for their contacts and networks within the courts and the people the may know on a police force in order to get your conviction reduced or overturned. Bite the bullet, hire a pro, they'll hopefully turn your major conviction into a minor one, and move on.

Unless of course you happen to be Mr. or Mrs. Charming who knows how to convince strangers that your viewpoint is right and they should cut you some slack...
 

Hyperion

Well-known member
FWIW, I had that nearly exact same scenario.
Was going 180~, got me at 160~, wrote 149 on the ticket (don't remember if he put the R).
I went to the Crown, they offered 29 over without me even saying anything (dropping a major to a minor).

Insurance never found out, never got an increased rate.


Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk
 

Rob MacLennan

Well-known member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Okay so there's 2 plays here:

  1. Fight it and hope to get a win via a few avenues
  2. Negotiate with the crown, aim to get the ticket switched to a different charge or lower the speed, either way you'll get a lower fine and points.
If who charges you? The charges have already been laid and they are for speeding 49 over.

If the officer did not indicate 160km in 80 and showed it reduced (with the R) then what he said at the stop doesn't matter going forward. If he wrote R on the ticket and you fought it, then they would jack it up to the noted original speed.
"Can", not "would." There is the possibility of it being increased to the original speed, but it's not a guarantee. It's a gamble.
 

Top Bottom