left hand turn in left hand lane

[smally21]

the best way to win in traffic court is to never end up there.

 

traffic offences will almost always be your word against the officer's. no judge is going to side against the officer, because he is the highly trained professional and you're the wreckless law breaker (not to mention judges might forget their signals once in while too).

 

examinations of the officer are next to useless - anything prejudicial to the crown's case will just be met with some answer like "I dont recall". anything handy to your case will be picked apart and spun until it makes you look more guilty than when you started. and the judge doesn't get bonuses for lettin' people off.

 

you're best hope in traffic court is to hightail it to the prosecutor and beg for mercy. they'll reduce your charge if you're super respectful and polite. the justice of the peace will listen to hardship cases and excuses before a judge will, and almost always reduce fines and increase time to pay.

 

traffic court is a joke. stay out of there my friends!!!!!

 

 

just caught the 'parade' story.its great - never heard it before.

Edited February 15, 2011 by smally21

[POLLIWOGG]

Its a friendly world when you ride a vintage bike and don't have signal lights, everyone waves at you, and you know that the guy behind you will pass you every time you slow down to turn left because he thinks your waving him to go ahead. Then try doing it at night, You are waiting for traffic to clear so you can turn left and you hear the left lane hog behind you brake hard and swerve to miss you, makes your heart stop.

[smally21]

good point polliwog - the hand signal represents exactly that! i know the bike doesn't require turn signals - but are there stipulations on night driving without signals?

[fishing n autograph]

the best way to win in traffic court is to never end up there.

 

traffic offences will almost always be your word against the officer's. no judge is going to side against the officer, because he is the highly trained professional and you're the wreckless law breaker (not to mention judges might forget their signals once in while too).

 

examinations of the officer are next to useless - anything prejudicial to the crown's case will just be met with some answer like "I dont recall". anything handy to your case will be picked apart and spun until it makes you look more guilty than when you started. and the judge doesn't get bonuses for lettin' people off.

 

you're best hope in traffic court is to hightail it to the prosecutor and beg for mercy. they'll reduce your charge if you're super respectful and polite. the justice of the peace will listen to hardship cases and excuses before a judge will, and almost always reduce fines and increase time to pay.

 

traffic court is a joke. stay out of there my friends!!!!!

 

 

just caught the 'parade' story.its great - never heard it before.

 

I wish. The JP's in Newmarket are very seldom pro police. There are a few that always side with defendent, no matter how solid the officers evidence is.

[misfish]

The second one I represented myself.

Thought I was doing pretty well until the judge interupted me with a lecture.

 

I interupted the judge and asked "what gives you the right to be so judgemental?".

 

Never ask a judge why he's so judgemental! Very bad things happen.

 

 

 

Now thats BALLS Mike

 

 

Oh did the judge leave them with you?

Edited February 15, 2011 by Misfish

[solopaddler]

Now thats BALLS Mike

 

 

Oh did the judge leave them with you?

 

$500 for contempt of court. I was pretty much castrated.

[mercman]

$500 for contempt of court. I was pretty much castrated.

 

 

Should have told him you had no contempt for the court, just HIM !!!! Well....you were already in trouble anyway right

[solopaddler]

Should have told him you had no contempt for the court, just HIM !!!! Well....you were already in trouble anyway right

 

The kicker was it was a nothing ticket. 68km in a 60km zone.

 

I was in a huge lineup of heavy traffic, during a rainstorm at the time to boot.

 

The cop jumped in front of my vehicle at the last second, motioning for me to go to the shoulder.

 

After almost running him over I did.

 

In court when it was my turn to question the officer I asked him: "Officer, is it possible a radar gun may not function properly during a rainstorm?"

 

"Yes" he answered.

 

I was like Perry Mason when I whipped out the hard copy evidence I had of rainfall amounts that day (I work at the weather office and have access to that info).

 

I figured it was done and over with, that I'd won (boy was I wrong )

 

So the judge started lecturing me.

 

As mentioned I asked him what gave him the right to be so judgemental LOL!

 

Well, during his red faced diatribe about wasting the courts time, etc., etc, he says to me: "Nowhere in any of your statements did you say you actually weren't guilty of speeding!!"

 

"Excuse me!" I interupted him again, "But doesn't pleading not guilty speak for itself?"

 

After that there was a lot of red faced gavel banging and I pretty much tuned him out.

 

The lady at the cashiers desk where I paid my fine said she'd never seen such a large fine tacked onto such a minor offense in 25 years working there.

[solopaddler]

 

As long as you're polite and respectful, the worst you can do is walk out with the original charges

 

 

I was incredibly polite and well spoken, not nervous at all. Until I knew it was a lost cause then I got a bit lippy. Paid the price for it too.

 

I agree with you 100% though, it is your right to request a hearing.

 

What is it with some judges? They're so judgemental.

[fishing n autograph]

nah it's because they're only justices of the peace....they wanna be judges! JP's don't have to have any familiarity with the law, they don't even need a background in law

[solopaddler]

nah it's because they're only justices of the peace....they wanna be judges! JP's don't have to have any familiarity with the law, they don't even need a background in law

 

Wow, I had no idea.

[fishing n autograph]

Wow, I had no idea.

 

Some are retirees, some are "pillars" in the community, some are professionals that want a change in careers...it all depends...for the most part, most are early retirees that want to work still

 

but when they get the position, they're given the Provincial Offences Act and told to learn it lol....

 

http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/jpaac/en/qualification.htm

Edited February 15, 2011 by FishnNAutographs

[irishfield]

Some Judges don't need a law background either... ours in Midland was the post master in his "past life".

[shane]

I heard that most judges are ex-lawyers that got tired of standing up to speak.