Traffic Ticket for passenger seat belt violation
Jump to Page:
< Previous [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] Next >
Posted on: 23-05-12 13:28:18
Quote:
Originally posted by Fido
Dude ,
And not everybody is a fighter !!
A Trial is granted not because the Police Officer may or may not show up --- but because per the Justice System , a charge is just a charge and can be refuted & over turned or sustained upon a further careful analysis ....... A Trial is granted because Law enforcement Officers are not the final sayers ...... They have just stated what they have observed which may not be entirely correct or complete and you state what you observe in the court ........
Based on the abover website , I have beaten tickets twice and people here have done it as well ..... If you belong to a category Hiren has referred above then you do not fight ... Pay up ... And that s what happens to 80% tickets .
But for the balance 20% who decide to fight , for one reason or the other - they get benefits which include getting the tickets thrown out , prosecutor offering discount , Crown withdrawing charges & charges being over tuned by JoP ...
I am totally in favor of fighting the ticket because there is nothing to lose. The reason I gave my input was to aware that I have seen many trials in the court where I felt that judge's decision was biased. In one case I remember that when defender (who was charged with the speeding) asked the police officer to provide radar reading. The police officer politely said that he is trained to judge the speed of any vehicle and radar reading is not mandatory. In that case, the decision was made in favor of the prosecutor. So it is not the justice system but the mood of the judge at that time.
In anyway people should always fight the tickets.
Quote:
Originally posted by web2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Fido
Dude ,
And not everybody is a fighter !!
A Trial is granted not because the Police Officer may or may not show up --- but because per the Justice System , a charge is just a charge and can be refuted & over turned or sustained upon a further careful analysis ....... A Trial is granted because Law enforcement Officers are not the final sayers ...... They have just stated what they have observed which may not be entirely correct or complete and you state what you observe in the court ........
Based on the abover website , I have beaten tickets twice and people here have done it as well ..... If you belong to a category Hiren has referred above then you do not fight ... Pay up ... And that s what happens to 80% tickets .
But for the balance 20% who decide to fight , for one reason or the other - they get benefits which include getting the tickets thrown out , prosecutor offering discount , Crown withdrawing charges & charges being over tuned by JoP ...
I am totally in favor of fighting the ticket because there is nothing to lose. The reason I gave my input was to aware that I have seen many trials in the court where I felt that judge's decision was biased. In one case I remember that when defender (who was charged with the speeding) asked the police officer to provide radar reading. The police officer politely said that he is trained to judge the speed of any vehicle and radar reading is not mandatory. In that case, the decision was made in favor of the prosecutor. So it is not the justice system but the mood of the judge at that time.
In anyway people should always fight the tickets.
Please treat the trial as a technical issue and each word said/presented by the prosecutor, witness, Police and the Judge can be used in your defense as required. The other way is also true - whatever you say can be held against you.
It is also important to follow the due procedure in contesting the ticket. In the case cited above, did the defender request a disclosure from the police officer regarding the radar readings? In fact there is a long list of disclosures he is supposed to seek from the prosecutor, but it needs to done at least 3-4 weeks prior to trial date and provide proof that the request was made.
Without knowing the complete details of the above trial it is not possible to evaluate the JPs ruling.
Hiren
Quote:
Originally posted by hchheda
Quote:
Originally posted by web2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Fido
Dude ,
And not everybody is a fighter !!
A Trial is granted not because the Police Officer may or may not show up --- but because per the Justice System , a charge is just a charge and can be refuted & over turned or sustained upon a further careful analysis ....... A Trial is granted because Law enforcement Officers are not the final sayers ...... They have just stated what they have observed which may not be entirely correct or complete and you state what you observe in the court ........
Based on the abover website , I have beaten tickets twice and people here have done it as well ..... If you belong to a category Hiren has referred above then you do not fight ... Pay up ... And that s what happens to 80% tickets .
But for the balance 20% who decide to fight , for one reason or the other - they get benefits which include getting the tickets thrown out , prosecutor offering discount , Crown withdrawing charges & charges being over tuned by JoP ...
I am totally in favor of fighting the ticket because there is nothing to lose. The reason I gave my input was to aware that I have seen many trials in the court where I felt that judge's decision was biased. In one case I remember that when defender (who was charged with the speeding) asked the police officer to provide radar reading. The police officer politely said that he is trained to judge the speed of any vehicle and radar reading is not mandatory. In that case, the decision was made in favor of the prosecutor. So it is not the justice system but the mood of the judge at that time.
In anyway people should always fight the tickets.
Please treat the trial as a technical issue and each word said/presented by the prosecutor, witness, Police and the Judge can be used in your defense as required. The other way is also true - whatever you say can be held against you.
It is also important to follow the due procedure in contesting the ticket. In the case cited above, did the defender request a disclosure from the police officer regarding the radar readings? In fact there is a long list of disclosures he is supposed to seek from the prosecutor, but it needs to done at least 3-4 weeks prior to trial date and provide proof that the request was made.
Without knowing the complete details of the above trial it is not possible to evaluate the JPs ruling.
Hiren
The point which I wanted to highlight was that even in speeding there was no need to provide radar reading. How come the person was charged of speeding without measuring the actual speed with the radar. That surprised me.
Disclosure package is only required if defender wants to see what evidence is entered into the court so that he can prepare his case accordingly. It is not mandatory to request the disclosure.
It is not manadatory to request a disclosure but it is mandatory for it to be provided if asked for .
Had the defendant asked for the radar readings and the radar caliberation records in a disclosure and if they would not have been provided , he could have got the charge stayed on that very basis ...
SS - ask for the disclosure as well ...for some reason if they are unable to provide it -- you can request for a stay of the charge....
Bottomline --- Know the law well - quote the law and cases and remind the law politely to the JoP as well as the Prosecutor ..... you will win !!
In my latest case , neither the Prosecutor nor the JoP were willing to grant me a stay under 11b till I produced case laws of precedents and granting of appeals by higher courts where such a stay was not initially granted by a JoP .....
The words of the JoP to the Prosecutor - ' This person has gone to some lengths in proving the case and since the delay is in deed long , I grant him a stay '
Know the law and stick by it ... Prosecutor does not want to present a bad case to the JoP .... JoP does not want to pass a wrong judgment where he sees there s a possibility of appeal and make his record weak ....
Police Officers -- they cannot do much unless they have un refutable evidence ... Even in speeding and red light tickets ( where evidence were there ) , people got of the hook upon proving to the Court that the equipment was not properly re caliberated and hence may have shown an incorrect reading .....
There are lot of loop holes in the law and thats what lawyers feast upon ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fido.
Quote:
Originally posted by web2000
Disclosure package is only required if defender wants to see what evidence is entered into the court so that he can prepare his case accordingly. It is not mandatory to request the disclosure.
All I can conclude is if you have no idea how to defend yourself and are not willing to put in the efforts, you can as well pay the ticket and the increased insurance.
Good luck.
Hiren
And the last piece of advice I can give is -- Never , never be intimidated by either the Prosecutor or the Police Officer or even the JoP .... Law as your guardian is giving you a fair chance to defend yourself ... Use it fearlessly and wisely ..... not being impolite though ......
Ideally , the defendant should provide the facts in a way to defend himself and not be afraid to question the Police Officer or the Prosecutor through the JoP .
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fido.
