[lay624]

I got my first ticket today for failing to stop at a stop sign. The officer claimed I stopped in front of the line as oppose to behind it

Now I dont really know what to do to fight or not to fight? The ticket doesn't say a thing about deducting demerit points, so will this ticket affect my insurance?

Advice please!!

[teamadobo]

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dan.../demerit.shtml


3 Points

[Tonybest]

Originally Posted by lay624

I got my first ticket today for failing to stop at a stop sign. The officer claimed I stopped in front of the line as oppose to behind it

Now I dont really know what to do to fight or not to fight? The ticket doesn't say a thing about deducting demerit points, so will this ticket affect my insurance?

Advice please!!

Don't get anymore.

Just kidding... or not.

Why would you fight? On what basis? Was the line moving? Was it covered with snow? If not... no reason to fight it. Your word against his. You will lose.

Sorry

[stevenqdz]

i think thats a moving violation which will case u points...just fight it, usually if u fight it u just get to pay the fine not the point, but most of my cases and my friend's cases r all in PA.

[catch]

u got a ticket even though you came to a complete stop still?? wow...
id fight it. its one thing if you roll through a stop sign, quite another if you actually stop but youre a few feet too far forward. That is unless you stopped after you clearly saw the cop watching

[CRS]

Originally Posted by stevenqdz

i think thats a moving violation which will case u points...just fight it, usually if u fight it u just get to pay the fine not the point, but most of my cases and my friend's cases r all in PA.

That can't be true.

The points are associated with the infraction. There can't be a way to pay the fine but not the points. It is like saying you have a kid without having sex.

[dpwr]

go file for a court date, that will take at least 6 months, then there's a possibility of cop not showing up...

[Tonybest]

Originally Posted by dpwr

go file for a court date, that will take at least 6 months, then there's a possibility of cop not showing up...

When was the last time you fought a ticket? The actual cop doesn't need to show up... only a representative of the cop. Anyways that's how it goes in MTL.

[CRS]

Originally Posted by Tonybest

When was the last time you fought a ticket? The actual cop doesn't need to show up... only a representative of the cop. Anyways that's how it goes in MTL.

That's how it goes for most provinces, IIRC.

And if that is your defence, how do you think that is going to go down?

Do you think the Justice of Peace will be like "oh, that's cool that you wasted tax payer money, the officer's time and my time because you thought the officer wouldn't show. It's cool, no worries, in fact, you can get off scotch free since you're such a good person".

Yeah, good luck with that. Expect the JP to change it from the minimum to the maximum and possibly adding in more charges if the officer is willing.

[dpwr]

Originally Posted by CRS

That's how it goes for most provinces, IIRC.

And if that is your defence, how do you think that is going to go down?

Do you think the Justice of Peace will be like "oh, that's cool that you wasted tax payer money, the officer's time and my time because you thought the officer wouldn't show. It's cool, no worries, in fact, you can get off scotch free since you're such a good person".

Yeah, good luck with that. Expect the JP to change it from the minimum to the maximum and possibly adding in more charges if the officer is willing.

i am a tax payer as well so if I feel like going in there then I will, it's my right... insurance companies are in bed with government and we are all paying out of our noses, 1-2 tickets like that and you're looking at insurance hike, how is that fair? they don't care if it's 5km/h over or 49km/h over, it's still considered a speeding ticket... when a cop stops you going from work on a down hill when it's impossible to go speed limit how is that for tax payers money being used? and no, nobody will add any charges if you say you're guilty with explanation... I actually got a 10 over speeding ticket few weeks back, and you damn right I'm going to court for that

[dpwr]

Originally Posted by Tonybest

When was the last time you fought a ticket? The actual cop doesn't need to show up... only a representative of the cop. Anyways that's how it goes in MTL.

i actually filed a court date today for a ticket, and there was an option if I want a cop to show up, and you can select yes... so I guess he needs to show up?

[CRS]

Originally Posted by dpwr

i am a tax payer as well so if I feel like going in there then I will, it's my right... insurance companies are in bed with government and we are all paying out of our noses, 1-2 tickets like that and you're looking at insurance hike, how is that fair? they don't care if it's 5km/h over or 49km/h over, it's still considered a speeding ticket... when a cop stops you going from work on a down hill when it's impossible to go speed limit how is that for tax payers money being used? and no, nobody will add any charges if you say you're guilty with explanation... I actually got a 10 over speeding ticket few weeks back, and you damn right I'm going to court for that

Now you're changing your tune.

There is a difference between pleading guilty at court vs. pleading not guilty and having no defence. Oh and if you didn't know, the fine and points are different once you reach different thresholds. 1-20 is speeding, 21-40 is little more and 41+ is the killer excessive one.

So you're basically hoping for a reduction in fine but pleading guilty. Completely different than going to court and pleading not guilty with no defence.

[Universal_Magnetic]

Originally Posted by Tonybest

Don't get anymore.

Just kidding... or not.

Why would you fight? On what basis? Was the line moving? Was it covered with snow? If not... no reason to fight it. Your word against his. You will lose.

Sorry

are you serious? always fight the ticket. theres a chance the officer wont even show. if he shows you state your case anything can happen. they cant increase your offense, but lets say if you were speeding 20km/h over and they dropped it to 10km/h and you fought it and you can be tried at going the original speed of 20km/h and face a higher fine than if you just paid the ticket. clearly not the situation here.

im sure if you came to a complete stop which the officer acknowledged even though you stopped "after" the line if you hire a paralegal or a traffic ticket specialist you will probably win the case.

was the bumper over the line, the tire over the line? etc. what deems the appropriate spot for which the car is to stop at? the entire car behind the line? could you personally judge from driving the vehicle if the car is exactly behind the line? there are so many cases and situations here im sure you have a good shot.

[OwnAge]

yeah, id get paralegal or a traffic ticket specialist. I think some would guarantee they will take the ticket off or you money back.

[CRS]

Originally Posted by Universal_Magnetic

are you serious? always fight the ticket. theres a chance the officer wont even show. if he shows you state your case anything can happen. they cant increase your offense, but lets say if you were speeding 20km/h over and they dropped it to 10km/h and you fought it and you can be tried at going the original speed of 20km/h and face a higher fine than if you just paid the ticket. clearly not the situation here.

im sure if you came to a complete stop which the officer acknowledged even though you stopped "after" the line if you hire a paralegal or a traffic ticket specialist you will probably win the case.

was the bumper over the line, the tire over the line? etc. what deems the appropriate spot for which the car is to stop at? the entire car behind the line? could you personally judge from driving the vehicle if the car is exactly behind the line? there are so many cases and situations here im sure you have a good shot.

The car must come to a complete stop before the line. So before the bumper reaches the line. Should have learned this when you learned how to drive.

If you start to tell your story (what you think happened) to the JP, you are then allowing the officer to cross examine you.

The trial goes like this, you all arrive with several other people for various other offences. The JP goes through the list of who is here and who isn't. After that, the JP then establishes who goes in what order.

When your name is called, the show is on. You are asked to plead so here you say guilty or not guilty. If you choose the former, the JP goes okay and may reduce your fine which you can talk to him/her about but not the points. If you choose the latter, then this is when the cop presents his/her case. After he/she has spoken, the JP will let you cross examine. After that is done, you get to either present your own evidence (which the officer can cross examine) or deemed that you have done a good enough job and wait for the JP's ruling.

JP rules and all is done. Oh and before the trial the officer will likely try to speak to you about the ticket and why you are fighting it. You do no need to speak with him unless you're trying to reduce the fine/offence for a guilty plea.

People on these boards are giving you some pretty untrue responses. I would suggest you take it with a grain of salt (including my own). And as for them increasing the fine, it is completely possible. Hell, even changing the offence is possible too! An officer has up a year to change the ticket and the JP has the right to choose either the minimum or maximum for the offence. I don't know where you guys are hearing otherwise but you are wrong.

Hiring someone to represent you would be stupid considering the time and effort in hiring someone good will cause you more money than just paying the fine.

[Tonybest]

So I guess some of you don't believe in : You do the crime, you pay the fine.
or on another note for speeders : You got to pay to play.

Anyways... I went to court to fight a ticket once since I had received 2 tickets with two different numbers for the same offense that happened at the same time. I also explained to the court that I was turning on a full green (after a priority flashing green) while the cop put down that I had turned on a yellow / red. I remember clearly the cop realizing his mistake when he gave me the ticket. But since it was written up, he couldn't cancel it on the spot.


I won my case and both tickets were canceled.

[shagkie]

Originally Posted by Tonybest

Don't get anymore.

Just kidding... or not.

Why would you fight? On what basis? Was the line moving? Was it covered with snow? If not... no reason to fight it. Your word against his. You will lose.

Sorry

that's not true. I went to court once on behalf of my brother for a failing to stop at a stop sign. The judge threw out the ticket because he said normally he would believe the officer but in this case he took my words for it. I told him that where the officer was positioned there's no way he could have seen me stop or not at that intersection. There was a tree obstructing his view.

[w2]

You don't need a defence to plead not guilty. It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove that you are guilty of an offence in order to convict you. The presumption of innocence is a fundamental constitutional principle and basic right.

Furthermore, I would suggest that you don't actually know whether or not you are guilty, nor does the police officer who laid the charges against you. Supreme Court justices argue with one another all the time about whether someone is or isn't guilty of a particular offence. You are only guilty if a judge (or in this case justice of the peace) finds you guilty and you don't appeal the ruling. Just because you can't think of a valid defence doesn't mean that you don't have one.

If you have a reasonable defence to present, it will of course make your case easier to win, and you will probably be convicted if you just show up and say "prove it," but even if you have no defence, you still have the right to demand that your guilt be determined by a justice and not by a police officer on the street. If you are found guilty, you will get a fine (with a "victim surcharge" tacked on) some demerit points, a conviction on your record, and probably face higher insurance rates, which can add up to hundreds or even thousands of dollars over a period of a few years. It is up to you to decide how much effort and money it is worth spending to defend yourself and to hire legal counsel or assistance.

[DnA Diesel]

Return your ticket with the "NOT GUILTY - I intend to question the officer's evidence" option ticked. That will get you a court date, and in Ontario the officer who wrote the ticket MUST show to present the "Crown's evidence against the defendant." the Court Office cannot testify on the ticketing PC's behalf. No show, no Crown's evidence, and a noted earlier, it is the Crown that must make the case definitaively against you.

Was this during the time that thre was all the snow and salt on the ground, obstructing the stop line, and why, not clearly seeing the line or a sidewalk, you ensured that you came to a full and complete stop short of the travelled portion of the cross-street? (hint, per the OHTA, there are three things to stop behind when a stop sign is present -- if you can't clearly see two of them, you went for the other, i.e. prior to the travelled portion of the cross-street).

The JP will give due consideration to your making the case for coming to a full and complete stop, at a point that you believed, given the conditions of the road surface and difficulty in discerning a painted stop line, to be a point in compliance as best as you could assess with the Ontario Highway Traffic Act.

Let us know how it turns out.

Regards.

p.s. My neighbour, an OPP SSgt is always available to give me nuggets from the OHTA.

[BMdblU]

Originally Posted by Tonybest

Don't get anymore.

Just kidding... or not.

Why would you fight? On what basis? Was the line moving? Was it covered with snow? If not... no reason to fight it. Your word against his. You will lose.

Sorry

Don't be sorry, you obviously don't understand the judicial system.

You don't actually have to be innocent to not be convicted.

[stevenqdz]

Originally Posted by CRS

That can't be true.

The points are associated with the infraction. There can't be a way to pay the fine but not the points. It is like saying you have a kid without having sex.

here is one of the program they offered in my traffic court "police bargain" (at least there was one when i went to court for failed to stop a red light)...what they do is that officer dealing with the case will offer u to pay be fine only and only if u decided not to talk to the judge.

outcome:
1: police bargain ( pay the fine only)-get to go home quickly
2:see the judge and win (pay nothing and no point)
3:see judge and lose the case( pay fine and point)
3a: appeal (some fee apply)

[kgb1637]

Originally Posted by stevenqdz

here is one of the program they offered in my traffic court "police bargain" (at least there was one when i went to court for failed to stop a red light)...what they do is that officer dealing with the case will offer u to pay be fine only and only if u decided not to talk to the judge.

outcome:
1: police bargain ( pay the fine only)-get to go home quickly
2:see the judge and win (pay nothing and no point)
3:see judge and lose the case( pay fine and point)
3a: appeal (some fee apply)

Laws are a little different in Canada as where the OP is.