Advice needed – What to request in a disclosure

[Krime]

I requested a disclosure by filling in the form that came along with the court date (sent via email). I got a response with only the details of exactly what I had sent them (court date, room and that it was for speeding), along with a note that if I want more details I'll need to tell them exactly what information I want disclosed ASAP.

I'm wondering what the best way to go about this would be – is there a standard protocol? I'm thinking of requesting the officers notes as well as the video of the traffic stop (I was told by the officer that I was being recorded).

Ticket was issued from a YRP speed trap in a 40 zone (NOT a school zone) and while in my car. The officer had reduced the initial fine to a lesser amount. At the time I thought there was a disconnect with what was on the ticket vs. what the officer had verbally told me while handing me the ticket (which read higher than I thought he'd said). I could have misunderstood him. If there was a disconnect, I'm not sure if this would have any legs in court, and if getting the video may be more incriminating and work against me then anything else (I was apologetic in the hopes of receiving a warning – at one point actually asking for a warning).

Trial is in a couple months – I'm planning on taking this on myself as a learning experience vs. hiring a paralegal, since it's a minor speeding ticket. Not too optimistic with this one (especially considering that it was reduced), but wanted to give it a go.

Thanks.

 

[GreyGhost]

I don't see how requesting the video could hurt you in court. They can bring it up, you might as well no the contents. That being said, I haven't heard of people being successful getting a copy (it may have happened, I just haven't heard about it). Past disclosures I have received included the officers notes (basically illegible) and a crap *** comment about calibrating the 20/20 before the shift with no description of when/where or how.

I am amazed at the crap that is provided as disclosure. It would seem easy enough to automate the whole system so you get all of the pertinent useful information.

 

[Evoex]

You need to think about exactly what you said during the stop. Did you admit to the offense, etc.

You're not guilty until proven in court, but if they whip out the cops dash cam video that has you saying "yeah i was a little fast but could you just give me a warning?" it will be a very short defense.

Don't talk to cops people. Provide your docs, ask him why you were stopped and let him do whatever investigation he needs to. Don't give him ammo for a court case down the road.

 

[J_F]

by law they have to give you everything they have

if they omit something then try to present it at trial
you have very good grounds for dismissal

I had a speeding tossed for this
received one page from LEO notebook as disclosure

during questioning he was reading from something else
I asked about it, JP gave the Crown a dirty look and tossed it

 

[Krime]

Appreciate the responses.

I am amazed at the crap that is provided as disclosure. It would seem easy enough to automate the whole system so you get all of the pertinent useful information.

Based on the response I got from my original disclosure request, I get the impression the goal is to try and deter you from getting the useful information.

You need to think about exactly what you said during the stop. Did you admit to the offense, etc.

You're not guilty until proven in court, but if they whip out the cops dash cam video that has you saying "yeah i was a little fast but could you just give me a warning?" it will be a very short defense.

Don't talk to cops people. Provide your docs, ask him why you were stopped and let him do whatever investigation he needs to. Don't give him ammo for a court case down the road.

This is what I'm wondering. I approached his vehicle after the initial conversation and tried to level with him, requesting a warning. This was before I even got the ticket. If he uses the video/audio for this, it will likely be incriminating for me, which is why I'd like to see it to know what I'm up against.

by law they have to give you everything they have

if they omit something then try to present it at trial
you have very good grounds for dismissal

I had a speeding tossed for this
received one page from LEO notebook as disclosure

during questioning he was reading from something else
I asked about it, JP gave the Crown a dirty look and tossed it

Interesting. So if they don't send me the video/audio as per my request but do show it during the trial as evidence, I can request a dismissal? What if it's in support of the officers notes?

If they have to include everything by law, then I'm not sure why they only responded with completely irrelevant/useless information during my initial request for disclosure.

I've put in another request for all the evidence, specifically calling out the videos as well. We'll see where this goes.

 

[JTR]

Any evidence that they plan to use, absolutely must be provided in disclosure. They may try to provide additional disclosure at the last minute, which would give you the right to request a new court date in order to prepare. If they haven't disclosed any evidence, then they can't use any. You would have been better off not requesting additional disclosure.

 

[Krime]

Any evidence that they plan to use, absolutely must be provided in disclosure. They may try to provide additional disclosure at the last minute, which would give you the right to request a new court date in order to prepare. If they haven't disclosed any evidence, then they can't use any. You would have been better off not requesting additional disclosure.

That's what I was originally hoping for (not requesting an additional disclosure), but at the bottom of the email in all caps there is a note that essentially says that if the information provided is inadequate, that I need to contact the prosecutors office with specific requests of the materials I would like as soon as it comes to my attention. I'm fairly confident that this 'fine print' covers them so that if I told them I didn't get adequate disclosure, during the trial they would tell me that I was directed to request specifics and failed to do so. That's the way I read the note at least. Didn't want to risk that.

 

[Evoex]

That's what I was originally hoping for (not requesting an additional disclosure), but at the bottom of the email in all caps there is a note that essentially says that if the information provided is inadequate, that I need to contact the prosecutors office with specific requests of the materials I would like as soon as it comes to my attention. I'm fairly confident that this 'fine print' covers them so that if I told them I didn't get adequate disclosure, during the trial they would tell me that I was directed to request specifics and failed to do so. That's the way I read the note at least. Didn't want to risk that.

If your original request asked for all evidence to be used at trial then I'd say you did your job. The onus is on them to provide it, Not for you to ask for it line by line. You don't know what they have, so how can you ask for it.

Wtf.

 

[Krime]

If your original request asked for all evidence to be used at trial then I'd say you did your job. The onus is on them to provide it, Not for you to ask for it line by line. You don't know what they have, so how can you ask for it.

Wtf.

I used the disclosure form that came in the mail along with the court date. The form does not let you give any information about what you're requesting (even in terms of generally requesting all evidence against you). I found a link online that specifically states not to use these forms as it gives them the option to send you whatever they feel like – which in my case was literally feeding me back the information that I filled out on the form. Pretty sure this is how they get you... pretty ridiculous but glad that I found the link last night that warns against this form of disclosure request.

 

[Evoex]

I used the disclosure form that came in the mail along with the court date. The form does not let you give any information about what you're requesting (even in terms of generally requesting all evidence against you). I found a link online that specifically states not to use these forms as it gives them the option to send you whatever they feel like – which in my case was literally feeding me back the information that I filled out on the form. Pretty sure this is how they get you... pretty ridiculous but glad that I found the link last night that warns against this form of disclosure request.

I see. There's a template for a disclosure request online, some googling will net you what you're looking for. I'd go with that.

Don't forget to send registered mail.

 

[Bagman]

You're best option is to delay the process so much that it gets tossed because it took so long. Take it right to first court date, and say you want disclosure and get it postponed. Second time up, tell them you need to find legal services. Get it postponed. Third time up, tell them you still haven't found good legal services. Postpone again. Fourth time up, it'll probably be set date and you MUST proceed. Show up without legal counsel, go it yourself and say it took too long and you want it tossed. LOL, so say you'll take the ticket at the reduce speed, no points and pay the minimum fine with 9mths to pay.

 

[Bagman]

Also, any conversation or incriminating statements you made prior to ANY OFFICIAL caution by the officer as to why you're being investigated and that it could incriminate you is NOT ADMISSIBLE in court. Just don't forget it's not the officer's job to prove you were speeding. It's your job to prove you weren't. Good luck! LOL - meaning, no one ever can, so it goes down to technicalities that put doubt in the court's mind of the accuracy of the evidence.

 

[GreyGhost]

You're best option is to delay the process so much that it gets tossed because it took so long. Take it right to first court date, and say you want disclosure and get it postponed. Second time up, tell them you need to find legal services. Get it postponed. Third time up, tell them you still haven't found good legal services. Postpone again. Fourth time up, it'll probably be set date and you MUST proceed. Show up without legal counsel, go it yourself and say it took too long and you want it tossed. LOL, so say you'll take the ticket at the reduce speed, no points and pay the minimum fine with 9mths to pay.

11b only applies to delays caused by the crown. Since step two and three were entirely the defendants fault, they won't count towards the time required. Your method gives you a few chances to hope the cop doesn't show, but when you eventually get forced to trial, the crown and JP will be annoyed with you and there may be no reduction offered.

 

[Evoex]

Also, any conversation or incriminating statements you made prior to ANY OFFICIAL caution by the officer as to why you're being investigated and that it could incriminate you is NOT ADMISSIBLE in court. Just don't forget it's not the officer's job to prove you were speeding. It's your job to prove you weren't. Good luck! LOL - meaning, no one ever can, so it goes down to technicalities that put doubt in the court's mind of the accuracy of the evidence.

Lol caution by police for a road side stop? What are you smoking?

And you`re way out to lunch on 11b, btw that doesn't work so well anymore. I think it's well over 13 months now before JPs will consider it.

 

[Bagman]

Yeah. lol. I have no idea what I'm on about. Good luck. GTAM cracks me up.

 

[hedo2002]

Yeah. lol. I have no idea what I'm on about. Good luck. GTAM cracks me up.

Well, in this case the others are correct. An officer ONLY has to provide a "caution" as you call it, which is actually reading you, your rights, in a CRIMINAL investigation NOT a traffic stop. so your in left field there my friend.

As for the "attempt" for an 11b, you missed a few salient points. He can't go to first court date and request disclosure, as he had already filed for disclosure, unfortunately, he did specify, what disclosure he sought, (OP I will tell you EXACTLY how to word your request next paragraph). An accused can NOT mount an 11b defence IF they are the cause of the delays. As stated 11b ONLY applies to delays created by the crown. so again your off base on that.

OP request further disclosure. You don't "need to know what they have" as was suggested by another poster. Instead you are going to state you want "ANYTHING and EVERYTHING which the crown intends to use to support their case, including but NOT, limited to typewritten copy of officer's notes, any notes on the actual ticket, ANY and all recordings to be presented at trial" The crown has NO obligation to disclose anything they do not intend to introduce as evidence.

I would like to know in the previous story what exactly the officer was reading that triggered the crown to seek a dismissal. If it were say secondary notes, then that would certainly trigger a dismissal, but if it were say the operating procedures of the device then that should not have triggered a dismissal, especially had the officer used the "magic phrase" of turning to the JP and asking "May I refer to these instructions to refresh my memory?" Most JP's will grant that, (I NEVER had a JP decline the request).

Now having said that, you need to be aware that when you were "asking for a warning" if they present that ANY defence you may have is gone as it will be ruled as an "instrumental admission of the elements of the offence alleged." You also need to be aware that if you go to trial, it will be on the ORIGINAL speed NOT the amended speed, (so if that is more than 19Km over then it includes points).

So, unless you are positive you have SOLID viable defence, and the reduction was "acceptable" to you then it may be worth it to just accept what is and keep your head down for insurance purposes. Hoping that the officer reads somthing not in disclosure or the crown introduces something that wasn't disclosed is something that can't be seen before the trial begins and is IMHO a crap shoot, these guys and gals do this hundreds of times a week. Once the trial date is set the deal is off the table. BUT, only you can make an informed decision on your chances of winning, and your level of skill when it comes to court, (which most don't recognize as a pretty intimidating scenario. Most defendants, that I have seen who likely could have won their case, screw up, and end up sinking their own ship.

 

[Krime]

Re: Advice needed – What to request in a disclosure

Well, in this case the others are correct. An officer ONLY has to provide a "caution" as you call it, which is actually reading you, your rights, in a CRIMINAL investigation NOT a traffic stop. so your in left field there my friend.

As for the "attempt" for an 11b, you missed a few salient points. He can't go to first court date and request disclosure, as he had already filed for disclosure, unfortunately, he did specify, what disclosure he sought, (OP I will tell you EXACTLY how to word your request next paragraph). An accused can NOT mount an 11b defence IF they are the cause of the delays. As stated 11b ONLY applies to delays created by the crown. so again your off base on that.

OP request further disclosure. You don't "need to know what they have" as was suggested by another poster. Instead you are going to state you want "ANYTHING and EVERYTHING which the crown intends to use to support their case, including but NOT, limited to typewritten copy of officer's notes, any notes on the actual ticket, ANY and all recordings to be presented at trial" The crown has NO obligation to disclose anything they do not intend to introduce as evidence.

I would like to know in the previous story what exactly the officer was reading that triggered the crown to seek a dismissal. If it were say secondary notes, then that would certainly trigger a dismissal, but if it were say the operating procedures of the device then that should not have triggered a dismissal, especially had the officer used the "magic phrase" of turning to the JP and asking "May I refer to these instructions to refresh my memory?" Most JP's will grant that, (I NEVER had a JP decline the request).

Now having said that, you need to be aware that when you were "asking for a warning" if they present that ANY defence you may have is gone as it will be ruled as an "instrumental admission of the elements of the offence alleged." You also need to be aware that if you go to trial, it will be on the ORIGINAL speed NOT the amended speed, (so if that is more than 19Km over then it includes points).

So, unless you are positive you have SOLID viable defence, and the reduction was "acceptable" to you then it may be worth it to just accept what is and keep your head down for insurance purposes. Hoping that the officer reads somthing not in disclosure or the crown introduces something that wasn't disclosed is something that can't be seen before the trial begins and is IMHO a crap shoot, these guys and gals do this hundreds of times a week. Once the trial date is set the deal is off the table. BUT, only you can make an informed decision on your chances of winning, and your level of skill when it comes to court, (which most don't recognize as a pretty intimidating scenario. Most defendants, that I have seen who likely could have won their case, screw up, and end up sinking their own ship.

Thanks for the detailed response. I requested the additional disclosure the other day, fortunately it was pretty similar to what you proposed (I added the note regarding ALL the evidence and a clause of including but NOT limited to before listing the examples).

Yes, good point about the original charge coming up. He dropped the original amount by just enough so there would be no demerit points. Since I'm not a regular offender (clean record), I don't need to worry as much about having the original 3 demerit points. My understanding is that in terms of insurance, it's a minor ticket regardless (demerit points or not). In the long run I figure that giving it a shot to have it dropped is smarter then saving myself the points and marginal extra fee (especially when considering how much more I could end up paying in insurance with 3 vehicles to my name). It'll be an interesting experience.

Regarding your note about the deal being off the table once the trial date is set, I don't think this is always the case. When you're called up on the day of, apparently it's common for the prosecutor to threaten you with the original charge prior to your plea, if you wish to proceed with a not guilty verdict. There is still an option for you to plea guilty to the ticketed offence right then and there in front of the judge.

 

[GreyGhost]

Re: Advice needed – What to request in a disclosure

Regarding your note about the deal being off the table once the trial date is set, I don't think this is always the case. When you're called up on the day of, apparently it's common for the prosecutor to threaten you with the original charge prior to your plea, if you wish to proceed with a not guilty verdict. There is still an option for you to plea guilty to the ticketed offence right then and there in front of the judge.

It's not that simple IIRC. If you want to plead guilty to the original charge, you leave the courtroom and go and pay your ticket at the cashier then return with the receipt showing it has been paid and the prosecutor doesn't bother proceeding with the increased speed. Now with the lineup that is normally present to pay tickets, I don't know if this is still possible or not.

AFAIK no matter what verbal conversation you have with the prosecutor, when you stand in front of the JP, they can still proceed with the unreduced charge if they want to. A lot of it comes down to attitude (of you, the prosecutor and the cop).

 

[Evoex]

OP request further disclosure. You don't "need to know what they have" as was suggested by another poster.

I actually suggested nothing of the sort. It was a response to his previous post.

Just sayin'

 

[hedo2002]

Re: Advice needed – What to request in a disclosure

It's not that simple IIRC. If you want to plead guilty to the original charge, you leave the courtroom and go and pay your ticket at the cashier then return with the receipt showing it has been paid and the prosecutor doesn't bother proceeding with the increased speed. Now with the lineup that is normally present to pay tickets, I don't know if this is still possible or not.

AFAIK no matter what verbal conversation you have with the prosecutor, when you stand in front of the JP, they can still proceed with the unreduced charge if they want to. A lot of it comes down to attitude (of you, the prosecutor and the cop).

This is correct, once the crown offers you the "deal" of the reduced charge, and you turn it down, it is off the table. You can't request disclosure and a trial then expect the crown to "reward" you, by still permitting you to get the "deal". The whole purpose of the "deal" is to prevent the "extra work" of providing disclosure and scheduling a trial date. Otherwise, NO ONE would take the "deal" initially, and it would clog up the system. Once you appear on the trial date the crown will stand and request the charge "be amended" to read the original speed. Now, you still "could" get lucky and the JP could deny the request, BUT, if the JP wants to remain on the bench, working they NEVER deny the request.

As, for insurance yes, anything 49 km and under is considered a minor infraction for rating purposes. MOST insurers don't go looking for tickets, unless your switching companies. as long as you keep your nose clean and under the radar, insurance is likely to be a not an issue. I had a minor ticket, (I had planned to dispute the ticket, she thought she would be nice and pay it). I changed insurers, the new insurer advised they seen the ticket, but because I was bringing multiple vehicles, they choose to overlook it for rating as it was more than a year stale dated. So you have a MUCH better chance with insurers, than your going to have, expecting the crown to still offer you a "deal."

But, again it is your choice, I merely mentioned the points as many people are unaware of the points issue, unless one is a TERRIBLE driver, points are never an issue....lol