Careless Driving/ No insurance ticket- HELP! | Page 7 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Careless Driving/ No insurance ticket- HELP!

Status
Not open for further replies.
yThe reason why i neglected the issue was in hopes of continuing to adjourn the case until the officer did not show up. I realize i should have been more proactive. I completely messed up, and this is truly going to screw things up for me. I did not ride for the remainder of that season but last season I was able to get my bike insured as the case was still on going. I will try to make it to court, even though I would be asking for a day off on the second day of a new job during the probation period. This is my first ever traffic violation and I truly ****** up.

One thing I want to clarify is that the officer told me he recorded the entire ordeal on his cell phone. However, that footage along with the body cam/ dash cam footage of how the stop was conducted was not provided. Could this be means of dismissal or adjournment until that is provided? Or can the cop simply disagree with my statement and the trial continues?


hedo2002 said:
There is a REASON your lawyer told you you HAVE to be there. The trial date was likely set sometime ago. You should have booked the day off, LONG ago. If you don't attend the court will proceed with a TIA, (Trial In Absentia). this basically means that you don't get to hear what evidence is given by the other witnesses, (so if someone says something that is wrong, your lawyer can challenge them on it, after you advise her of the issue), etc.

Your lawyer also likely wants you there to "show the court" that your present and ready to proceed, (then say the crowns witness, the officer), doesn't attend your lawyer can ask the JP, for the charges to be dismissed. If your not there either the opportunity is gone. If the JP is ****** they will have the crown read into the record the alleged facts, of the case and can make a ruling based solely upon that.

I agree with Rob, a year and you haven't discussed strategy with your lawyer. now if it was because you couldn't get a day off work, then you have learned NOTHING. This should have been your #1 priority until it was finished with. If it is because your lawyer couldn't make time, you hired a crappy defence lawyer, who will if you don't attend likely just throw in the white towel and let you bend over.

You are going to be screwed once that insurance conviction is registered. Your going to the facility market for insurance, if as your name suggest you ride a 1000RR, it will EASILY be well in excess of $10,000 for the next several years. So either your going to a 250, or riding dirty, (which of course if caught again you will be totally screwed).

Hate to say it, but you have created a hornets nest for yourself and still appear to not be taking this as seriously as it is. So to me you haven't learned form your mistakes at all as you have let this get totally out of hand, and have done NOTHING, other than throw some money to a lawyer, to rectify the issue.

Is your bike NOW insured? How long has it been insured? Hopefully, you insured it RIGHT after, (as in the next day), to show the court you took responsibility. Once your convicted you MUST advise your insurer of the convictions, (Failing to do so, means they can deny ANY and ALL claims submitted), plus if they discover them, they WILL cancel your policy. If your convicted of both careless and insurance, you can expect a letter VERY soon advising your policy has been cancelled. Which again will mean HIGHER premiums IF you try to get insurance again.

Don't attend, the JP "could" issue a bench warrant, although HIGHLY unlike, as you are represented. Also if you fail to attend, you surrender your options such as a possible appeal etc.
Click to expand...
 
s1000rrr said:
yThe reason why i neglected the issue was in hopes of continuing to adjourn the case until the officer did not show up. I realize i should have been more proactive. I completely messed up, and this is truly going to screw things up for me. I did not ride for the remainder of that season but last season I was able to get my bike insured as the case was still on going. I will try to make it to court, even though I would be asking for a day off on the second day of a new job during the probation period. This is my first ever traffic violation and I truly ****** up.

One thing I want to clarify is that the officer told me he recorded the entire ordeal on his cell phone. However, that footage along with the body cam/ dash cam footage of how the stop was conducted was not provided. Could this be means of dismissal or adjournment until that is provided? Or can the cop simply disagree with my statement and the trial continues?
Click to expand...

Your lawyer should be able to ascertain if you received proper disclosure or not. If not then normally yes, but because you've apparently delayed it already maybe not.
 
s1000rrr said:
One thing I want to clarify is that the officer told me he recorded the entire ordeal on his cell phone. However, that footage along with the body cam/ dash cam footage of how the stop was conducted was not provided. Could this be means of dismissal or adjournment until that is provided? Or can the cop simply disagree with my statement and the trial continues?
Click to expand...

You are obviously guilty of the no-insurance charge regardless of what is or isn't on the recording. Unless you have a really useless cop (or amazing lawyer), I can't see this getting thrown out because they didn't have probable cause to stop you (which I don't even think is required as they can and have stopped many bikes for doc check as many are riding dirty). As this has already dragged out for a year, it seems like you have annoyed the court (and quite possibly your lawyer), I can't see the video being absent from disclosure helping you now. When you first got disclosure, maybe, but you have dragged this out too far and now they just want it to go away.

You have a lawyer, rely on their expertise, but I would try to plead guilty to careless to get the no-insurance to disappear. That one is as bad as they get for future pain. Careless won't be fun but it is much less painful than no-insurance (yet alone the combination, holy bleep will that be pricey).
 
going back to the first post
OP does not say why he was stopped in the first place

was given a careless and no insurance charge
hindsight is no help

but he was advised to get some insurance right away
that may have cleared the one ticket - maybe not

and careless is something the police throw out because it's easy
vast majority of them get plead down to unsafe pass
following too close etc....hardly anyone eats a careless conviction

but the time for that deal with prov/off crown was a year ago

if there's a video and it was not disclosed
I'm gonna say it cannot be entered as evidence
but the cop won't need it
it's not hard to give evidence justifying the stop
his sworn testimony as an officer of the court carries a lot of weight
 
What if i file a complaint against the officer with regards to assault? He grabbed me by my collar and started dragging my bike to tilt and cause a burn on my leg?


JavaFan said:
going back to the first post
OP does not say why he was stopped in the first place

was given a careless and no insurance charge
hindsight is no help

but he was advised to get some insurance right away
that may have cleared the one ticket - maybe not

and careless is something the police throw out because it's easy
vast majority of them get plead down to unsafe pass
following too close etc....hardly anyone eats a careless conviction

but the time for that deal with prov/off crown was a year ago

if there's a video and it was not disclosed
I'm gonna say it cannot be entered as evidence
but the cop won't need it
it's not hard to give evidence justifying the stop
his sworn testimony as an officer of the court carries a lot of weight
Click to expand...
 
s1000rrr said:
What if i file a complaint against the officer with regards to assault? He grabbed me by my collar and started dragging my bike to tilt and cause a burn on my leg?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't affect your court case.

Someone else can verify the statute of limitations on this stuff but you might be able to still file a complaint.
 
Evoex said:
It wouldn't affect your court case.

Someone else can verify the statute of limitations on this stuff but you might be able to still file a complaint.
Click to expand...

I can't see winning this as you have waited a long time and have little evidence to support your claim.

In cases where the officers were grossly out of bounds (eg. they beat you enough to knock out your teeth while you were wearing handcuffs), criminal charges have been dropped. I am not sure if similar applies to HTA charges. The cases I have seen were a pretty high bar, not just grabbed (especially since the officer could easily argue they were trying to control a belligerent person who they were concerned would take off).
 
OP,

if you have evidence that you were assaulted
perhaps that may go somewhere

but it has nothing to do with your HTA offenses
 
s1000rrr said:
What if i file a complaint against the officer with regards to assault? He grabbed me by my collar and started dragging my bike to tilt and cause a burn on my leg?
Click to expand...

The time to have raised this issue was the day after it happened, not the day before it goes to court.

The time to have raised lack of disclosure was at the time that the disclosure was found to be incomplete, after having requested it a few weeks before the first court date ... not now.

Your employment situation is not the court's concern. It's not their problem.
 
Can't help but think you should be talking to your lawyer about all this instead of a bunch of strangers in a public forum.

But do let us know what the result is...
 
Evoex said:
Are they officers of the court? I thought that only applied to lawyers/judges and clerks?
Click to expand...

No, they are not. They are peace officers who, due to some fairly recent decisions, are to be given no more weight in testimony than a regular civilian. What they DO have is far better supporting documentation of most incidents, which is given more weight.

s1000rrr said:
What if i file a complaint against the officer with regards to assault? He grabbed me by my collar and started dragging my bike to tilt and cause a burn on my leg?
Click to expand...

At this late date such an attempt would be seen as retaliatory, a further attempt to delay, or both. It would only hurt your case, if it had any affect at all.

Unless you presented a request to a JP for a Private Prosecution, you wouldn't likely even see charges be levelled. Unlike the United States YOU do not get to 'press charges.' All charges are laid in the name of Her Majesty, not private citizens. Even if you swore a statement in order to invoke a Private Prosecution, The Crown has the right to subsume the case, then deal with it as the see fit. In a case like this "see fit" would likely be to drop it, for the previously stated reasons.
 
s1000rrr said:
How long does a no insurance and careless driving charge stay on your diving record for?
Click to expand...

Lmgtfy

Q: How long will a traffic ticket or accident affect my insurance rates? A: Traffic tickets stay on your driving record for three years. Accidents remain on your record for six years.

Edit:
I always say demerit points don't matter for the vast majority. You have found yourself in the minority. You are looking at 12 points which triggers a meeting to discuss why you should keep your license. I hope you don't have other tickets in the last 3 years or you could be in for a mandatory license suspension now.

Given how close you are flying to the sun with demerit points, no bike for the next 3 years seems like a great idea even if you could afford insurance.
 
Last edited:
Firstly, the video is of NO consequence, given the officer stated it was recorded on his/her personal cell phone. The ONLY time, (as someone already eluded to), that it would be considered "incomplete disclosure" would be if the crown planned to introduce the video as evidence to support the charges. The video would be of no use for the insurance charge, (unless of course you stated in the video, that you had no insurance, and knew that riding without it was wrong). So unless, the crown begins to play the video, in court it need not be part of the disclosure. Even if the crown attempted to play the video, your lawyer should at that point argue to the JP that the video was not part of the disclosure, at which point it is still not a fatal flaw. The JP would simply rule the video as inadmissible, and it could not be used. IF by some weird, (and lucky for you), circumstance, the JP ruled the video could be used as evidence, a best it may get you an avenue of appeal, (which would likely with a lawyer run into the tens of thousands of dollars to see through the system.

But crowns are smart, they would simply state that the video won't be used and instead rely solely upon the officer's testimony. Obviously, if you advised your lawyer that there was a video, if he/she felt it would help your case they could have, (too late at this point), requested that the crown provide it, so your lawyer already knows they aren't going to use it, and if anything it may hurt your case if introduced. Once your lawyer asked for it to be disclosed, then if there was ANYTHNG damning on it the crown could now use that against you.

Sure, you can file a complaint of assault, but given it has been a year, it would be seen as purely, what it is an "attempt" to have the charges dropped, it would NOT delay the trial in anyway.

Again it wasn't just yesterday that you got the court date. So the smart thing to have done is when you were offered the job was to advise your potential employer, that you would need this date off for a previously scheduled commitment. if they wanted you for the job they would have said no problem. If you were one of 15 qualified applicants they may have withdrawn the offer of employment. Too bad you didn't do that, now you have to suck it up and go ask for the day off.

Charges, generally stay on your driver abstract for three years. But it can remain on your "insurance record" for much longer. It will be entered into the system that insurers see when quoting, which lists many things IE every policy you have ever had, (therefore, how long you have had insurance), all claims etc are entered in their system which ALL insurers can access. So for quoting purposes it will depend upon the company and their underwriting guidelines. etc.
 
hedo2002 said:
Firstly, the video is of NO consequence, given the officer stated it was recorded on his/her personal cell phone. The ONLY time, (as someone already eluded to), that it would be considered "incomplete disclosure" would be if the crown planned to introduce the video as evidence to support the charges. The video would be of no use for the insurance charge, (unless of course you stated in the video, that you had no insurance, and knew that riding without it was wrong). So unless, the crown begins to play the video, in court it need not be part of the disclosure. Even if the crown attempted to play the video, your lawyer should at that point argue to the JP that the video was not part of the disclosure, at which point it is still not a fatal flaw. The JP would simply rule the video as inadmissible, and it could not be used. IF by some weird, (and lucky for you), circumstance, the JP ruled the video could be used as evidence, a best it may get you an avenue of appeal, (which would likely with a lawyer run into the tens of thousands of dollars to see through the system.
Click to expand...

Few things here:

Even if it was the officers personal cell phone, as he was acting in his official duties could one not subit a Access of Information request? It's theoretically evidence of a crime. (Maybe i watch too much U.S. youtube).

What if the cellphone had evidence that he was in fact NOT breaking the law. Could the officer then not be compelled to release this video and if he deleted it be possibly charged with destroying evidence? I realize this is a little theoretical, more for my personal interest in such things.
 
Access to information requests, are only applicable to PUBLIC records, IE what government does emails, contracts, files etc. They are not applicable to "evidence" The only request that could have been filed was for disclosure of the video. But if the crown has no intent of using the video then there exists no disclosure requirement.

The officer's personal cell phone is not a government entity, as such there would be no more a requirement for the officer to turn anything on it anymore than you or I could be compelled to do so. Given that no one actually knows what is or isn't in the video, the accused can't go on a "fishing exhibition" to see what is on the cell phone anymore than an officer can go on a "fishing exhibition" with your cell phone, looking for evidence. Given that it has been over a year and the accused lawyer, has made no attempt to gain access to the video, the officer could state MANY reasons why the video no longer exists.

1. that cell phone broke and has been replaced.
2. when I looked after the interaction, I had forgotten to hit the record button, so in fact there never was a video.
3. I upgraded the phone and turned it in as part of the upgrade... etc etc etc.

Given it is private property, the officer has the same protection as does any civilian. Therefore, no requirement to turn anything on a cell phone over, to anyone. If I were a supervisor, or union rep, I would be advising the officer to leave his/her cell phone holstered. ONLY official devices should be used in the course of one's duties.

As for the destroying of evidence, it is the crown, and police who must PROVE that a crime occurred, they are not required to prove NO crime was committed, that is the job of the accused and their legal rep. I suspect the OP hadn't made mention that a video "may" exist of the interaction, (sounds like there has been limited communication between the OP and his own lawyer). But now that he faces the very real possibility of being hung out by the courts and his own actions and inaction, he is frantically searching for a loophole to get himself out of the VERY deep hole he has dug for himself, (hence the question about filing a formal assault complaint, only now, in hopes of saving his bacon..lol).

Evoex said:
Few things here:

Even if it was the officers personal cell phone, as he was acting in his official duties could one not subit a Access of Information request? It's theoretically evidence of a crime. (Maybe i watch too much U.S. youtube).

What if the cellphone had evidence that he was in fact NOT breaking the law. Could the officer then not be compelled to release this video and if he deleted it be possibly charged with destroying evidence? I realize this is a little theoretical, more for my personal interest in such things.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
hedo2002 said:
Access to information requests, are only applicable to PUBLIC records, IE what government does emails, contracts, files etc. They are not applicable to "evidence" The only request that could have been filed was for disclosure of the video. But if the crown has no intent of using the video then there exists no disclosure requirement.

The officer's personal cell phone is not a government entity, as such there would be no more a requirement for the officer to turn anything on it anymore than you or I could be compelled to do so. Given that no one actually knows what is or isn't in the video, the accused can't go on a "fishing exhibition" to see what is on the cell phone anymore than an officer can go on a "fishing exhibition" with your cell phone, looking for evidence. Given that it has been over a year and the accused lawyer, has made no attempt to gain access to the video, the officer could state MANY reasons why the video no longer exists.

1. that cell phone broke and has been replaced.
2. when I looked after the interaction, I had forgotten to hit the record button, so in fact there never was a video.
3. I upgraded the phone and turned it in as part of the upgrade... etc etc etc.

Given it is private property, the officer has the same protection as does any civilian. Therefore, no requirement to turn anything on a cell phone over, to anyone. If I were a supervisor, or union rep, I would be advising the officer to leave his/her cell phone holstered. ONLY official devices should be used in the course of one's duties.

As for the destroying of evidence, it is the crown, and police who must PROVE that a crime occurred, they are not required to prove NO crime was committed, that is the job of the accused and their legal rep. I suspect the OP hadn't made mention that a video "may" exist of the interaction, (sounds like there has been limited communication between the OP and his own lawyer). But now that he faces the very real possibility of being hung out by the courts and his own actions and inaction, he is frantically searching for a loophole to get himself out of the VERY deep hole he has dug for himself, (hence the question about filing a formal assault complaint, only now, in hopes of saving his bacon..lol).
Click to expand...

Awesome! Thanks very much for the info!
 
interesting discussion...
there is a duty to disclose all evidence to the defendant

this was publicized in the Commission into the wrongful prosecution of Guy Paul Morin
of course it was DNA evidence that acquitted him
but the report was very critical of Durham Police for squashing evidence that would have benefited the defendant
 
Hoooooly toledos.
If anyone is ever searching for what not to do in a court case send em this thread.
Op I'll take that s1krr off your hands. You want be able to ride clean after this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom