Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19
Okay. First of all, an officer cannot ticket you for an offense he did not witness. For example, if an officer knows you left Calgary at noon, and he knows you somehow made it to Edmonton by 1:45, obviously you were speeding... but you cannot be issued a speeding ticket, unless he actually saw you exceeding the speed limit.
Second, these are absolute liability offenses, meaning there's no element of intent. As a result, it becomes even more important to establish that the person committed the ACT in question. Now, I don't install my own window tint (or wouldn't if I had it), I would have a shop do it for me. They would be guilty of an offence under s.70(1). I would not, because I did not "install, replace or cover" anything - I paid a shop for a service. Or maybe I didn't even do that - maybe I bought the car used, and the person before me had it installed. Either way, I didn't commit the actus reus described in the provision.
So, to sum up, as an officer cannot, by looking at your car, determine that you committed the act in question, he cannot cite you under that provision. Moreover, even if he was completely sure you HAD done it, without evidence (i.e. his witnessing the act in question), he can't cite you for it.
|