Legal Help: Police Intimidation

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

How'd you like to have your car crushed for making a long pass on the highway.. A 60 year old man in Ontario got busted for it, he did 130 in an 80 passing a long line of cars..

We was probably driving a real car...like, one made out of metal and was absolutely pwning a long line of Toyota Yaris`. The cop was obviously a tree-hugger.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I wouldnt go that fast a bridge like the one between cranston and chapparel.. I've done in excess of 50+ on deerfoot in my mustang when I was a stupid 19 year old.. Not justifying anything, just saying its doable.. Plus how often do you see morons blaze through a 70km/h construction zone doing 120km/h during the night..?

How'd you like to have your car crushed for making a long pass on the highway.. A 60 year old man in Ontario got busted for it, he did 130 in an 80 passing a long line of cars..

I admit that on the highway it's a different story. Hell, the QEII has that unsaid rule of "you must be going at least 140 if you're in the left lane" on any given long weekend in the summer.

But inside the city? Are there any roads where going 50 over the limit is ever a good idea? Either you're young and crazy or you're drunk. Either way, your car should be crushed. You're crazy to do it in the daytime because there's traffic on every road. You're crazy to do it at night because you can't see as well.

Maybe I'm thinking about this too much because I can see going 150 on Deerfoot S between 130th and 22x late at night. But I'd like to hope that there is some discretion involved on the officer's end. Maybe in that situation, the guy's car doesn't need to be crushed. But going say, 100 on Elbow Drive? You deserve to have your car crushed. You never know when some spaced-out granny is going to pull out of an alley, or some kid is going to jaywalk.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Old Yeller

There was a story in late summer about the guy (or girl) on a crotch rocket hitting over 200km/h on 22X... right in the middle of the day.

If I'm not mistaken that was actually highway 16 west of Edson.
There were two that made the papers, the guy doing 210 in his car and the dude doing 260 on his bike.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by 4X4

But going say, 100 on Elbow Drive? You deserve to have your car crushed. You never know when some spaced-out granny is going to pull out of an alley, or some kid is going to jaywalk.

You'd need a 4X4 to go 100 down Elbow Drive. Its choppier than the trails around McLean Creek lately.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I admit that on the highway it's a different story. Hell, the QEII has that unsaid rule of "you must be going at least 140 if you're in the left lane" on any given long weekend in the summer.

But inside the city? Are there any roads where going 50 over the limit is ever a good idea? Either you're young and crazy or you're drunk. Either way, your car should be crushed. You're crazy to do it in the daytime because there's traffic on every road. You're crazy to do it at night because you can't see as well.

Maybe I'm thinking about this too much because I can see going 150 on Deerfoot S between 130th and 22x late at night. But I'd like to hope that there is some discretion involved on the officer's end. Maybe in that situation, the guy's car doesn't need to be crushed. But going say, 100 on Elbow Drive? You deserve to have your car crushed. You never know when some spaced-out granny is going to pull out of an alley, or some kid is going to jaywalk.

I think of all the crap I've done behind the wheel.. Most of which I wouldnt admit to here without being judged horribly.. I probably deserved to have my car crushed a dozen times. But the reality is, I dont have an demerits and I pay nothing for insurance.. Luck more than anything that no granny ever pulled out, and no space cadet ever lane changed into me.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Court= no vacation.

The Police officers that I know really like Court as if they go and spend 30 minutes in court for example. They get a minimum amount of hours which is OT and it really adds up. When I went to court over a ticket awhile back it took 10 minutes.

To Clarify;

Court = good Vacation

[old-fart]

Originally Posted by flambers

The Police officers that I know really like Court as if they go and spend 30 minutes in court for example. They get a minimum amount of hours which is OT and it really adds up. When I went to court over a ticket awhile back it took 10 minutes.

To Clarify;

Court = good Vacation

I believe the point trying to be made was "cop already had tickets to Hawaii that left Thursday (example), so he can't go to court on Friday. Him not showing = ticket gets tossed =(maybe) bad review from boss and no hero-donut".

Every other day, Court = good. But not on the day after you are supposed to be in Hawaii.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Wouldn't said ticket be significantly harder to prove in the event that you actually challenged it?

Well, unfortunately with any traffic ticket it comes to your word vs. the police (barring witnesses and such). Of course I'm sure a judge would question why a ticket would be delivered with an affidavit but I'm sure if the officer could produce a sufficient reason I shouldn't see why it would be hard to prove....unless I'm misunderstanding your question....

Originally Posted by T@T

The first ticket has to be quashed before he issues a second.

As for the other part..sure he can give you a ticket...but he'll never win in court.

Sorry I just mean in general that an officer could issue a ticket.

And he'll never win??! You either have no experience with traffic law or you are just being argumentative.

Case and point...police is en route to a call with lights and sirens activated...buddy doesn't pull over for cops and blocks lane for the officer going en route to the call...really...the cop just needs your licence plate, a description of who was in the vehicle and can serve that ticket up to 6 months later.

And that will be held up in court. No doubt.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Case and point...police is en route to a call with lights and sirens activated...buddy doesn't pull over for cops and blocks lane for the officer going en route to the call...really...the cop just needs your licence plate, a description of who was in the vehicle and can serve that ticket up to 6 months later.

And that will be held up in court. No doubt.

Because there is a forward facing video camera mounted to the dash of all police crusiers that also records audio to provide evidence.

No proof, no ticket. If it comes down to the cop's word VS yours with no other evidence it will be thrown out. Otherwise the judge would essentially be removing all accountability on the part of the police, simply "trusting them to tell the truth."

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Because there is a forward facing video camera mounted to the dash of all police crusiers that also records audio to provide evidence.

No proof, no ticket. If it comes down to the cop's word VS yours with no other evidence it will be thrown out. Otherwise the judge would essentially be removing all accountability on the part of the police, simply "trusting them to tell the truth."

They dont go to those lengths, presenting evidence ect.. I've seen judges bitch at people for speeding and it was their word against the cop. 9/10 times they side with the cop.

[PIMking]

Okay here in Iowa I know that the tickets have a serial number on them something like 001 so say your ticket is 001 and the second ticket that he issued is 055 and the date and time are the same something is wrong and show that to the judge. Also if that police officer showed up at my house I would of grabed the camera real quick and recorded the conversation. because if he is intimidating you he would really be upset with it and if he isnt he wouldnt worry to much about the video.

Get a lawyer.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Well, unfortunately with any traffic ticket it comes to your word vs. the police (barring witnesses and such). Of course I'm sure a judge would question why a ticket would be delivered with an affidavit but I'm sure if the officer could produce a sufficient reason I shouldn't see why it would be hard to prove....unless I'm misunderstanding your question....

Seems to me that if the cop was speeding off to a call with his sirens on and lights flashing, he would have a hard time saying with certainty that it was actually you driving the vehicle.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

They dont go to those lengths, presenting evidence ect.. I've seen judges bitch at people for speeding and it was their word against the cop. 9/10 times they side with the cop.

The prosocution bears the burden of providing evidence.

Assume someone crashes their vehicle into a ditch off an icy country road. There are no witnesses, and it happens in the dead of night. Once the police arrive over 12 hours later, they decide to issue a ticket "driving to fast for conditions".

Explain to me how they can prove it?

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Because there is a forward facing video camera mounted to the dash of all police crusiers that also records audio to provide evidence.

No proof, no ticket. If it comes down to the cop's word VS yours with no other evidence it will be thrown out. Otherwise the judge would essentially be removing all accountability on the part of the police, simply "trusting them to tell the truth."

Where do you people get your info?!?! There's no dashcams in calgary yet so that's incorrect.

Unfortunately, as much as people hate to believe it, a cops word is proof. They go on the stand, swear on the bible, and if they lie, they're perjuring themselves.

If you really think a cops word vs. yours will get your ticket thrown out how does any ticket become legit?! A cop pulls you over after you run a red light...cop is the only witness other than yourself...and you think the ticket won't stand?!

No offense but know your stuff before you start spouting information in a thread.

[burn_this_city]

As soon as the cop signs that line that states he/her swears that offense occured at such and such a time I believe the burden of proof shifts to you. I dont think in the example you provided they would even issue a ticket. Unless of course there was witnesses who said you went mach 5 by them on the shoulder and hit the ditch.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Seems to me that if the cop was speeding off to a call with his sirens on and lights flashing, he would have a hard time saying with certainty that it was actually you driving the vehicle.

Well you can what-if the situation to death I guess but just trying to throw an example of what could happen. Surely that would be a tactic for the defense though.

[flip]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

If I'm not mistaken that was actually highway 16 west of Edson.
There were two that made the papers, the guy doing 210 in his car and the dude doing 260 on his bike.

Friend of mine got a photo radar doing in excess of 220km/h on Deerfoot. Because they can't prove who's driving it is just like any other non-demerit ticket except the cops delivered it to his house in person and it was really effing expensive.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I'm wracking my brain trying to think of one road inside the CoC where I would be comfortable going 50 over the limit. It's pretty difficult. I suppose maybe Marquis of Lorne between Cranston and Chapparell. But even in a place like that, I'd be too concerned about a massive speeding ticket that going 50 over would be out of the question.
50 over the limit. No fear of cars entering in front of you or cops radaring you. No worries of what's around the bend. Yeah. I'm pretty sure that if you get busted going 50 over the limit your car should be crushed. Maybe even with you inside (which is quite possible when you're going 50 over the limit).

Did you really just name the highway of death as a spot where you'd feel comfortable doing 50 over the limit? Even though it's twinned now, I still wouldn't risk going that fast on that section of the 22x.

Hilly, over the river so it frequently ices and fogs up, and two traffic lights right in the middle.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

The prosocution bears the burden of providing evidence.

Assume someone crashes their vehicle into a ditch off an icy country road. There are no witnesses, and it happens in the dead of night. Once the police arrive over 12 hours later, they decide to issue a ticket "driving to fast for conditions".

Explain to me how they can prove it?

There are always witness, doesnt have to be a person could be forensic evidence. Skid marks, damage done to vehcile ect.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I'm wracking my brain trying to think of one road inside the CoC where I would be comfortable going 50 over the limit. It's pretty difficult.

Crowchild, at the bottom of the biiiiiiig hill at the intersection w/ Kensington where it drops to 60...