| Holw long does the city get, to serve you? - Click HERE for Original Thread |
| e46 |
for example you get a ticket and you decide to fight it in court..... is there a set amout of days where the hearing can happen or is it infinate?
what im trying to say, can they scheduel a court date 7 months after the violation?
i know in some places its usually 90 to 120 days or else the ticket gets dismissed |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by e46
for example you get a ticket and you decide to fight it in court..... is there a set amout of days where the hearing can happen or is it infinate?
what im trying to say, can they scheduel a court date 7 months after the violation?
i know in some places its usually 90 to 120 days or else the ticket gets dismissed
For clarification,
1. you got a ticket
2. you went to court, set a date
3. the date is now 7 months after the infraction....
Short answer is yes.
were are these 'places' you speak of? |
|
|
| e46 |
| arizona for example... they dismiss a ticket if a court date cant be set within 90 days after the ticket |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
The court date written on your ticket is your "plea" date... (plead guilty or not)
On that date, if you choose to plead not guilty a trial date is set. Tipically it is 4-8 months after the "plea" date...
No your ticket will not get dismissed, however, after six months (of violation), it can not be re-issed.
Our court system is extremely slow, I am still going to court over "tickets," (provincial acts) not criminal acts a year later. |
|
|
| e46 |
| any suggestions on how to fight a photo radar ticket? |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
| Talk to prosecutor, ask for a reduction |
|
|
| MX5 Miata Guy |
quote:
Originally posted by e46
any suggestions on how to fight a photo radar ticket?
A photo ticket...ie: a coupon...with no demerits or other consequences. Just pay it, far easier. Life's too short. |
|
|
| e46 |
quote:
Originally posted by MX5 Miata Guy
A photo ticket...ie: a coupon...with no demerits or other consequences. Just pay it, far easier. Life's too short.
but i have a feeling that its incorrect.... i remember slowing down when i saw the van, and driving maybe 5 over the limit when i passed it..... i got a ticket for 27 over |
|
|
| e46 |
quote:
Originally posted by MX5 Miata Guy
A photo ticket...ie: a coupon...with no demerits or other consequences. Just pay it, far easier. Life's too short.
but i have a feeling that its incorrect.... i remember slowing down when i saw the van, and driving maybe 5 over the limit when i passed it..... i got a ticket for 27 over |
|
|
| e46 |
and when going to court, doesnt the accuser have to face the accused? in photoradar case the accuse would be a the computer that calculates the speed and triggers the camera..... how can i be proven guilty based on what a computer says?
i dont know how the city can depend on something so unrealiable |
|
|
| AudiInProgress |
| Maybe you should just stop speeding? |
|
|
| HEWSINATOR |
quote:
Originally posted by e46
and when going to court, doesnt the accuser have to face the accused? in photoradar case the accuse would be a the computer that calculates the speed and triggers the camera..... how can i be proven guilty based on what a computer says?
i dont know how the city can depend on something so unrealiable
I guess then you have a case. Show that it is unreliable and you did not commit the offence. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
| You face the photo radar operator, he would be the one who issued the ticket |
|
|
| e46 |
but is there anyway for him to prove that the reading was correct?
clearly he and the city have a vested interest to make money, how can he prove that the radar gun is giving the right reading everytime |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
| They do tests on the radar system at the start and end of their shift to ensure the instrument is working properly. |
|
|
| MX5 Miata Guy |
quote:
Originally posted by e46
clearly he and the city have a vested interest to make money, how can he prove that the radar gun is giving the right reading everytime
Actually, no. People involved has a vested interest in making roads safer. Whether you agree or not, one of the ways is to keep speeds down (to their legal limit). As such, they'd be most happy if the van, red light camera, etc...didn't issue a single ticket.
You're just the guy who's speeding around...giving them cause to mail you a ticket. Learn from the lesson, pay it, and drive safer. |
|
|
| e46 |
| the mayor just spend 60 grand on a study to see if photo radar systems are effective in slowing down drivers..... study showed that it didnt make the roads any safer.... people only slowed down in areas where the photo radar is known to be |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by e46
the mayor just spend 60 grand on a study to see if photo radar systems are effective in slowing down drivers..... study showed that it didnt make the roads any safer.... people only slowed down in areas where the photo radar is known to be
Did you read the actual study or did you just read the newspaper artical about it?
media has tendency to only print what sells |
|
|
| Dan_Gyoba |
quote:
Originally posted by BLOCKER
They do tests on the radar system at the start and end of their shift to ensure the instrument is working properly.
While I realise that this is true, I still feel that there must be circumstances where these things are just wrong.
I've had a total of 3 photo tickets. One of them I admit I rightly deserved. I paid the fine and didn't think much of it. One of them was an odd circumstance, I'd just turned out onto the road, and some guy in an SUV was screaming up behind me. I gunned it so as not to get rear-ended. Flash flash.
One of them, however, was just plain wrong. It was on Hwy 60, going through Devon. Speed limit 70. I remember because I'd earlier gone through that stretch the other way, and saw the van, so when I was coming back to the office, I ws very careful of me speed through that zone. I made sure that it was UNDER 70. Double and triple checked. Ticket comes in the mail for 87 in a 60 zone.
This one I wanted to fight, but in the end, I paid the fine rather than spend a day in court in Leduc. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
There are circumstances where the photo radar can be in-accurate, best thing to do is google photo radar or even radar and do some research... honestly I don't feel like going through all my old text about radar...
e46 - be careful what you read, the papers are not always accurate in their reporting |
|
|
| aarrgghh |
Some time in the last two years Devon had to pay back a batch photo radar tickets due to miss-calibrated systems. I know as I got a check in the mail after seeing it on the news. Probably the only time the traffic people will be paying me!
Edit: this was a user problem, not a hardware problem. Blocker is right the hardware generally works very well. |
|
|
| DivineRight |
If only the newspapers paid the people for all the misprints and wrong information that they harmed...I'd probably subscribe to them then.
A study is based on stats and anyone who has taken a statistics class will know how easy it is to skew data the way you want to. If photo radar makes people stop speeding in specific areas then that is better than nothing. Friends and family of mine who do road construction in the city appreciate it. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by aarrgghh
Some time in the last two years Devon had to pay back a batch photo radar tickets due to miss-calibrated systems. I know as I got a check in the mail after seeing it on the news. Probably the only time the traffic people will be paying me!
Edit: this was a user problem, not a hardware problem. Blocker is right the hardware generally works very well.
If I remember that one correctly, they were ticking as if it was a slower zone than it was, example setting the limit at 30 km/h rather then 50 km/h (the actual limit for the area) that would have been the operators mistake, not the equipments. |
|
|
| aarrgghh |
| Not sure I remember correctly Blocker, but I'm pretty sure it was out on the highway road just before the turn ins going north, which was a 70 zone. |
|
|
| aarrgghh |
quote:
Originally posted by AudiInProgress
Cheque
Oops, thank god someone is the spelling/grammer police! I don't know what we would do without you. |
|
|
| BLOCKER |
quote:
Originally posted by aarrgghh
Not sure I remember correctly Blocker, but I'm pretty sure it was out on the highway road just before the turn ins going north, which was a 70 zone.
I didn't remember specific details, I was using the km/h as an example |
|
|
| Dan_Gyoba |
| Well, I didn't receive a cheque in the mail. :( I wonder when this was, since it certainly sounds like what happened to me. Grrr... I mean it's one thing if I was speeding and got caught. It's another when I wasn't. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by e46
but i have a feeling that its incorrect.... i remember slowing down when i saw the van, and driving maybe 5 over the limit when i passed it..... i got a ticket for 27 over
So you were speeding, then you realized you were going to get caught so you didn't speed as much until you passed the van, then probably started speeding again? Was that an idea you got from this study you read about? How is that theory working out for you?
Anyways...maybe he nailed you before you saw him and were still going faster. Or maybe not. Either way, you got caught, man up and pay whether you slowed down for the van or not.
As for the question of time frame....
You DO have the right to a fair and expeditious trail. In some places this is taken VERY seriously and things get tossed if the governing body can't try you in time. Even in Ontario they use that as an argument why OPP officers can be forced to work a night shift, go to court the next day, then work another night shift right after. The public has a right to an expeditious trail so the officers have to suffer (you don't see the Crown or judges working back-to-back-to-back shifts though, funny that).
It is, however, law theory, not a hard and fast rule in practical law in most places. The general interpretation in MOST provinces in Canada is that you have a right to as fair and expeditious a trail as can be arranged. The point of the concept is to prevent someone from being arrested and left in a cell for several weeks before being served due process. In my opinion, places like Arizona (and I believe NV and some others work that way as well) are taking it to the extreme.
You're being processed as quickly as they can. It doesn't benefit anyone to have your ticket sitting in the system awaiting trial. |
|
|
| quick_gold |
Holy Shit,
welcome back man.. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
| In about a week I'll know if I'm back to stay or not. :S |
|
|
|
|
