Last week, I went to court to fight a traffic violation. It was my first time. The cop that gave me the ticket was there and we both gave our statements, a case of he said/she said. I'm the 'he' - the cop was a bitch, and the judge believed the cop, so I lost the case and was given demerit points plus the fine. I want to appeal myself. I don't want to use a lawyer. If I do, will there be another trial with me and the cop again, but at a different court? So if he doesn't show up, I win? Does anyone have experience of this? Thanks.
Traffic violations - going to court
- Thread starter punter
- Start date
Whenever it's a case of he said/ she said, the judge always believes the cop, that's been my experience.......I now always use an agent who knows how to play the system and been quite happy....won't fight tickets by myself any longer.....don't know if an appeal will be in a different court, but I would use an agent if you appeal..
Yeah, halfway through the trial, I realized that they were all out to get me - the bitch cop, the prosecuter and the judge. They probably had a good laugh afterwards that I had even bothered to go to trial. I was hoping that the cop wouldn't show up.
Maybe. But on one of the violations, he just plain made a mistake, but it's still his word against mine. It's hard for me to let that one go.hunter001 said:Is it possible you actually did something wrong? B.T.W. it is the prosecutor's job to get you.
If I appeal, the chances of him showing up again in 6 months time for another trial is probably less. Maybe he won't bother showing up.
The fine is about $200 and 2 demerit points. I'm not sure if it's worth it to go any further.
What do you guys think, is it worth it to have the 2 demerit points removed?
An appeal cannot change a lower court finding of fact. If the judge has now ruled on the "he said / she said" aspects of it, that ruling is final.
What an appeal court can do is say that a judge should have allowed in some evidence that was denied, or denied some evidence that was allowed, or didn't properly consider the way the law applies in your case, etc.
An appeal court cannot change anything about what facts the judge determined happened. Those are facts of law now.
What an appeal court can do is say that a judge should have allowed in some evidence that was denied, or denied some evidence that was allowed, or didn't properly consider the way the law applies in your case, etc.
An appeal court cannot change anything about what facts the judge determined happened. Those are facts of law now.
you lost me when you said the above...they are simply doing their jobs..what makes you so special that you think they are all out to get you....yep they all conspired to screw you..get a grip ..pay the fine ..and move on.....regards,paranoid and delusionalpunter said:
An appeal does not get you a new trial so there will be no reason for the officer to appear. An appeal gets you a chance to have a judge of the Ontario Court of Justice (not the Court of Appeal for Ontario) review the transcript of the original trial and, as previously mentioned, determine if there was an error in law or a palpable and overriding error with respect to the determination of a particular fact.
If you are appealing and hoping that you will win the appeal because the officer will not show up you are flat out of luck. The appeal is not a new trial. You can do the appeal without a lawyer but you better have a pretty good understanding of terms like "standard of review" and be able to determine what the correct standard of review is when dealing with issues of pure law, issues of pure fact or issues of mixed fact and law.
If you win the appeal you may convince the judge to dismiss the charge outright but you might also end up just having a new trial ordered.
If you are appealing and hoping that you will win the appeal because the officer will not show up you are flat out of luck. The appeal is not a new trial. You can do the appeal without a lawyer but you better have a pretty good understanding of terms like "standard of review" and be able to determine what the correct standard of review is when dealing with issues of pure law, issues of pure fact or issues of mixed fact and law.
If you win the appeal you may convince the judge to dismiss the charge outright but you might also end up just having a new trial ordered.
What colt said is true. Appeals are done based on issues of pure law and not the merits of the case. Unless the judge has mis-interpreted / mis-applied the law (unlikely), your case will not be accepted for appeal.
Just curious!
My experience with my tickets is ..I fuc#&ed up and got caught. The cop is doing his/her job ... I react with attitude ie; calling her a "bitch". End result I get no consideration in court when it comes trial time.
So ...suck it up buttercup
My experience with my tickets is ..I fuc#&ed up and got caught. The cop is doing his/her job ... I react with attitude ie; calling her a "bitch". End result I get no consideration in court when it comes trial time.
So ...suck it up buttercup
Wait, did I read this right? There were TWO violations? And what mistake did they make? Daring to charge YOU? was that the mistake?punter said:
Punter, you were charged and found guilty of an offence under the HTA....for $200.00 and 2 points, don't make out like you've been sent to the Gulag for 10 yrs of hard labour.
BTW: the cops are paid to show up for court so whoever "hopes the cop doesn't show up" is IMO pissing up a tree......
you must have grounds for appeal , i did not like the result is not grounds. If you actually have grounds for appeal your appeal will be heard by a judge. The traffic courts are generally Justices of the Peace, who may or may not be lawyers. The position was a good patronidge post for years for party bagmen and women. There may actually be an appeal available because the JP misinterpreted the law not because you lost. The problem is you need the transcipts and someone who can actually tell what they mean from a legal perspective. All this costs money. The question is will the increased insurance costs offset what you have to pay for the services.
For the record, I don't believe all (if any) insurance companies raise your rates for 2 points. Many have a 3 or 4 point "forgiveness' policy so if you fuck up once, no biggy, just don't make a habit of it.
I say: if your insurance rates go up because you keep getting caught doing stupid things on the road, GREAT more power to them!
Like this story on CityTV back when rates started skyrocketing. They had theis example of a woman who wrote off a car in a parking lot (how you do that at 5 kph I'll never know) and her rates went from $1200.00 to $10,000.00 per year. GASP OMG write off your first car in a parking lot, gasp, have to pay $10K on a new Jetta? That's reasonable IMO.
Moral of this story? Don't break any HTA laws and you never have to worry about points, trials, lawyers, insurance rates rising etc. But that'd be too easy eh?
I say: if your insurance rates go up because you keep getting caught doing stupid things on the road, GREAT more power to them!
Like this story on CityTV back when rates started skyrocketing. They had theis example of a woman who wrote off a car in a parking lot (how you do that at 5 kph I'll never know) and her rates went from $1200.00 to $10,000.00 per year. GASP OMG write off your first car in a parking lot, gasp, have to pay $10K on a new Jetta? That's reasonable IMO.
Moral of this story? Don't break any HTA laws and you never have to worry about points, trials, lawyers, insurance rates rising etc. But that'd be too easy eh?
I beat a ticket on a cop no show ONCE, but I was extremely lucky. In fact, I only went to plead guilty with an explanation to try to get my penalty reduced, but because the cop didn't show the crown withdrew the charge.
By the way, the court was full of cops. Taking the chance that of them not showing up is pretty remote. I got lucky, thats all.
By the way, the court was full of cops. Taking the chance that of them not showing up is pretty remote. I got lucky, thats all.
