撞枪口上了。收到一个“不小心驾驶”罚单。

[zeus190]

警察让我的时候应该90左右，我插到他前面后应该105-110左右。

别在速度上纠结。警察测速必须要有专门校准好的雷达。不能以警车dash速度表的为参考。

 

[pojian]

警察要有雷达数据早就给你超速罚单了，不会只给你这个争议机会较大的careless。通常雷达都指向前方的，所以他基本没有可能给你测速。
你争取的是不认罪free to go，不要无故给自己节外生枝。不要说你自己超速，问你你就说不记得。

没经验不要自己和检控官商量，不要相当然认为人家会给你减少处罚。一定要有专业人士帮你打。

别在速度上纠结。警察测速必须要有专门校准好的雷达。不能以警车dash速度表的为参考。

再次感谢指点！
一直有找个专业人士帮忙的想法，但似乎Ottawa没有讲中文的专业人士做这项服务（为了交流更精确/清晰），不知是否属实？实在不行的话估计要考虑找不懂中文的人士了。

 

[zeus190]

再次感谢指点！
一直有找个专业人士帮忙的想法，但似乎Ottawa没有讲中文的专业人士做这项服务（为了交流更精确/清晰），不知是否属实？实在不行的话估计要考虑找不懂中文的人士了。

不客气。
这里有篇文章和你的case有点关联：

作者：
James C Morton， Past President of the Ontario Bar Association, Liberal, lawyer in Ontario and Nunavut, teacher and media commentator

链接：
http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.ca/2012/11/change-lane-not-in-safety-and-fail-to.html

正文：
"Change Lane Not in Safety" and "Fail to Drive in Marked Lane", are not lesser and included offences of "Careless Driving"


Greater Sudbury (City) v. McNeil 2012 ONCJ 157, 99 W.C.B. (2d) 754 has a careful analysis of what is, and more important is not, included as a lesser offence for careless driving. Especially note the passage “I would go so far as to say that unless particulars are provided which would spell out a manner of committing "Careless Driving" that includes all of the essential elements of another offence then there can be no lesser and included offences for "Careless Driving."”:


13 Section 55 of the Provincial Offences Act states as follows: "Where the offence charged includes another offence, the defendant may be convicted of an offence so included that is proved, although the whole offence charged is not proved."


14 The Prosecutor referred me to the head notes of two cases in the 2011 Annotated Provincial Offences Act by Murray D. Segal and Justice Libman to support her position that "Change Lane Not in Safety" contrary to section 142(1) of the Highway Traffic Act and "Fail to Drive in Marked Lane" contrary to section 154(1)(a) of the Highway Traffic Act are lesser and included offences of "Careless Driving." Her position was that if I find the defendant not guilty of Careless Driving I should find him guilty of either of these two charges based on the evidence and the fact that they are lesser and included offences.

15 Before reviewing those cases referred to by the Prosecutor I will review other cases which deal with the issue. In R. c. R. (G.), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 371 (S.C.C.), the Supreme Court of Canada considered the issue of included offences pertaining to criminal matters. Although the wording of section 662 of the Criminal Code is not identical to section 55 of the Provincial Offences Act I am satisfied that they are close enough and based on the case law that the test to be applied in interpreting these sections is the same. At paragraph 27 Justice Binnie speaking for the majority accepted the findings of the Ontario Court of Appeal in a previous decision of R. v. Simpson (1981), 58 C.C.C. (2d) 122 (Ont. C.A.) when it stated: "Martin J.A. of the Ontario Court of Appeal also insisted on making clear to an accused the precise extent of his or her legal jeopardy: "The offence charged as described either in the enactment creating the offence, or as charged in the count, must contain the essential elements of the offence said to be included....the offence charged, as described either in the enactment creating the offence or as charged in the count, must be sufficient to inform the accused of the included offences which he must meet." Justice Binnie also stated at paragraph 25 that the test is a strict one and the lesser charge must "necessarily" be included and if it is not "necessarily included" then it must be excluded.

16 A case that is quoted in many other cases as being a short but clear interpretation of lesser and included offences is R. v. Foote, [1974] N.B.J. No. 32 (N.B. C.A.). Justice Limerick speaking on behalf of the New Brunswick Supreme Court Appeal Division stated at paragraph 6: "An included offence is not merely a "lesser offence" as it is sometimes referred to but is an offence that the accused necessarily commits in the commission of the offence charged."

17 Justice of the Peace Cuthbertson in the case of R. v. Richards, 2009 ONCJ 651 (Ont. C.J.) applying the analysis of the law which he sets out in his prior case of R. v. Reiber, 2007 ONCJ 343 (Ont. C.J.), finds that the charge of "Failing to stop for a red light" is not a lesser and included offence of the charge of "Careless Driving" as the actual wording of section 130 (Careless Driving) does not contain the essential elements of section 144(18) (Failing to stop for red light). He also finds that since the charging certificate states only "Careless Driving" the certificate does not inform the defendant that she may have to defend herself against a charge of "Failing to stop for a red light."

18 Applying section 55 of the Provincial Offences Act and the case law above which illustrates this section to this case, I find that the offences of "Change Lane Not in Safety", and "Fail to Drive in Marked Lane", are not lesser and included offences of "Careless Driving." "Careless Driving" as set out in section 130 is a very broad and general charge. It can be committed in countless ways. One can imagine many scenarios where a person never leaves their lane of travel and yet still commits the offence of "Careless Driving." Must a person commit an offence of "Change Lane Not in Safety" during the course of committing an offence of "Careless Driving"? Clearly the answer is no and therefore the charge does not meet the test for a lesser and included offence. The same must be said of "Fail to Drive in Marked Lane." I cannot find the defendant guilty of either of those two charges simply because the evidence may better support those charges rather than a charge of "Careless Driving."

19 Applying the second part of the test as set out in R. c. R. (G.), to the case at bar...would the defendant be aware that he was facing the possibility of defending himself against the charges of "Change Lane Not in Safety" and "Fail to Drive in Marked Lane"? The answer is no as the charging document is a Certificate of Offence which does (and must) state the approved short form wording for the offence, which in this case is simply "Careless Driving". As this offence can be committed in numerous ways the defendant would not be aware of which other possible charges he may be facing. I would go so far as to say that unless particulars are provided which would spell out a manner of committing "Careless Driving" that includes all of the essential elements of another offence then there can be no lesser and included offences for "Careless Driving."

Posted by James C Morton at 7:15 AM

 

[zeus190]

安省扣分系统：


Fail to remain at the scene of an accident 7
Fail to stop when signalled/requested by a police officer 7
Careless Driving 6
Stunt Driving 6
Speeding 50 km/h or more over the sped limit 6
Fail to stop for a school bus 6
Speeding 30 to 49 km/h over the speed limit 4
Following too closely 4
Speeding 16 to 29 km/h over the speed limit 3
Fail to report a collision to a police officer 3
Improper use of high occupancy vehicle lane 3
Fail to yield the right-of-way 3
Drive Handheld Communication Device 3
Red light-fail to stop 3
Disobey stop sign 3
Fail to drive in a marked lane 3
Pass off roadway 3
Fail to move into another lane for emergency vehicle 3
Unsafe lane change 3
Going the wrong way on a one-way road 3
Improper passing 3
Prohibited turns 2
Turn not in safety 2
Start from stop not in safety 2
Change lane not in safety 2
Fail to signal lane change 2
Driver failing to wear a seat belt 2
Fail to obey signs 2
Fail to stop at a pedestrian crossing 2
Improper Left Turn 2
Improper Right Turn 2
Backing on a Highway 2

 

[waisgan]

那SUV不可能也大幅度减速，除非有病。

我有一次更夸张，也是hw７，前面就一辆车，超车时我加速她加速，我减速她减速，感觉有一两分钟，最后看到对面大卡开来，还是没法退回左道。结果３辆在几十米内同时停住。几乎并肩停住的是白女，真不明白她为什么也大幅度减速还停住了

 

[Track]

可以到法庭与公诉人Bargain.有可能减轻处

 

[pojian]

不客气。
这里有篇文章和你的case有点关联：

作者：
James C Morton， Past President of the Ontario Bar Association, Liberal, lawyer in Ontario and Nunavut, teacher and media commentator

链接：
http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.ca/2012/11/change-lane-not-in-safety-and-fail-to.html

正文：
"Change Lane Not in Safety" and "Fail to Drive in Marked Lane", are not lesser and included offences of "Careless Driving"
......

安省扣分系统：

Fail to remain at the scene of an accident 7
Fail to stop when signalled/requested by a police officer 7
Careless Driving 6
......

非常感谢！
我研究一下这些资料。

 

[冷笑六声]

所以我坚决不走七号公路，感觉七号路上的人都有点那个，七八年前晚上走七号公路，一辆SUV开着高灯顶着我开，我让他过去他也不过去，倒后镜反的光照得我眼睛看不见路，只好找个地方停下来等他走远了再开。

只能说明你并不是真会开车。

 

[ccc]

十次事故九次快、宁停三分不抢一秒，都是真理

去年暑假期间送孩子们去夏令营做义工一周，当天出门有点晚，她们又不能迟到，在一条限速40的小路上超速，被后面一辆深色车拉响警笛车截住。

结果是不但迟到，还得到一张上百元的罚单。
不过我没有申诉，老实交了罚款，谨记这次教训。

市内怎么赶时间也没用，抢了半天，两个红灯就抵消了。

 

[pojian]

超速要有雷达记录。自己如果不熟悉就找专家代理。一定要选不认罪，不要选第二项。
Careless driving 就是drives wo care。你看起来其实是care的。你上庭后对手是检察官不是法官，警察是专家证人。

刚才在看"Offence Notice"背面的三个Option。在这三个Option的下面有一栏“Representative's name and address"。
想请教一下，如果我选Option 3 (Trial Option)，但在递交/返回Offence Notice的时候还没有最后确定代理人（Representative），是否可以先交回Offence Notice，然后过一段时间再通知法庭我的代理人的信息？
（Offence Notice上没有任何电话或其他联系方式供咨询）

 

[Teddy]

可以。罚单上应该有联系地址，不然你如何交钱或递回签单。知道具体的 prosecution office 后，你也可以上网查他们的网站，一般来说他们的服务很周全的。

刚才在看"Offence Notice"背面的三个Option。在这三个Option的下面有一栏“Representative's name and address"。
想请教一下，如果我选Option 3 (Trial Option)，但在递交/返回Offence Notice的时候还没有最后确定代理人（Representative），是否可以先交回Offence Notice，然后过一段时间再通知法庭我的代理人的信息？
（Offence Notice上没有任何电话或其他联系方式供咨询）

 

[zeus190]

刚才在看"Offence Notice"背面的三个Option。在这三个Option的下面有一栏“Representative's name and address"。
想请教一下，如果我选Option 3 (Trial Option)，但在递交/返回Offence Notice的时候还没有最后确定代理人（Representative），是否可以先交回Offence Notice，然后过一段时间再通知法庭我的代理人的信息？
（Offence Notice上没有任何电话或其他联系方式供咨询）

楼上答了我就不重复了。尽快找人帮忙，渥太华法庭处理速度不慢。你得到上庭通知后还得申请disclosure什么的。虽然花费下来可能比你罚单还贵，但未来省很多保险费。
一张6分票保险涨40%.

 

[pojian]

可以。罚单上应该有联系地址，不然你如何交钱或递回签单。知道具体的 prosecution office 后，你也可以上网查他们的网站，一般来说他们的服务很周全的。

楼上答了我就不重复了。尽快找人帮忙，渥太华法庭处理速度不慢。你得到上庭通知后还得申请disclosure什么的。虽然花费下来可能比你罚单还贵，但未来省很多保险费。
一张6分票保险涨40%.

非常感谢两位热心朋友！
我刚才在网上搜到了法庭的服务电话。

 

[韩国美容护肤品代购]

只能说明你并不是真会开车。

请教一下该怎么办呢？我也遇到过类似的情况，晚上单车道，后面的车灯照在我的左车灯上，什么都看不见。怎样避开呢？

 

[Teddy]

后面的车能照在前面车的左车灯上？不明白.
不过，你知道村长说的这个吗？这不是直接调整后视镜角度，而是掰那个小片，切换到另一个角度模式，应该不会有刺眼问题了。

后视镜晚上可以换个角度，你知道么？

请教一下该怎么办呢？我也遇到过类似的情况，晚上单车道，后面的车灯照在我的左车灯上，什么都看不见。怎样避开呢？