Distracted driving ticket court case - did i win or lose?

[dirtsniffer]

Time to go to the news.

[msommers]

Yep it's media time.

Prosecutor's office sounds like a real cowboy outfit.

[killramos]

I really commend you for pursuing this is all I can really add

[gwill]

I'm not a fan of running to the media to create outrage altho at some point if there are perjury charges I'm sure it will end up there. For that the investigation will need to continue to see what they decide. I don't think its wise to interfere with that yet.

Other then that I told the chief prosecutor that he made a lot of assumptions that were wrong and that he showed a weird bias towards me that was borderline threatening.

Until theres an actual complaint process theres no point in pursuing things with the chief prosecutor as he has no guidelines to follow. His superiors will ultimately back his response.

[Gman.45]

I can understand how you feel Gwill. However -

I do think that the email you received about you being seen at the courthouse with your wife has done you a huge favor. It proves the pattern of behavior you described of these fake-Crowns (my new term for them), and shows that they terminated your complaint based on something that is demonstrably false - you were NOT stalking them, that's ridiculous, it can easily be proved you were there with your wife to help her, something you obviously would want and need to do after your last time attending this kangaroo court circus.

These sorta-Crowns need to be blasted due to their attitude and behavior. Gwill, you're both skilled as well as fortunate, both of those things contributed to your (rightful) victory in this clown-court, but think of ALL the others who won't be. Others who will have these same officers with their very...selective memory. Others who will have this faux-Crowns threatening them with the same BS (I can't believe that it's legal for them to intimidate and literally outright lie to defendants). I realize LE can use deception when interrogating suspects, but for crowns to lie about punishments and consequences is beyond outrageous to me.

IMO you have a bit of a responsibility now to use what you have - proof of this behavior - and expose it/them. What they are doing is NOT justice, it's the opposite of that. You'll be surprised at how much support you would get after going public, to help carry this complaint and story forward. Just my opinion.

[gwill]

I'll think about it a bit.. maybe I'll chat with the minstry of justice who reached out to me. I told them after the email I got from the prosecutor that I didnt want to pursue the complaint any further.

If you guys read the email I'm sure most would take the hint to get lost.

[spikerS]

post the email, black out your info. I would like to read it.

[Gman.45]

Gwill, the very fact that they have you so concerned, is why you need to go public. Even though you won the court case, IMO what they tried to do to you before, and now after, is a serious miscarriage of justice. I'm going to run this thread by my pop tonight and see what he's got to say. I too wouldn't mind seeing the email, or even just excerpts that you could post here.

Also, I think lessons learned here for all of us is to ensure you have a dashcam, preferably one that records both forwards and backwards, and captures you and your actions inside the vehicle. Also, to record EVERY phone call and interaction you have with L/E and court officers/Crown Prosecutors/PretendCrownJPs/Etc. This is what I had meant in post one, if you had your phone recorder or a dedicated recorder going while the Crown was making these threats to you - that would be great material to go public with had you done that. Even having calls recorded where you requested having the A/V equipment in court for your video evidence, would have been more ammunition to show the judge that the crown/JP/whatever was incompetent(perhaps purposefully to not allow your evidence to affect the case), and wasn't prepared even after you had previously arranged things with them.

Everyone should take such measures going forward as well IMO, dashcams are inexpensive, and most phones have an audio record feature as well, and it's your right to use it, you don't even need to inform anyone you're recording if you're part of the conversation as per Canadian law.

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not a fan of running to the media to create outrage altho at some point if there are perjury charges I'm sure it will end up

This complaint would be 1000x better than your typical soccer mom complaining about how their vehicle was broken into, in the alley they were 'FORCED' to park in for street cleaning ... which actually made the news.

Corporate/profit news LOVES a story like yours - small person going against the mean government Juggernaut. They would make it into a mini series.

[phil98z24]

Pursue it. If what you’re saying is true, the crown and those Mounties need to be dealt with. I understand what the RCMP intake person is trying to say when talking to you and I don’t think it’s meant to dissuade you, and that’s on them to discern perjury or poor recollection - not you. As far as the chief crown of that office, screw ‘em. They are a public service and represent justice and what it stands for. Their employees should do the same. So demand it.

[gwill]

^the rcmp officer was great to chat with. I don't think she was dissuading me just giving me their perspective on what to expect. Definitely made me think a bit on how things can be perceived.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'll think about it a bit.. maybe I'll chat with the minstry of justice who reached out to me. I told them after the email I got from the prosecutor that I didnt want to pursue the complaint any further.

If you guys read the email I'm sure most would take the hint to get lost.

If you're willing to nail yourself to the cross over this and personally deal with the shit storm that comes from challenging the justice system, then I don't understand why you wouldn't take it public? You're already going to deal with the negative consequences. So why not take it to a place where something may actually get done about it?

[gwill]

Small update, hope everyone enjoys.

As there was a bylaw officer in the vehicle with the rcmp officer who was part of my traffic stop i had to submit a complaint against the bylaw officer which is separate from the rcmp complaint i filed. The bylaw supervisors have completed their investigation. Complaint was filed april 29th and i heard back today that they will not be taking any disciplinary action against the officer in question. Here is their ruling:

A review of the completed investigational file, review of the official provincial court transcripts and interview of yourself was completed. During the interview with yourself, no new information was presented that was not considered by the presiding traffic court commissioner during the trial that took place. Without new evidence or information provided by yourself, my review was mainly based on the official court transcripts and the officers investigational notes.

The review of the full transcripts showed that the traffic court commissioner in his ruling, stated that he did not believe that officer _______ misled or colluded with the other officer during their testimony. But he did point out some inconsistencies and ambiguities between the officers recollection of events when comparing it to the dash cam video that you supplied. He also ruled that there were some problems and peculiarities with the evidence that you gave and at times you came across as evasive when asked about the use of your cell phone that day. However, the commissioner stated that because of the ambiguities of the officers testimony on some of the cursory matters, he believed there was sufficient doubt raised and acquitted you of the charges.

When reviewing the officers court testimony against the officers investigational file and notes i did not see any reasonable evidence of fabrication. I did however note that the officer did testify to some matters based on his memory due to the lack of not having more detailed notes.

In my years of experience in court, giving and hearting testimony as well as hearing rulings, I do not find it unreasonable or uncommon for officers to give testimony that differ at times. It is also not uncommon for an officer to have limited hand written notes available to recall matters from the past. The fact the officers testimony did not match up exactly with each other or the video presented in court is not sufficient or reasonable enough evidence for me to rule that the officer had intent to mislead or fabricated evidence or testimony.

Based on these factors and evidence, I find the allegation against officer ______ to be unfounded.



A few issues with the ruling that i intend to appeal: I did provide new evidence when i was interviewed. The investigator looking into my complaint alleges the officers had few notes. My traffic ticket had an entire novel of notes written on there. The notes covered 2 sides of the traffic ticket. I've never seen so many notes on a traffic ticket before. The investigator determined the officer in question testified by memory due to the lack of detailed notes. He provides an excuse for the officer and somehow knows the officers intent/purpose when testifiying but then at the end of their ruling say that they cant determine if the officer had intent to to mislead, or fabricated evidence or testimony.

How do we know what the officer meant to do in one scenario and then turn a blind eye pretending we don't know the intent later on?

[googe]

Hilarious, this is nothing more than a small town shakedown. Essentially a toll road for revenue generation because they don’t have authority to actually toll and it turns out that funding local governments is hard when anyone with a clue gets the hell out of there at their first opportunity. They’ve been lying without a second thought for years, nobody goes back to fight them and anyone who does won’t win. These places exist, all 20 people in that town go to the same church, nobody is going to investigate each other or they’d be excommunicated by their inbred family because the subject of the complaint probably shares their DNA.

I’m wondering why you are leaving out the location. Personal privacy? I get that, but I think naming and shaming helps give these shitholes a reputation. We all know about Ponoka and Hope. Down here it’s Black Diamond.

Unfortunately if you didn’t have dash cam, nobody here would even believe you and insist that you were leaving out the part where you shat on the officer’s hood and reached for his gun. Because when they were pulled over and respectful, they had no problems.

Anyway, I think that the public service that you are doing (isn’t it supposed to be the other way around?) is worthwhile even if they don’t get punished. If nothing else, it puts them on notice that people are calling them on their shit. Absolutely guarantee that if this gets media coverage, they will still be dirty scumbags but they’ll at least try to be dirty within the law, because they don’t want bad PR and scrutiny drying up that cash cow.

[revelations]

So the B/L member is off - but how long for the RCs to get back to you?

[gwill]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So the B/L member is off - but how long for the RCs to get back to you?

Not sure how long the rcs will take.

I'll appeal the judgement. I think theres enough issues with the written findings that i should be successful in an appeal to at least be heard by the director of law enforcement. This department handles the appeals for bylaw officers.

I expected this result in all honesty. I have requested to view any documents they used to come to their findings but not sure theyll be providing me access by the sounds of things. I've asked to see the interviews they did as well as get access to the court transcripts.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The fact the officers testimony did not match up exactly with each other or the video presented in court is not sufficient or reasonable enough evidence for me to rule that the officer had intent to mislead or fabricated evidence or testimony.

[msommers]

You're doing us all a massive favour here. Your persistence on this issue needs to be rewarded, though I'm not sure how exactly.

[Mitsu3000gt]

No disciplinary action taken against the officer for writing a bogus ticket and wasting everyone's time - what a shocker.

[revelations]

If the RCs come back with something similar - definitely go to the corporate mass media. They love to shit on LEOs and in this case, it sounds pretty justified.