# Fighting a trafic ticket - fail to wear seat belt



## Mattou (Jan 4, 2010)

It was very bad luck for me in 2009! On the last day of 2009, I was ticketed for failing to wear seat belt while I DID wear the seat belt!

In about noon time, I was driving at a speed about 30 kph in Sidney street, BC, Canada. A police officer stopped me and alleged me not wearing seat belt. I replied to the officer that I was wearing the seat belt while with my right hand I pulled the seat belt on my shoulder to show the officer that I was wearing the seat belt. The officer said that the another officer saw me not waering seat belt in the intercetion. I replied to the officer that I did wear the seat belt since I started to drive from my home to here and my wife sitting in the pessanger seat could prove that I was wearing seat belt all the time. I also told the officer that I have never ever not waer seat belt in a vehicle in motion in my whole life. The officer took my driver license and registration papers away and back in about half an hour with the ticket!

The distance from the intersection to where the officer stopped me is about 30 meters. As I said I was driving at about 30 kph, the time I took driving from the intersection to where I was stopped was 3.6 seconds. I was driving as normal without noticing anything happened at that time. How could I realyze that I was caught by that stupid officer in the intersectoin, decided to wear the seat belt and then weared the seat belt in such a short time.

I have decided to fight the ticket as I am REALLY innocent! If it did not happen to me I could not believe the police officer can make such a fault allegation under the sun!

One thing I am not sure if my wife can be the witness in the court.

Thank you in advance for your help you can.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Fight it. You'd be a fool to plead guilty to something you didn't do. Plus you have a witness. Unless the officer can produce a photograph proving otherwise, it's you and your wife's word against his.


----------



## SoyMac (Apr 16, 2005)

1. You can try one of those lawyer services that guarantees a "not guilty" verdict in traffic court.

2. Represent yourself. Don't plead guilty, and if the cop shows up in court that day, you _will_ lose. 

You might feel better having argued your side, but in the end, expect a guilty verdict and a ruling to pay the fine.

The judge will never rule against the word of a police officer.

Unfortunately, lack of photographic evidence only works _against_ you, not for you.

And I have heard some incredible stories, from lawyer friends, about the things cops get away with, even with _video_ evidence in favour of the civilian charged and against the cops.

You'll feel outrage and helplessness, and I only hope you will quickly move on from the experience.


I strongly lean toward # 1.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

SoyMac said:


> 2. Represent yourself. Don't plead guilty, and if the cop shows up in court that day, you _will_ lose.


On the other hand, in my experience, if the cop does not show up there is a very high probability you will win.

At least, that's how it's been for the folks I know. If they show up you lose and if they don't you win.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

People always say police have ticket quotas, but I've never heard a cop say that. Police get less respect these days because of media spreading stories of bad cops, leading people to believe this is the norm.

I believe there are the same amount of pricks that are cops than any other profession.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

hayesk said:


> People always say police have ticket quotas, but I've never heard a cop say that. Police get less respect these days because of media spreading stories of bad cops, leading people to believe this is the norm.
> 
> I believe there are the same amount of pricks that are cops than any other profession.


+1; this 'requirement' to fulfil and issue a certain number of tickets per month is likely nothing short of a myth.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Mattou, I'm really sorry that you got a ticket.

I fully believe that if you go to court and calmly, reasonably and firmly present your evidence, including your eye witness--and perhaps others who will attest that you have never driven without a seat belt--you will have a chance to get the ticket thrown out.

If the police officer doesn't show up, it's done: you get off.

All that said (and welcome to ehMac!), if the worst luck you had in 2009 was getting a traffic ticket, even unfairly, please think about it for a minute: last year other people got sick, lost loved ones, lost jobs, were denied promotions, you get the idea. You got a ticket. It may have been unfair, but it's a traffic ticket. You also live in Canada, where it's possible to fight a ticket like this, and you may not win, but at least you get to fight it.

Good luck with your case.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Do recall _reasonable doubt._
Up to you if time and effort is worth and the points if any.

I suspect you'd do okay.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

SoyMac said:


> The judge will never rule against the word of a police officer.


Sure they do, all the time. I've seen it first hand. Everyone I know who has bothered to fight a ticket has at bare minimum gotten a reduced fine and no points on their license. 



Lars said:


> +1; this 'requirement' to fulfil and issue a certain number of tickets per month is likely nothing short of a myth.


Police agencies regularly make public announcements when revenue is down, and specifically cite that as the reason for a targeted ticketing blitz.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Lars said:


> +1; this 'requirement' to fulfil and issue a certain number of tickets per month is likely nothing short of a myth.


I spoke to an ex-parking ticket officer in Toronto who told me that they didn't have quotas, but they had pools in which the officer with the highest number of tickets issued would win. He explained that this was why there were often errors on hand written tickets; end-of-week rush to win the pool.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

> Effective Jan. 1, some fines will be doubling, tripling or even quadrupling, the OPP says.
> 
> The fine for driving without a seatbelt and child seat violations will now cost $240 instead of $110.


Source

Makes me glad I don't drive a car.

Cops are always waving me past when they are looking for seatbelt infractions.


Dave


----------



## Mattou (Jan 4, 2010)

HowEver said:


> Mattou, I'm really sorry that you got a ticket.
> 
> I fully believe that if you go to court and calmly, reasonably and firmly present your evidence, including your eye witness--and perhaps others who will attest that you have never driven without a seat belt--you will have a chance to get the ticket thrown out.
> 
> ...


Thanks HowEver for your advice.

I feel bad lock just because the cop gave me the ticket for the thing I did not do. If I did such thing and got a ticket, I would not feel bad luck and would pay the ticket right away. But that ticket is really wrong! I believe now the cop just want to make up his quotas.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

A friend who was a Victoria City cop had an answer ready when people mentioned these legendary "quotas." 

"Oh, we don't have quotas any more. Now they let me write as many tickets as I want!"


----------



## SLaw (Jun 5, 2004)

Mattou said:


> It was very bad luck for me in 2009! On the last day of 2009, I was ticketed for failing to wear seat belt while I DID wear the seat belt!
> 
> In about noon time, I was driving at a speed about 30 kph in Sidney street, BC, Canada. A police officer stopped me and alleged me not wearing seat belt. I replied to the officer that I was wearing the seat belt while with my right hand I pulled the seat belt on my shoulder to show the officer that I was wearing the seat belt. The officer said that the another officer saw me not waering seat belt in the intercetion. I replied to the officer that I did wear the seat belt since I started to drive from my home to here and my wife sitting in the pessanger seat could prove that I was wearing seat belt all the time. I also told the officer that I have never ever not waer seat belt in a vehicle in motion in my whole life. The officer took my driver license and registration papers away and back in about half an hour with the ticket!
> 
> ...


Sorry to hear about your bad luck.
Unfornately your wife cannot be the witness or the judge will not accept her statement because she is directly related to you (I tried this before in the traffic court). 
But attend the court and if the cop show up, challege him with some questions:

- "The officer said that the another officer saw me not waering seat belt in the intercetion." - So the officer wrote you the ticket actually did not see you not wearing the seat belt? - hearandsay information?
- Ask the cop what direction was his vehicle at when he noticed you not wearing the seat belt? From the left side? right side? back? front? Try to determine he did not get a good view of you not wearing a seat belt. Is there any obstruction between his view and your position. To better prove your point, before the court date, sketch a diagram with the intersection, position of your car and travel direction. When he answer your question, mark his location and try to prove that he did not have a clear view of you inside your vehicle. 
- How much time he has to see you not wearing the seat belt? 5 seconds, 1/2 second?
- Ask about his vision, does he wear contact lens? how ofter he has his vision check.

Objective is to prove to the judge that he did not clearly see you not wearing a seat belt.

Good luck


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Really speaking--and I am by no means a legal expert--shouldn't the other cop have to be in court too in order to provide witness testimony? If he's not there, I wonder if you can get it thrown out based on that, as shouldn't you have the right to question the witnesses?

I'm told--at least in Ontario--it's getting a lot trickier to get things thrown out based on the cops not showing up, and that a lot of the prosecutors are former paralegals who know all the tricks. I was told this by a paralegal who handles traffic court cases... he used to have a money-back guarantee, but no longer.

That said, I would think your chances are a bit better if it relies on having two cops show up.


----------



## Mattou (Jan 4, 2010)

SLaw said:


> Sorry to hear about your bad luck.
> Unfornately your wife cannot be the witness or the judge will not accept her statement because she is directly related to you (I tried this before in the traffic court).
> But attend the court and if the cop show up, challege him with some questions:
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot, Slaw for your very helpfull info. I am wondering if the other cop has to show up in the court, too, either as a cop or witness?


----------



## Mattou (Jan 4, 2010)

Sonal said:


> Really speaking--and I am by no means a legal expert--shouldn't the other cop have to be in court too in order to provide witness testimony? If he's not there, I wonder if you can get it thrown out based on that, as shouldn't you have the right to question the witnesses?
> 
> I'm told--at least in Ontario--it's getting a lot trickier to get things thrown out based on the cops not showing up, and that a lot of the prosecutors are former paralegals who know all the tricks. I was told this by a paralegal who handles traffic court cases... he used to have a money-back guarantee, but no longer.
> 
> That said, I would think your chances are a bit better if it relies on having two cops show up.


I agree with you, Sonal. This is also my question if the orther cop has to show up in the court as either a cop or a witness.

Thanks a lot.


----------



## SLaw (Jun 5, 2004)

SLaw said:


> Sorry to hear about your bad luck.
> Unfornately your wife cannot be the witness or the judge will not accept her statement because she is directly related to you (I tried this before in the traffic court).
> But attend the court and if the cop show up, challege him with some questions:
> 
> ...


Have more time on the weekend and here are some more thoughts for you to think about if you decide to fight the ticket.
The cop noticed you did not wear a seat belt at the intersection and pulled you over, then issued you a ticket.

During the hearing, the cops might not remember the details of your case because they hand out so many tickets a week, but this is good for your advantage)
Don't expect the judge to give you an hour to present your case as they could be another 20 cases behind you. 

He noticed you did not wear the seat belt at the intersection. So ask him what's his car's position at that time. His answer will be a) cannot remember, b) directly in front of you, c) you right or left side.
His answers does not matter to you. You just want to show to the judge that the cops did not clearly see you not wearing the seat belt.

For him to see you not wearing the seat belt, he car can only be directly in front of you or at your left or right hand side. If he said he is directly in front you, ask him if he is 100% sure he stopped the offending car. (he will say yes). Also ask him at the time of noticing your violation to the time he stopped you, did he ever lost sight of your car. (he will say no). Ask him about your car's color (mostly he will not remember). Tell the judge the cop lies - because if he is directly in front of you, he has to make a u-turn so he can pulled you over. At the time of passing you car and made a u-turn he lost sight of your car for about 5 seconds. So the 'real' offending car (if there is one) could have make a turn and he mis-dentify you as the offender, to support this point, he cannot remember your car's color.

If he was at your right or left side when you entered the intersection, what caused him to tell you did not wear the seatbelt but actually you did? Ask yourself what color is the seatbelt and try to remember the color of the clothing you worn that day. Did their color blend together (black seat belt on your black jacket?) and confused the cop? If that's the case, you can wear that clothing again, get in the car, take a photo of you wearing the seatbelt (take it at 45 degree angle), Make 2 copies of the photos to 10" x 8", the width of the photo should fully cover the width of the car, so the scale is about (1:6). Assume the distance between your car and the cop's car is about 30 feet. Show both pictures 5 feet from the cop and ask him if he can tell which one does not have seatbelt on. Just try to reproduce the scene and if the photo is shot through the window, it could be difficult to tell because of reflection. Show the photos to the judge and tell him about the color of the seatbelt and your clothing.

The judge might not let you ask some of these questions or he might tell the cop he does not need to answer, but the whole point is if you can make the judge have a little doubt after listening to your presentation, the chance of reducing or dropping the conviction increase. Also this make the judge wonder why you spent time and effort to prepare for this case - you might be innocent?

Prepare, organize and practise before the court day will certainly help. There might be more that I cannot think of, this will have to leave to you.

Anyway, good luck


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

You might want to consider going to that particular intersection and taking some photos from where you think the viewing cop was and where your car would have traveled. Take whatever else you think might be appropriate while you're there.

Go there at the same time of day as when the ticket was written. See if lighting, etc affects the view through car windows (refections, etc). If weather might have affected reflections, go on a similar day and check for such reflections that might obscure views.

You could also photo cars traveling from the viewing officer's vantage point. See if it's obvious if you can tell if any of the drivers were wearing seat belts in the photos.

Have someone drive your particular vehicle (similar height, similar clothing) and photo it. Your car may me more difficult to see through than others. Use whatever fits your position (other cars only, your car, both, whatever).

Look for obstructions in the officer's line of sight. Signs, trees, what have you. Take pictures of the obstructions from the vantage point of the viewing officer.

If you take photos to court, blow a few up (save them in case they are needed). See if it's still difficult to see in the car windows. That will be your defense if the officer says he used some aid (binoculars, etc) to view you. If he didn't, that's a defense against clearly viewing you. Use whatever arises to your advantage; ideally you will have supporting evidence for both, regardless of his answer.

If something doesn't fit your defense (ie you can see clearly in some photos) don't go there with questioning.

Sometimes it's worthwhile right off the bat to ask the officer if he recognizes you. If he does, ask him if that's you driving (photo of friend driving). If he doesn't, play on his lack of recollection with other questions and your defense. 

And so on. The point is in traffic court, when it's officer's word against yours, you've lost. You need to create the doubt with your evidence, not your testimony alone denying the charge. There really is no "reasonable doubt" in traffic court (or perhaps more precisely, the judge will doubt you, not the officer, if that's all he has to work with); it's more like civil suits where "the preponderance of evidence" prevails.


----------

