PDA

View Full Version : Behind the Wheel - Feb 6, 2008 - Traffic Court


skidmark
02-06-2008, 09:19 PM
Traffic Court

Have you ever been traveling a long distance from home and received a traffic ticket that you felt you should dispute in court? Were you disappointed to learn that in order to dispute the allegation you would have to travel all the way back to the court nearest to the place where the ticket was written? Many drivers decide at this point that the issue is not worth pursuing, pay the ticket and carry on.

Recent changes to the Offence Act tell of a significant change on the horizon. The tentative step of allowing the enforcement officer to testify via video conferencing or telephone at some court locations in British Columbia will be extended to the prosecutor and the defendant in the near future. This will apply throughout the province as well.

I contacted the Ministry of the Attorney General for more information and learned that teleconferenced disputes will only be allowed for certain offences, or certain offences in certain circumstances. They were not able to tell me anything more as the system is still in development and many decisions have yet to be made ranging from which offences will be designated to how the public might access teleconferencing equipment.

It will be interesting to see if teleconferenced disputes will involve more than verbal presentation by any of the parties. How will one introduce photos, drawings or other physical evidence? Perhaps the prescribed circumstances will limit this.

The justice hearing the trial may be operating under the biggest disadvantage. I suspect that many cues they use to decide on how much weight to give to the evidence they are hearing come from being able to observe the person testifying. Disputes by telephone will remove the opportunity to "size up" both the prosecution and the defence.

Hopefully the initiative will provide the public with convenient access to court services that are delivered in a timely manner.

Reference Links (http://www.drivesmartbc.ca/back_issues/2008_02_06.htm)

Jessev
02-07-2008, 08:46 AM
finally

steveo
02-07-2008, 09:28 PM
that law is a total bitch for more than traffic violations

try selling something to someone in even alberta by mail, and they decide to sue you

guess where you have to go to court, probably in the dead of winter too..

most people just give up and pay a settlement, considering what the travel cost incl. lost wages would be

our family business has been through that a few times

luckily in small claims you can sometimes write the judge directly and try to get it chucked before it sees a courtroom

CamaroRobZ28beer
02-10-2008, 10:52 PM
that puts gives icbc +1 in my books

they are now at -244

ShaneN.
02-10-2008, 11:05 PM
that puts gives icbc +1 in my books

they are now at -244


lol

Jessev
02-11-2008, 07:09 AM
that puts gives icbc +1 in my books

they are now at -244

they get +5 each year they don't have any accidents?

Kobra
02-14-2008, 10:06 AM
the right for the officer to testify in absentia is troubling, unless theres dire circumstances the person bringing the charges against you should face you in court.This removes the judges ability to use things like body movements, facial expressions etc to tell when the officer might not be telling the truth.This is a cop out.

skidmark
02-14-2008, 10:15 AM
It also works against the officer when the accused is being deceptive and isn't in the court for the judge to see. I take it your position is that everyone should always appear personally in a traffic court for a dispute?