phoned up DO this afternoon. According to them, most likely I need to pay for the fine because the Provincial Conservation Officers don't always tell people about the 7-day grace period. And it's "up to the officers" wether they give you the opportunity to fax your license or not.
Ok, now i get it, it is double standard. If they like you, you get a chance; if they are not in the mood, suck it up.
And yes, i am still waiting for my disbute court date. And I will address this issue nicely with the judge, and also yes, i will honestly admit that i did fish for 5mins without my licnese, and got ticketed when the rod's already been putted away.
Yes, it is the same double standard as the police officer that decides to let you off with a warning for failing to produce your license. You could say "...but I was only driving for 5 minutes...and I had already stopped when you gave me the ticket and I wasn't going to drive any more..." but it is the officer who decides if he is going to give you the ticket or not, and if he gives you the ticket, you are going to have a hard time selling it to the judge that you did not deserve it, since you were driving your car without having your license on your person. Sure you expect the CO to believe you that it was only for 5 minutes and you expect him to believe you that you were not going to fish any more, but you will have to forgive him for not trusting you as he has probably heard the same story numerous times in the past.
an appeal is exactly what it is...in this case, not to prove his innocence, but to put forth what precedence was set prior, to ensure fair play of *the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions[/i]...(known as the Common Law or Case Law Act).
everybody has the right of appeal, it's part of our constitution...by appealing, the courts can easily audit citations that were deemed 'void' and authorized by the Department.
Sure, but the "appeal" you refer to is used to prove the Judge in the case did something wrong, overlooked a key fact, did not allow viable evidence (or allowed invalid evidence) or, in this case, ruled contrary to prior precedence. To "put forth what precedence was set prior" you would need to cite an actual case that was heard in court (saying "my friend got off with a warning" or saying "A guy I know had the ticket ripped up when he faxed in his license" is not setting a "precedence"). What you are suggesting is that Officer's discretion (to write the citation or not) is a "precedence" and that is simply not the case. It is the judge who cannot "treat similar facts differently on different occasions" and it is there that you need to prove "past precedence". A judge, hearing similar facts, reduced the charges or dismissed the case.
That is an appeal.
Now, you are not really arguing that the Officers should
not have that "discretion", are you? That they should enforce the law to the letter every time? Something tells me that you would not want that. Or, that once one officer lets a guy off with a warning, he (and every other officer) must now let every offender off with a warning? You need to accept that the Officer has the discretion, and if you get them on a bad day, then you have the unfortunate problem of having to explain your actions in court. (Again, we are not arguing about his guilt at the offense.)
Author
Topic: was given a ticket (Read 29417 times)