court case: prosecution won't disclose

So I am going to court to fight a stop sign violation ticket (I didn't stop 100%), and I requested disclosure. Disclosure for those that don't know, is getting access to the evidence thats being used against you before the trial starts, and is your right to have (at least in Canada).

With the disclosure request I received the officers hand written notes. The only thing is that parts of them are illegible. So I contact the prosecuter and request a hand typed version that I can read. Shes writes me back essentially saying no, and that I can cross examine the police officer in court to find out what the officers notes say exactly.

Ok so is this not againstt my rights to a fair trial? How am I suppose to prepare a defense based on evidence I don't fully understand simply because I can't read it. I legimately asked for clarification, multiple times in fact, and all that I'm told is that I can cross examine the officer for clarification on the evidence. Its not like this is some impossible outrageous request, its entirely realistic. How am I suppose to prepare a defense on the spot at the trail.

I have evidence that I attempted further disclosure, I have evidence that I was denied. I think I can have this case thrown out of court due to a breach of my rights to a fair trial. Anyone else have an opinion on this?

 

maybe you can show the judge your papers and state your case while asking for a future court date to give you time to prepare your case-----but for a traffic violation? and you admit you didnt stop completly---here thats called a rolling stop and its guilty for failure to stop---but i have seen judges throw out--(rarely) a few cases---even with the police officer present--dont know why they took the defendents word over the cops but it does happen----good luck

 

So you admit you were wrong and are going to fight a traffic ticket in court anyway?

Heh.

 

Good luck, I would plan on paying though.

 

Thats what I'm thinking. At the very least they can grant me more time to prepare, and order the prosecution for further disclosure.

Yes I admitted I didn't stop completely, but coasting through a three way stop sign in a quiet residential area after looking every which way doesn't warrant a $200 fine and a merit, which in my province makes car insurance go up. If theres a chance I don't have to pay I'm going to take it.

Where the cops were sitting was way down the intersecting street with a fence blocking their view before a couple feet from the stop sign. So really all they could see was the area immediately before the stop sign. The officers notes states it was icy. I'm going to claim that I stopped a few feet before the stop sign because it was slippery and proceeded through from the position I was at, which from their position looked like I was running the stop sign.

But if I can get the case thrown out before I get to that point of explaining it due to the prosecution not providing sufficient disclosure, that would be even better.

 

Economy sucks, judges have bills to pay too, and job security hs never been more important to those in the public sector, good luck.

 

it does if you knew it was illegal.

everyone knows traffic tickets are fucking expensive, that's why people obey traffic laws.

 

In many cases, if the officer does not show up the case is then dropped......

In your case, with the badgering that you have done to get so called “information”, I will almost guarantee that the officer will show up as they have been bothered by you.

If you did as you have admitted you did, you are wasting the time of the court and the officer and it should stick.

 

So you're going to lie? Awesome. I hope you get the full fine.

Cop is just doing his job.

 

Traffic enforcement is as much about generating revenue as it is about safety. Fair and just is likely what they determine it is.

 

I got pulled over in Dallas once with a broken taillight. I got three tickets and they towed my car for not having my insurance card on me. Now that's a racket.

 

Welcome to fascism.

Now that's the American Waste.

Oop.

I meant American Way.

.

 

To the OP,

It's worth fighting it. You don't have much to lose. The ones that are difficult are speeding tickets with data from a laser or radar gun. Rolling is partly a matter of judgment of the observer.

PS:

You can always get a pharmacist to read the police officer's writing. Pharmacists can read anything.

.

 

This is the most useful piece of advice that I've read so far. Thank you for trying to be helpful.

Lol don't judge me for lying. I need that $200 dollars more then the city does. Oh my, I rolled through a stop sign going 10 KM an hour similar to the other 400,000 incidents that happened that very same day. Safety my ass. Quiet resdential area in the middle of the night. Its just like putting one of those photo radar vans on a deserted street in a school zone 5 o'clock on a sunday morning (which does happen), strictly for "the childrens safety". Give me a break...Its simply to generate revenue. Safety is just a convenient justification.

I was hoping that someone who knows a little bit about disclosure would give some advice. Although I appreciate those who tried regardless.

 

I doubt that me being in contact with the prosecution would have any effect on whether the officer will be there. I am hoping the cop doesn't show up, because it will likely be thrown out of court. And if she does, I'll ask for more time to give her another chance to not show up.

I'm obviously not admitting in court that I didn't stop, or that I rolled through. I'm not stupid, I know a roll through still is a non stop. Theres other circumstances, such as the officers obstructed view, as well as the prosecutions failure to elaborate on evidence, that gives me a chance of winning.