Bishs

Hello Mr. Bishop,

After reading what you sent me I agree with you. I will be bringing this to the attention of our Minister of Justice.

Thanks for highlighting it for me.

Mike Wallace
MP Burlington

CDN_Wolf_eh

I feel like I jumped right into the middle of a story ...

SilverSurferC6

I got mine too, only her assistant had me confirm my address, etc. We'll see what happens next.'


Oh Mark, it's about the cops getting off on the DWI charges in court.

1971Coupe

another PM who replies like he has no control, and passes the buck to someone else.

WYCKD 1

Nothing yet and sent messages to both local and Ottawa addresses...

Not surprised..it is Garth Turner after all..he's too busy putting his feet in his mouth and insulting different cultures....

Cdn Z06 Mike

Got a response...standard issue but everything has to start somewhere.

88BlackZ-51

You guys are funny!

I believe this is about the police officer getting off on the Impaired and Over 80 charges. The conviction rate on Impaired Driving is around the 30% rate across the board. This has nothing to do if this was a police officer or not.

Another blown up negative aspect about police officers. Only on the Cdn site of the Corvette forum!

Most of you dont have a clue! Kinda why I dont post much on here in regards to Police matters.

FFIN90

Since this defence has been around since about 1985 I would guess that there are more than a few people who have had their cases dismissed using this defense and there's been barely a peep.

At least the government has finally slammed the door on the "Carter Defence"


Defences narrowed for drunk drivers
June 1, 2008

It will be harder to fight charges of driving with excess alcohol once amendments to the Criminal Code take effect July 2, 2008. Also under the amendments, higher fines and longer jail terms await those convicted.

Until now it was possible to defend a charge of driving with excess alcohol - "over 80" - by raising a reasonable doubt that your blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was over the legal limit. To succeed with the defence it was enough to testify about the amount you drank and have an expert calculate that your BAC would be within the legal limit at the time of the alleged offence. Unless the court rejected your evidence you'd be acquitted. No more.

Must prove machine malfunction
Evidence that your BAC was within the legal limit (known in law as "evidence to the contrary") will no longer suffice. Now you will also require evidence that the breath instrument was malfunctioning or operated improperly and that but for the malfunction or improper operation, the readings would have been within the legal limit. To muster such evidence will be tough.

The evidence to the contrary defence is known among the criminal bar as the "Carter" defence. The name derives from a 1985 Ontario Court of Appeal decision that upheld the acquittal of James Carter whose car had crashed on Highway 400. Blood analysis revealed a BAC of over 226 mgs. of alcohol in 100 ml of blood.

"Death of Carter"
At trial Carter said he had "three beers" and a toxicologist testified Carter would have had no alcohol in his blood at the time of the accident. As Carter's evidence was not rejected, he was acquitted.

The Crown appealed. In dismissing the appeal, the court noted "if the appellant's evidence is accepted, the blood sample reading must be wrong, and the appellant is not obliged to speculate where the error might have occurred; in the taking of the sample, the labelling, the testing or whatever." In the wake of the amendments, criminal defence lawyers are now lamenting the "death of Carter."

The amendments also introduce harsher penalties for drinking and driving offences. These offences include driving or care or control while impaired or with over 80 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood, and fail or refuse to provide a breath sample.

Higher fines, more jail
The minimum fine for a first offence will jump from $600 to $1,000. For a second offence, the minimum penalty will rise from 14 days jail to 30 days. For a third or subsequent offence the minimum penalty will go up from 90 days jail to 120 days.

As a weekend (intermittent) sentence is available only for sentences of up to 90 days, it will no longer be available to persons with two prior convictions. In addition, the maximum jail penalty for a drinking and driving offence prosecuted by summary conviction will increase from six months to 18 months.

New offences created
The amendments create several new offences. These include:

driving with excess alcohol and causing bodily harm or death to another person
failing or refusing to provide a breath sample when you know or ought to know that your operation of a motor vehicle caused an accident resulting in bodily harm to another person or death
The amendments were passed by the House of Commons on November 27, 2007. They received Royal Assent on February 28, 2008.

Cdn Z06 Mike

Rick, While I do agree with you on some counts it's really hard to overlook some of the evidence presented in this case. In my letter to the member of Parliament I actually asked them to re-examine the over 50 kph law and perhaps continue to focus on more important driving concerns like drinking and driving. Putting a plane in the air is the biggest God*** waste of tax payer money around. Lets call a spade a spade, it was issued to generate revenue and absolutely nothing more. (why because people don't see the plane so they continue to speed and it does not slow traffic. Put 20 cruisers on the 400 and watch how fast traffic slows down, but that doesn't generate money).I agree with you that the conviction rate for DUI is low and this should be corrected in my opinion. Also the 50 over law should be strict but not to the point that an officer gets to be judge and jury on the side of the road regardless of guilt or innocence. At the end of the day when evidence this damming against an officer is presented you have to expect people to go up in arms when he/she walks away free and clear. I just wish people going over 50 get off this easily, oh yeah they can't, they had there car towed on the spot

rpanesar

We know there are good cops, we are not arguing that. The point we are making is the fact that it was a cop that was charged and the worst part is that he knew he was drunk and driving at excessive speed while intoxocated, yet the low life fought his case and had the charges thrown out. If cops can't be accountable to the laws then why the heck should we?

sxr6

88BlackZ-51

People are not perfect. There is bad apples in every profession. Relax!

Why should we have them? Are you serious. Do you want it to be like "Animal Farm".

WYCKD 1

Rick, that's not what he said. Of course we need the services of the Police and other Emergency Services. The last line was in relation to accountability.

Every citizen, regardless of profession, need to be accountable for their actions.

And to your point, yes, Police officers are human beings and make mistakes. However, it is a well known fact (and don't even bother trying to deny, I have worked with Police Services across the country and know), that there is a line of protection for Police and other Emergency Services, that everyday citizens don't have.

Carter Defense or not with regard to the DUI, the other charges were enough to convict. The judge made a very poor decision.

NOCRISIS

all I can say is I will cruise behind Rick anytime!

Zeeman28a

Hey Rick. What's going on? Haven't seen you on this side of the forum in a bit. Don't blame you with today's climate out there. There's enough BS going around from both sides nowadays to fertilize all of the Holland Marsh. Can't say I blame you for not coming out and enjoying some of our events. Facing an angry mob is not a choice I would make either. But we are the cool angry mob.

But here's my take on this cop DUI. And please, take it with a grain of salt. It's not really worth the "paper" it's written on.

The cop got charged with DUI, used the Carter Defence, and got off. The judge chose to believe the cop and his buddies over the results of a machine. What's the problem? Until a few days ago, everyone had that chance.

But because this was a cop, we're all angry about the results, as you can read from some of these posts. They're in the public eye. They're supposed to be out there protecting us from DUI's. This particular cop should be ashamed and embarrased to say the least. :o Thank whomever you want that he didn't hurt or kill anyone. I did like some of his defence.

I didn't realize this argument would work in court. I'll have to use this one sometime.

My is that the perception is that cops seem to have a line of defence that others do not. We know he was charged with DUI and with speeding 146kph. Was he charged with careless driving? How about stunt driving? I'm sure if that were me, I probably would have been. Good thing I don't drink.

Now that the Carter Defence is no longer a valid defense, we'll see how the next cop makes out when he's stopped for DUI and speeding.


This was a more well thought out argument in my head. Not sure why it didn't come out that way on paper.

Stan.

88BlackZ-51

Everyone is accountable for there actions. Whether it's Wayne Gretzky, a Police Officer or you!

Impaired driving is a no-no whomever you are.....Whether you are a Police Officer or not. Impaired Operation of a Motor Vehicle is a very serious situation. Even officer's are held accountable for there actions.

I have found over the past years Police Officers get a bad rap on the Cdn forum for some reason. Our soul purpose isnt stopping Corvette's and issuing them tickets. That is the least of our worries, and dont worry, you dont get stopped just because your driving a Corvette. They are dime a dozen and no one cares that you are driving one.

I find a few guys on here are negative towards Police, but I will press send now, and say no more!

88BlackZ-51

Line of protection? I agree years ago, It was probably suitable to turn a blind eye, but those days are gone.

Maybe you should email the Judge your concerns.

NOCRISIS

2 yrs with a Vette and never been pulled over on either side of the border,not even a spot check yet,been through a lot of speed traps though.(touches forehead,wood)

Snobike Mike

Hey Rick,

You said you'd say no more!

z06cab

So it was an officer this time, big deal it's a person like everyone else. You can thank the judges and lawyers as these are the people that control the courtroom. I've seen many people in the courts that should have been sentenced to death let alone a few fines, but remarkably they find themselves walking out the same day. I've been on both sides of the law and have family on the force, I hear stories each day and as much as you'd like to point fault at the police, open up a law book and see how many loopholes you can find to some charges.

On a similar case for DUI I was a witness with 2 other officers as I helped take a drunken lady off the road, physically went into her car and shut the vehicle down before she plowed down a minivan of people. It went to court, she didn't show, back in court again, not there as she was "sick" after a year now, back in court and she's not there again and the lawyer says it's been too long to try her. SHE's the one putting it off not the courts. (usually if the court holds it over you can get off after a year) I'm sitting outside the court with the other officers and the crown comes out and tells us the judge is tossing it out as she's had a long year, she was having a divorce and her husband was abusing her. Ok, I feel bad but she nearly killed a bunch of people incl. myself. I had to be at court each time or they'd issue a warrant if I didn't show, missed work, lost pay, for what. nothing. Our system at work. It would have been better if she just drove into a semi that day.

Stuff happens, we're not going to be changing anything soon with petitions unless you're asking to change a park name and even then it might not even see a desk. Unless you're planning a coup I doubt any of your petitions and letters will do anything. If you really want to break *****, each week I send my advertising mail to the parliament address. I'm just helping them with saving money as a concerned citizen, who knows if they need 10% off duct cleaning. At least I'm helping.*(also, amex would always send me a creditcard app so I resent them pizzapizza flyers, they have stopped sending me stuff, so they know to stop giving me free ammo (self addressed envelopes).


btw, lets keep Wayne Gretzky out of this. Nobody should ever give him a ticket no matter what, he's above the law. Let him rape and pillage, he's his own dynasty damn it.