|
|
1. Driving dog gg
2.
 Originally Posted by gabe
details of how you argued?
I presented the argument that I was presented with a situation of emergent and imminent danger. I went on to argue that I had no other legal alternative than to continue through the intersection and more harm would have been caused if I did not take the action that I did. I also emphasized the prevalence of abnormal and horrible weather and driving conditions through the cops written notes and through hourly environment canada weather reports for the night before and morning of. I was also very fortunate that my very leading and suggestive cross examination questions were answered perfectly by the cop including; Admission that I was driving under 40 km/h (yes km) in a 60 km/h zone and therefore taking precaution for bad driving conditions, that I was possibly apporaching the traffic light when it was yellow not red (important), that if I had slid into the intersection I would have almost surely caused an accident.
I think that's hilarious that the CP is going to apeal. Does he not have more important things going on in the day? Where do you live, Riverdale? <---- nerdy Archies reference
I guess so, I could tell that It definately burned the CP's chops after the decision was read. He argued that because it was an absolute liability he had to appeal, thats why I want a better understanding of absolute liability vs. defence of necessity for the appeal. And dont worry Ive got like 100 archie comics stashed in my bathroom somewhere from back in the day. (they make good toilet reading, lol)
Circumstances around alleged running of the red light offense? What exactly is a defense of necessity?
Cirumstances, I approached a traffic light on a downslope during inclement weather conditions and could not stop, and in turn made the consious decision to accelerate through the intersection before the vehicles waiting at the intersection were able to enter. I was charged with failing to stop for a red indication traffic light. Basically as I was going down a slope approaching a green traffic light it turned yellow, and I was unable to stop, even while travelling slowly, so I sped up and went through as it was red and the cop was waiting at the red light going down the intersecting street.
The defence of necessity is basically;
Three elements are required for a successful defence of necessity :
1. the accused must be in imminent peril or danger
2. the accused must have had no reasonable legal alternative to the course of action he or she undertook
3. the harm inflicted by the accused must be proportional to the harm avoided by the accused
|
snowboard_31 : 1 , Canadian court: 0
Reply With Quote
