Fighting Stunt Driving Charges

Drivers with traffic tickets or Summonses for EXCEEDING THE SPEED LIMIT BY 50 KMS/HR OR MORE may also be charged with Stunt Driving which has fines from $2,000 up to $10,000 or to imprisonment of up to 6 months, or to both and their licence may be suspended for up to 2 years on a first conviction and up to 10 years for a subsequent conviction.

Speeding has always been classified as an offence of absolute liability. This means that the prosecution only has to prove the offence has been committed to secure a conviction. There may be reasons or excuses for a person speeding, but they do not constitute a defence to the charge.

Stunt driving on the other hand is classified as strict liability. This means it is open to an accused to show he/she is without negligence and acted with due diligence, taking all reasonable care to avoid the offence charged.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently ruled that when it comes to stunt driving by speeding at a rate of speed that is 50 Kms/hr or more over the speed limit, it is now strict liability not absolute liability and it is open to an accused to show they took all reasonable steps not to exceed the speed limit by 50 Kms/hr or more.

The court also ruled that even if an accused is able to demonstrate due diligence and therefore be found not guilty of performing a stunt, they could still be found guilty of simply speeding.

The definition of Racing was expanded with the introduction of the “Stunt Driving” legislation.

There are now six ways that driving behavior may be considered to be racing.

The penalties are severe with a fines ranging from $2,000 to $10,000, jail up to six months, or to both and up to two years licence suspension for a first offence and up to ten years for any subsequent offence within ten years.

Why fight the charge?

A conviction for racing will most certainly result in a massive increase in insurance, if not an outright cancellation of the policy. Protect your licence and your insurance premiums. Speak to a licensed paralegal at POINTTS before deciding on a course of action you may regret later.

Why POINTTS?

POINTTS’ team of Licensed Paralegals comprised of former police officers and college graduates have been trained to the highest standards and continue to have their skills and knowledge upgraded by their in-house trainer who’s responsible for ensuring all POINTTS paralegals comply with the Law Society of Upper Canada’s continuing professional development requirement.

Why a Licensed Paralegal?

Every charge must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution. POINTTS Licensed Paralegals have the knowledge, skill and experience to know if that burden has been met. A person trying to represent themselves is not likely to know what has to be proven, let alone whether proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We will look at the disclosure, research the relevant case law to be used in your favor and be able to recognize technicalities that would be fatal to the prosecution’s case against you. POINTTS paralegals know how to cross-examine witnesses. When questioning police officers, we know what the answers to technical questions should be so we know if the answer given is the right one, whereas most self-represented defendants would not.

TORONTO - Speeding offences in Ontario have now been divided into two categories as a result of a decision by the province's highest court.

The Ontario Court of Appeal made the distinction between speeding and "aggravated speeding" as it upheld the controversial stunt driving law that carries fines of at least $2,000 and penalties of up to six months in jail for driving more than 50 kilometres over the speed limit.

Drivers convicted of speeding up to 49 kilometres over the limit are subject only to fines and demerit points.

The three-judge panel stated there "was nothing illogical" with treating "speeding simpliciter" and "aggravated speeding" differently under the stunt driving legislation. The Court of Appeal accepted arguments made by the Ontario government that speeding involves a "wide variety" of circumstances and some are "significantly more dangerous" to the public.

The OPP have charged more than 12,000 people with stunt driving offences since the provincial legislation took effect in 2007. Most of those cases have been related to speeding and not other illegal activities under the law, such as street racing or "wheelies" by motorcyclists.

Fatalities on roads patrolled by the OPP have decreased by more than 30% since 2007, and Commissioner Fantino cited enforcement of the stunt driving law as a key reason.

The Court of Appeal decision overturned a lower court ruling that said the stunt driving law was unconstitutional, because one could be convicted simply for speeding more than 50 kilometres over the limit. There was no requirement to prove the driving was part of a race or stunt.

A defendant charged with stunt driving will be permitted to present a "due diligence" defence to show that reasonable steps were taken to speed by less than 50 kilometres per hour.

"I see nothing illogical in treating one as a strict liability offence and the other as an absolute liability offence," wrote Justice David Doherty, with Justices Robert Blair and Kathryn Feldman concurring.

Judge Doherty provided a number of examples where someone speeding might be acquitted of a stunt driving charge, such as pulling out into a passing lane for a few seconds or if the speedometer was malfunctioning. An acquittal on stunt driving charges would still likely result in a conviction for speeding, the court said.

If nothing else, Ontario’s new “street racing” law has made for some amusing police blotter. There was that heavy-footed firefighter who had his emergency vehicle impounded for seven days (he was off-duty when a North Bay cop clocked him at 70 km/h over the limit). Another driver nabbed in the same part of the province also lost his wheels for a week—as did the speeding tow truck driver who came to impound the car. And then, of course, there was Antonio Talarico, the 26-year-old who made headlines across the country last month when his Infiniti G35 was spotted tearing down a Toronto highway at a whopping 250 km/h. His first words after being pulled over? “I’m sorry.”
The Ontario Provincial Police certainly isn’t apologizing. Or laughing. The force says the tough new street racing penalties—including possible prison time for anyone caught driving more than 50 km/h over the limit—are doing exactly what they were designed to do: save lives. In 2008, the law’s first full year on the books, fatalities on OPP-patrolled roads plummeted by almost one-third (from 451 to 322), and in the first three months of 2009 there were 17 speed-related deaths, a 29 per cent drop from the same period last year. 
But 18 months and 11,000 charges after the law was first introduced, police and prosecutors are revving up for a legal showdown that threatens to quash some of cops’ newfound powers—including the luxury of treating every excessive speeder like a hard-core street racer. One justice of the peace has already ruled that a key section of the law is unconstitutional, and if defence lawyers have their way, the province’s highest court will have to weigh in on a question already being asked in traffic courts across Ontario: do jail sentences for speeders violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? 
Adopted in September 2007, Section 172 of Ontario’s Highway Traffic Act was created to crack down on the fast and the furious. Anyone caught racing or “stunting” (doing doughnuts in a parking lot, for example, or cruising around town with a passenger in the trunk) will automatically lose his car and his licence for seven days. If convicted, the penalties range from a minimum fine of $2,000 to six months behind bars. At last count, 24 drivers have served at least one night in jail because they thought they were Paul Tracy.
But the “50 over” provision—though widely supported by the public—presents a constitutional conundrum. Nobody is saying that a jail sentence isn’t appropriate for a pair of reckless pals weaving through traffic on their way to an imaginary finish line. But that off-duty fireman driving 70 km/h over the limit? Or a late-night commuter who’s rushing home? Their infraction—plain old speeding—is already covered in the Highway Traffic Act, and the maximum penalty isn’t anywhere near prison. “At 49 km/h over the speed limit, you’re a member of society and you’re welcome to live amongst us,” says Gary Parker, a paralegal who has represented dozens of drivers netted by the new law. “At 50 over, you’re now a monster worthy of jail. It makes absolutely no sense at all.” 
Simply put, speeding has always been considered an “absolute liability” offence. Once a person is clocked over the limit, there is basically no possible defence (unless he can prove the radar gun was defective). As a trade-off for such swift justice, the Charter guarantees that anyone who commits an absolute liability offence—i.e., he has no fighting chance to defend himself—can’t be locked away. Yet now, thanks to the new stunt-driving legislation, a form of speeding is suddenly punishable with prison. “It is unconstitutional,” says Brian Starkman, a lawyer who specializes in street-racing cases. “You can’t have an absolute liability offence co-exist with the potential for jail. That is settled in law.”
Starkman, among others, has tried to argue that point in court, hoping to have the “50 over” section scratched from the act. The courts have been unsympathetic—until now. Maclean’s has learned that earlier this month, a man in Burlington who was clocked at 60 km/h over the limit had his charges stayed after a justice of the peace, Barbara Waugh, agreed with the constitutional challenge. “I am the first one to win,” says Gary Lewin, the man’s paralegal. “She ruled that speeding is speeding, it is an absolute liability offence, and that the stunt-driving law breaches the Charter because now you can go to jail.” 
Though significant, the decision does not set a precedent. Fellow JPs are free to follow Waugh’s opinion or ignore it. However, two similar cases have already been appealed to a provincial judge, and as the legal arguments creep toward the country’s highest courts, the results may force the Ontario government to raise the checkered flag. “If you’re using a highway as your own personal racetrack, that’s criminal,” Starkman says. “But if all you’re doing is speeding, then you should be charged with speeding.”

Complete this form and receive a FREE consultation and quotation from POINTTS.

Using this contact page is free and without any obligation on your part. The information you provide, including e-mail addresses, is highly confidential and will not be shared with anyone. It enables one of our experienced agents located in your area, to discreetly contact you at a convenient time or you can request an on-line contact.