Stunt Driving Ruled Unconstitutional in Ontario?

On September 4th 2009, Justice G.J. Griffin overturned a conviction of Stunt Driving that Jane Raham, a grandmother from Oakville, received from an earlier court date. During this appeal decision, Justice Griffin ruled that a section of the controversial stunt driving law in Ontario is, “unconstitutional as it creates an absolute liability offence for which one can be imprisoned for six months, contrary to Section 7 of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” This decision has been a long awaited one, especially by people facing a stunt driving conviction that feel it is an unjust charge against them.

Now, before you go rip up that stunt driving ticket you received last week and excessively speed down the highway in celebration, you should first realize that this in no way will make your ticket automatically void, nor will it stop police officers from issuing stunt driving tickets. It is also still legal for an officer to impound your car and suspend your licence on the spot if you are charged with stunt driving or speed racing.

Only a section of the law has been deemed unconstitutional and that is to do with a speeding offence (which is considered an absolute liability offence) being charged under the “name” of Stunt Driving (which is a strict liability offence) which potentially has a jail sentence associated with it.

An Absolute Liability Offence is an offence that does not allow for a defence of due diligence. This means that the prosecution is only required to prove that the accused performed the prohibited act. Speeding under section 128 of the Highway traffic Act is an absolute liability offence because the officer only has to prove that you were speeding and there is no defence that you can rebut with. Not knowing that the speed limit dropped or, as in the Raham case, passing a truck out of fear are explanations and cannot be a defence for the act of speeding. If the officer has proper evidence against you in court, you WILL be found guilty of the ticket no matter what the excuse. (Life or death emergencies are the exception)

A Strict Liability Offence is an offence where, once the accused has been proven to have committed the offence, the accused is able to put forth a defence of due diligence. This means that even if they did clearly commit the prohibited act, they are given the opportunity to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that they did everything possible to prevent the act from happening or that there were extenuating circumstances that created the prohibited act.

In the original trial for Raham, the Justice of Peace, J. Chiang, convicted Raham of stunt driving because the officer had ample proof that she did indeed speed. He did not, however, take into account Raham’s testimony with reasoning of why she was speeding and whether her testimony gave rise to a due diligence defence. By disregarding any due diligence, Justice of the Peace Chiang proceeded as if the matter was an absolute liability offence where Raham was actually charged with stunt driving which is a strict liability offence. In the appeal, Judge Griffin noted, “He did this in my view because the reality of the situation is that section 3(7) of Regulation 455/07 is a speeding offence, albeit a speeding offence by another name namely, stunt driving. One is reminded of the words of William Shakespeare from Romeo and Juliet, ‘What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.’"

This stunt driving law created uproar from the start with the general public and law professionals alike, that could clearly see the flaws in the law. As we have stated in a previous blog, there are many reasons we at Traffic Ticket Solutions feel that this law is unconstitutional, but this ruling was strictly about the simple fact that an accused could receive jail time for a stunt driving offence even if the only reason they received this offence was because they were speeding.

So what exactly has this ruling changed??

If you are an excessive speeder that drives in a manner that is outlined as the definition of a “stunt” or “race” as outlined in the HTA… nothing! There are rumours and speculations on the internet asking if this means that you cannot be pulled over for speeding or charged with a stunt driving ticket because of this ruling and that is absolutely not true. Officers issued many stunt driving tickets over the long weekend as speed racers and stunt drivers are still able to be charged with the section 172.1 stunt driving. “We’re continuing to do business as normal,” Sgt. Dave Woodford of the OPP stated. The only difference is that it is now unconstitutional to convict an accused that received a stunt driving charge solely on the fact that they were speeding. However, Brendan Crawley, a spokesman for the attorney general’s department had stated that, “We will be seeking leave to appeal the decision of the Ontario Court of Justice. In interim, people should understand that the street racing provisions are still in effect and police can still lay charges.”

If you have a stunt driving ticket that you would like advice on, call a professional to help you determine which course of action you should take with your specific case. Traffic Ticket Solutions always offers free, friendly and informative legal advice and can answer any questions that you may have in regards to your situation.

We will regularly be updating the status of the appeal of this decision and what it means to stunt driving charges in the future.

OPP Officer Charged with Falsely Charging Drivers with Stunt Driving

In late May 2009, 12 year veteran of the OPP, Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer, 49, was charged with 3 counts of breach of trust and one count of attempting to obstruct justice for allegedly charging three drivers with false speeding and/or stunt driving tickets. The OPP have not released any information on what the catalyst may have been to trigger the investigation or what Mahoney-Bruer’s motive was, but The Toronto Star reported that “owners and managers of Mississauga towing companies say OPP detectives have been asking them if they had ever paid Mahoney-Bruer to use their services or heard about Mahoney-Bruer allegedly receiving kickbacks from other towing companies.”

Since the charges were laid, Mahoney-Bruer was suspended with pay and was scheduled to appear in court on July 13th 2009. Information on the proceedings of this court date has yet to be released.

Since this incident first came available to the public, we at Traffic Ticket Solutions have received numerous calls from concerned clients wondering if this could happen with one police officer, could the officer that charged them be wrong too? As in any profession, obviously human error can occur when police officers issue traffic tickets. If they didn’t, services such as ours would not exist! Clients hire us because they feel an injustice has been done and to find any mistakes an officer may have made in the process in issuing them the ticket. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the officer’s intentionally make these mistakes, but human error is unavoidable and the case of Mahoney-Bruer is definitely not the norm.

Two of the allegedly false charges laid were Section 172.1 of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) Stunt Driving / Speed Racing. Included with this charge is an immediate roadside licence suspension of 7 days and roadside vehicle seizure, leaving the accused and all occupants of the car on the side of the road to find another form of transportation. It is no secret that speed racers and stunt drivers are a danger to all drivers and harsh penalties should be enforced to stop the unnecessary deaths caused by these situations. Unfortunately these racers are most often not the ones being stopped for the new section 172 Stunt Driving law. The majority of the people we see charged with these offences are everyday people that made an inadvertent error. We aren’t saying that makes it right, however we also believe that this law could be supplying too much power to the charging officers. In Ontario, you are innocent until proven guilty, so why does this law grant the officer the ability to asses your guilt on the spot and suspend your licence and impound your car for 7 days? What if you are found innocent of the charge because of an officer’s mistake like the three wrongly accused by Mahoney-Bruer? You would still be responsible for all of the towing and impounding fees for your car, not to mention any monetary loss you may have incurred not being able to drive to work or school, etc. We have seen these losses climb into the thousands of dollar range for some of our clients. That is a pretty big loss for someone who may have not done anything wrong! This doesn’t even cover the possibility that the car does not even belong to the offending person. John Doe may have been Racing at 50 over the limit while driving his friends car that he took without permission. Now we have a situation where his friend, who had absolutely nothing to do with the incident, is being punished for Joe’s behavior. Higher fines are one matter, but having an officer being able to be the judge, jury and executioner to decide someone’s guilt at the roadside is too much power, in our opinion and the situation going on right now with Mahoney-Bruer is a perfect example of this.
The Toronto Star has also reported that “OPP spokesperson Insp. Dave Ross said police are working with the Crown to withdraw charges laid against the three drivers by Mahoney-Bruer. Ross said the force is also reviewing other charges where Mahoney-Bruer was involved as an investigator, but ‘we haven’t yet determined the scope of that review.’”

If you have an upcoming court date for a ticket laid by Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer or a past ticket that you were found guilty of, Traffic Ticket Solutions can help. Call us at 1.877.TTS.WINS for a free consultation and quote for your case.

Below are some links to news stories regarding Sgt. Dennis Mahoney-Bruer:

Jun 05, 2009 The Toronto Star
“250 Cases Under Review in OPP Officer Probe”

June 4, 2009 The Toronto Star
“OPP Asks if Tow-truck Firms Paid Off Policeman”

May 30, 2009 The Toronto Star
“Officer Accused of Falsely Charging Drivers”

May 29,2009 CBC News
“OPP Officer Charged With Obstruction of Justice”