- Oct 10, 1999
- 31,003
- 12,545
- 136
I knew this was coming sooner or later.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/692925
Update: a second Judge has now declared the law unconstitional but the police are still charging people under that law.
http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/729505--ontario-stands-firm-on-street-racing-law?bn=1
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/692925
Reckless street racers will still be charged and convicted under the stunt racing laws, but convicting someone on excessive speed alone - as in Raham's case - is now considered unconstitutional, unless Justice Griffins' ruling is successfully appealed.
The law, enacted two years ago, requires no criminal intent when speeding is 50 km/h over the speed limit; proof alone of someone doing this is sufficient for a conviction, something considered "absolutely liability" under law.
Essentially, the conviction is automatic - and upon conviction there must be a fine of between $2,000 and $10,000, which may also be combined with jail term of no more than six months. The original Justice of the Peace decision found her guilty, but reduced that minimum fine even lower because of the circumstances.
Since punishment may also include jail, the judge ruled this violated Section 7 of the Charter, which specifies no one can be deprived of "life, liberty and security of the person... except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."
This section is "unconstitutional as it creates an absolute liability offence for which one can be imprisoned," the judge wrote.
Update: a second Judge has now declared the law unconstitional but the police are still charging people under that law.
http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/729505--ontario-stands-firm-on-street-racing-law?bn=1
Justice Peter West, a provincial court judge in Newmarket, found that an accused driver's Charter rights are "clearly infringed" by the potential jail time because the law doesn't permit the person to put forward a defence.
"There is no air of reality to the Crown's submissions that a defendant charged with stunt driving under section 172 of the Highway Traffic Act ... has an available defence of due diligence," West stated in a written ruling.
"The possibility of the imposition of up to six months imprisonment thereby renders this section unconstitutional."
In making his ruling, West dismissed stunt-driving charges against Alexandra Drutz, who was reportedly clocked going more than 150 km/h while driving on Hwy. 407 in March 2008.
Last edited: