r v. CHAO LI, 2020 QCCQ 10056

Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions c. Li 2020 QCCQ 10056 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF BEDFORD CITY OF GRANBY «Criminal and penal division» No: 460-61-018417-202 DATE: December 2, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BEFORE MADAM TANYA LAROCQUE, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE AND JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL AND PENAL PROSECUTIONS Prosecutor v.

CHAO LI Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The defendant is accused of driving at a speed of 138 km/h in a 100 km/h zone on highway 10 [1] , on the 12th of October 2019. [ 2 ] On that day, the police officer is using a Laser that he tested at 7:30 before its use and he tested it again after its use at 18:15. The officer tests the laser and it is operating well.

The officer is qualified to operate the Laser since April 2003. [ 3 ] The Court of Appeal, in the D’Astous [2] case, established that the measurements taken with the radar are exact when : 1) The operator is qualified; 2) The radar was tested before and after its use; 3) The test reveal that the radar is functioning well. [ 4 ] To refute the speed captured, the defendant’s proof must be reliable, precise and pertinent to raise reasonable doubt [3] .

This proof must be sufficiently detailed and be based on exact facts and not on simple hypothesis or probabilities that cannot be verified [4] . [ 5 ] It is sufficient that the defendant’s proof tends to demonstrate that the speed measured is not the speed that existed when the infraction was supposedly committed [5] . A reading of the speedometer by the defendant at a moment judged sufficiently close to the place where his speed was captured can raise a reasonable doubt [6] . [ 6 ] The defendant alleges that he never drives that speed.

When the officer captures his speed he is in the left lane, side by side, next to the vehicle he is trying to pass. His speed is less than 120 km/h. [ 7 ] The court has no doubt that the defendant truly believes that he did not drive at 138 km/h that day. However, t he defendant’s testimony is based on driving habits and an estimation of his speed at the moment he was tagged by the Laser.

Therefore, the proof is not precise and based on a hypothesis witch does not raise a reasonable doubt. [ 8 ] Therefore, the proof the infraction is committed is beyond a reasonable doubt and the court must find the defendant guilty. [ 9 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 10 ] DECLARES the defendant guilty of the infraction; [ 11 ] CONDEMS the defendant to pay a fine of 155 $ with costs in the next sixty (60) days of the present judgement.

__________________________________ TANYA LAROCQUE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE and JUDGE Me Juliette Ménard Reid Attorney for the prosecution The defendant is not assisted by an attorney. Date of hearing: November 27, 2020