×

Loading...
Ad by
Ad by

你这不是乱说一气吗?跟警察穿一条裤子就对吗?还讲不讲原则呀?要是大家都按你的方针走,有亡国,亡民的危险吆。请看下面的观点:

本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛“Let's look at this from a different perspective.:

You are thinking of pleading guilty, just because you really did speed, right? Do you really understand what the charge is? In a criminal trial, the defendant will be denied a guilty plea if the judge feels that the defendant didn't fully understand what the charge meant, or the defendant's rights not fully explained to him. Also, if the police obtained evidence illegally, even though the facts point out that the defendant should be convicted, the charge(s) will still be dismissed. If you do not go for a trial you'll never know if the Crown's evidence is illegally obtained or not. For example, if the police were to put a hidden camera in your car to videotape your speedometer, the evidence so obtained will be considered illegal. Remember? You are being charged "operating a motor vehicle in excess of the posted speed limit on a provincial highway". Do you fully understand what that means and do you really know if the police obtained evidence legally? i.e. Do you know if the radar/lidar was setup correctly? Do you know the police has had adequate radar/lidar training? Do you know whether the speed limit sign was erected properly according to the provincial regulations (i.e. has to be no higher/lower than a certain height and from a certain distance of the edge of the road, etc). Pleading guilty to a charge you do not fully understand is obstruction of justice.“更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下茶话 / 社会 / 看到有人为了赖掉一两百块钱的交通违章罚款,不惜钻法律空子,因此而浪费了纳税人的钱去支付法官,警察,翻译额外的工作时间还有其他法庭费用,这些算起来至少要几百块钱吧..
    我觉得加拿大类似的诉讼程序应该改一下,打官司可以,但如果输了,你要支付所有的法庭费用,省得让所有纳税人帮你背书,对付刁民只有这样了...
    • 知道“ 你有权保持沉默 ” 这句话吧,google一下围绕这句话的历史沿革,拜托!
    • 你这不是乱说一气吗?跟警察穿一条裤子就对吗?还讲不讲原则呀?要是大家都按你的方针走,有亡国,亡民的危险吆。请看下面的观点:
      本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛“Let's look at this from a different perspective.:

      You are thinking of pleading guilty, just because you really did speed, right? Do you really understand what the charge is? In a criminal trial, the defendant will be denied a guilty plea if the judge feels that the defendant didn't fully understand what the charge meant, or the defendant's rights not fully explained to him. Also, if the police obtained evidence illegally, even though the facts point out that the defendant should be convicted, the charge(s) will still be dismissed. If you do not go for a trial you'll never know if the Crown's evidence is illegally obtained or not. For example, if the police were to put a hidden camera in your car to videotape your speedometer, the evidence so obtained will be considered illegal. Remember? You are being charged "operating a motor vehicle in excess of the posted speed limit on a provincial highway". Do you fully understand what that means and do you really know if the police obtained evidence legally? i.e. Do you know if the radar/lidar was setup correctly? Do you know the police has had adequate radar/lidar training? Do you know whether the speed limit sign was erected properly according to the provincial regulations (i.e. has to be no higher/lower than a certain height and from a certain distance of the edge of the road, etc). Pleading guilty to a charge you do not fully understand is obstruction of justice.“更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
      • criminal trial和交通违法本身就不应该放在一起类比,否则一个法庭就可以了,为什么会有小额法庭这样的其他司法部门?所以不同性质,严重程度的本来就需要不同的法律程序.违反交通法规使用另一套程序完全合理...
        • 交通法规问题有可能涉及刑事问题,这就是为什么事情要搞个水落石出。让所有的人心服口服,不留后患。只有这样做才有可能维持社会的稳定和持续发展。这也正是中国当今学习加拿大经验,急需解决的问题。
          • 那仅仅是有可能,有几起交通违章涉及刑事问题?比如说你车牌过期?如果涉及刑事问题就走刑事案件的程序不就行了..
            • 没那么简单,我还在研究这个问题。。。
      • 很有意思的观点,看来从多方面看问题很有启发性
    • 合法避税
      • 我没有说他们现在这么做违法,就象有人钻法律漏洞避税,虽然合法,但伤害了社会公平,所以税法就会被修正,弥补法律空子...我现在提议就是去改变去弥补漏洞...
    • 对!支持!但是,平等和公正是有代价的,这些钱花得应该值吧。另外,理论和实用也是两回事,正确的理论,实际真的用时才发现有很大的问题。象你的理论,实施时要求法官警察翻译都绝对无误,否则,就会制作很多怨气,埋在百姓中。
      爆发起来就不得了。
    • 同意。x38说公平和平等是有代价的,但这个代价不应该由无关的第三方纳税人付。在中国打官司也是谁输了谁出法庭费用。
      • 你说的是理论。那实用呢?
      • 错误。 这就像交保险, 如果依靠一个人的财力,非常容易把那个人搞的破产。 更何况官司输了并不一定那个人就有罪, 否则一审就把他搞破产了, 谁还敢或有钱经历上诉。
    • 这是人的基本权利,不是钻什么空子。好好读读Canadian charter of rights and freedoms-Legal Rights.
      • 我说不允许他们打官司了吗?有人明明是违法了,而是寄希望于警察或者翻译不出庭而躲掉罚款,不是钻空子是什么?
        • 那为什么多数情况下警察会主动和那些人和解? 作为公务员和执法者不是纵容违章?
          • 那时因为没有那么多警力去上庭,浪费时间在这些小事情上面.你愿意警察不去巡逻,不去维护治安,到法庭里为100块钱的案子浪费半天的时间去作证吗?而且如果他们退说身体不适,翻译不在.肯定还不只半天,
            • 那为啥不一刀切:必须交罚款, 没有上庭一说(象中国:关系除外)。因为这儿是民主社会给你说话的机会。 但是如果象你这样的人移民多了占了大多数,可能会改会中国的模式把。
              • 当然有可能警察误判,所以要上诉,但如果按照我的提议,那些钻法律空子的人就不敢钻空子了,上庭的基本上都是真正需要申诉的,所以就有足够的警力上庭作证了.不会每个案子草率处理,才能维护社会公平.
                • 如果打这种官司如果输了的自己出钱, 大部分人会忘而却步:1,官司的钱比罚款高许多; 2,普通人和警察比是相对的弱者。 长此以往民众容易行成逆来顺受, 许多正义得不到伸张, 容易集权社会。
                • 正是那些钻法律空子的人推动了法律的完整和神圣。
            • 问题是当今警察把罚款成了任务,变成了赚钱工具,不去维护治安了。我们有义务把颠倒的世界扶正。
              • 你以为这是中国,警察需要你的罚款发奖金吗?你那点罚款还不够支付处理你的案子需要的费用呢...
                • 你还嫌少?告诉你吧,停车和超速罚款是某些城镇政府的主要财经来源。罚款的目的和用途不是你想象的那样好。
                  • 你告诉我有什么用?有证据吗?
                    • 有,如果按你的方针办我先在就出$330+邮寄或$3的信用卡费。
                    • 有啊, 这次多伦多警察罢工几天就工会就给市府捎话意思是我们罢工不但不执行公务, 市府每天还少收不少罚款哪。
        • 那只能是说明执法和审判机构的资源不足,不能说明有人想钻空子。
          • 你愿意花你的税钱去雇佣更多的警察,法官还有翻译去处理这些事情吗?反正我不愿意...
            • 那我劝你发动大家多交点税,增加执法和审判机构的资源,把你说的钻空子的人都绳子与法,看他谁敢钻你说的空子。
              • 这些小案子,即便罚款还不够支付处理这些案子需要费用.
                • 这可不是做生意哪。
    • A man can do anything good to him when it is not illegal. If he has no any belief, how can you persuade him? What's good to such people not doing this? For face? Sometimes no other people he knows knows it.
    • 如果赢了,是不是警察出堂费?
      • 俊杰这么愤愤,叫他出。
      • 还不明不白?不管谁赢,谁输,到头来都是你和我这样的老百姓出。
        • 还是不明白呀!!!!!全让警察赢,那不全是司机出?司机支付堂费,政府或许赚多点儿,你和我还少交点儿税呢。