Join Date: Mar 2008
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
No prob......Just remember that in order to violate a law, you must violate all elements of the crime- So one must "parse" the law (break in into individual elements) to determine whether or not you in fact violated the law, and all elements must be satisfied in order to convict.
In your case, I do not believe that a violation exists because all of the elements of the "crime" are not satisfied. Here's what you said the ticket read, and it appears that this is verbatim as written:
"Contrary to 111 (2). 111 (2) says: (2) No person shall operate or permit to be operated upon a highway a motor vehicle that carries a load or draws a vehicle that carries a load unless the load is loaded, bound, secured, contained or covered so that no portion of the load may become dislodged or fall, leak, spill or blow from the vehicle. 2002, c. 18, Sched. P, s. 26."
O.K., the section says you must load, bind, secure, contain or cover the load so it doesn't leave the truck. No rocks left the truck, right? I know it sounds like splittng hairs, but you weren't hauling a load of dust, so the dust that left your truck was not part of the load, right?
You do not have to do all of the steps listed (load, bind, secure, contain, cover) because the word "and" is not between each of them. This means that you must perform only the measures listed in order to prevent the next part, the load to dislodge, fall, leak, spill, or blow from the vehicle, which you did. No rocks left the truck.
Officer wanted to write you for something, and the only thing he could find after 7 miles of following you was a very loose interpretation of the section he cited you for. Bad ticket, Bored cop.