Traffic Court Is Not a Customer Service Counter
Each week across British Columbia, hundreds of drivers walk into Provincial Court clutching some papers, thinking about their rehearsed speech, and labouring under a fundamental misunderstanding of what is about to happen. Often people assume that there will be some compassion. Often they assume that if they simply explain it, somebody important will think of the logic in their reasoning.
Most people assume that the process is more of an administrative appointment.
They expect an informal meeting, perhaps around a conference table with an arbitrator or a hearing officer, where common sense and goodwill prevail. Most self-represented drivers believe they can simply step forward, explain that traffic was unusually heavy, that their speedometer seemed off, or that the police officer was an overbearing jerk, and the court will dismissed ticket.
We want you to know that this is not how it works. Assumption like this lead directly to a conviction.
In October, we are running a weekly four-part series breaking down the procedural realities of BC Traffic Court. Over the coming weeks, we will peel back the curtain on the technical traps, strict rules of evidence, and courtroom procedures that catch unrepresented drivers completely unprepared.
A full-on trial
The first reality check is straightforward: a traffic dispute is not an explanation session. It is a full trial under the Offence Act, governed by the same formal rules of evidence that apply to so-called quasi-criminal and criminal matters in Provincial Court.
When your case is called, you are standing before a Judicial Justice of the Peace. The police officer, or on occasion Crown counsel, prosecutes the ticket. The hearing adheres to the formal rules and structure of a trial. That is, Crown calls evidence of the offence followed by cross-examination, potential defence evidence, cross examination of the defence witnesses and closing submissions. Then the judicial justice renders a decision. This is not a discussion. The decision is final.
If you attempt to interrupt the police officer while they give evidence to say, “that is not what happened,” the court will immediately silence you.
If you attempt to show the justice a letter from your mechanic or an email from a passenger, it will be excluded as inadmissible hearsay. If you fail to challenge the officer during cross-examination, you may lose the right to contradict that evidence later when you speak.
Traffic court exists to determine whether the prosecution can prove every single essential element of the alleged offence beyond a reasonable doubt using strictly admissible evidence. Judicial Justices do not dismiss violation tickets because a driver has a clean record or presents as a reasonable person, or has what they think is a good excuse. They dismiss tickets when the prosecution fails to establish its case under the law.
Nearly 30 years ago, when we first began defending driving offences, virtually no lawyers went to traffic court. We are the original BC Driving Lawyers. We recognized from day one that protecting your driving record demands technical, procedural advocacy in a formal courtroom.
If you have received a violation ticket, call the original BC Driving Lawyers at 604-608-1200. We can help.