Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

78 km/h in a 50 zone: B.C. speeding appeal denied

A B.C. Supreme Court judge said a laser device recorded the speed at 97 km/h.
speed-radar-gun
Police officer holding laser speed gun near police car on highway background.

A B.C. Supreme Court judge has denied the appeal of a man whose speeding case has been ordered returned to provincial court for a new trial.

Justice Patrice Abrioux said Jefferson Thachuk was charged with speeding and excessive speeding under the Motor Vehicle Act.

In a short provincial court trial, he was convicted of speeding but not excessive speeding, somewhere in the Lower Mainland.

The Crown successfully appealed, and Justice David Crerar remitted the matter to the provincial court for a re-trial.

Then, Thachuk sought leave to appeal in B.C. Supreme Court.

What happened

Abrioux said a constable was parked by the side of the road marked as a 50 km/h speed zone.

The officer saw Thachuk’s vehicle approaching and visually estimated Thachuk’s speed as 90 km/h. He used his laser device to confirm the speed, which was recorded at 97 km/h.

The judicial justice ruled she could not accept the evidence of the laser readout beyond a reasonable doubt without admissible evidence about its accuracy.

Abrioux said that left the court with the constable’s visual estimate and his margin of error, which he conceded on cross-examination could be up to 12 km/h.

“As such, the Crown had only proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Thachuk was travelling 78 km/h. This made out the offence of speeding, for which he was convicted and fined, but not excessive speeding,” Abrioux said. “The Crown appealed.”

The judge allowed the appeal and returned the case to provincial court.

Abrioux said the sole issue in the new appeal was whether Thachuk should be granted leave to appeal Crerar’s decision.

Thachuk said the judge erred in conflating the admissibility of laser readings but Abrioux said that avenue of appeal had little chance of success.

He also dismissed other grounds for appeal.

“I see very little merit in any of the grounds of appeal,” Abrioux ruled. “Accordingly, I conclude that it is not in the interests of justice to grant leave and the application is dismissed.”

$(function() { $(".nav-social-ft").append('
  • '); });