R v Meyer

Her Majesty the Queen v. Sharon Meyer

Provincial Court (Criminal Division), Judicial District of York Region
Before His Honour Judge H.E. Zimmerman | August 23, 1984

Background

Sharon Meyer was charged with speeding after being clocked at 77 kilometres per hour in a 60 km/h zone. The case came down to a technical battle over radar evidence — specifically, whether the Crown had properly proven that the radar device was operating accurately and that the officer was qualified to use it.

At trial, Crown counsel Mr. H. Dales presented what seemed like a straightforward speeding case. Defence counsel Mr. F. Streiman, however, wasn't buying it. The transcript reveals a detailed examination of the radar evidence that would ultimately expose fatal gaps in the Crown's case.

Issues

1. Did the Crown prove that the radar device was operating properly and accurately?
2. Did the Crown prove that the officer was qualified to operate the radar equipment?

The Radar Evidence Problem

The court found that while the officer testified about using the radar device, the Crown failed to establish two crucial elements. First, they didn't prove the device was working accurately at the time of the alleged offence. The officer mentioned that radar devices "must be" calibrated and tested, but provided no evidence that this particular device had actually been properly calibrated or tested.

Second, and more critically, the Crown presented no evidence about the officer's training or qualifications to operate radar equipment. The court noted that radar is a "technical device" that requires specific knowledge to operate properly. An officer can't just pick up a radar gun and start using it — they need to understand how it works, how to test it, and how to ensure accurate readings.

The judge emphasized that "before a radar device can be used to give evidence of the operation of a motor vehicle, it must be proved that the radar device was operating properly and was capable of accurately registering speeds, and that the instrument was operated by someone who had sufficient knowledge of the workings of the instrument."

Key Takeaway

Technical evidence requires technical proof — the Crown can't just assume you'll accept that complex equipment works properly.

If you're fighting a radar-based speeding ticket, demand that the Crown prove both that the device was properly calibrated and tested, and that the officer was actually trained and qualified to use it. These aren't minor technicalities — they're fundamental requirements for reliable evidence.