R v Milelli

Her Majesty The Queen v. Fernando Milelli

Provincial Offences Court, Brampton
His Honour Judge R.T. Weseloh | December 28, 1988

Background

Fernando Milelli was charged with speeding after being clocked by radar. During cross-examination, the officer admitted he was not a qualified radar technician and could not repair the machine. More damning, he testified that he did not perform the tests required by the manufacturer's instructions because he wasn't qualified to do them. The officer stated he simply wasn't an "expert" and couldn't follow the technical procedures spelled out in the Muni-Quip MDR 1 Track Radar Operating Instructions manual.

The prosecution argued that an officer doesn't need to be qualified as a technician — that an operator can use radar equipment without being able to repair it or perform all the technical tests. They asked the court to accept the radar evidence despite these admissions.

Issues

1. Can radar evidence be admitted when the officer admits he's not qualified to perform the manufacturer's required tests?
2. What level of technical competence must a radar operator demonstrate before their evidence becomes admissible?

The Qualification Requirement

Judge Weseloh was unimpressed with the officer's admissions. The court found that the officer had failed to establish the basic foundation required for radar evidence. The judge noted that the officer "simply cannot be qualified" because he admitted he wasn't capable of following the manufacturer's specifications and couldn't perform the required tests.

The court distinguished between being an "operator" and being qualified to give evidence about radar readings. While an officer doesn't need to be able to repair the equipment, they must be able to demonstrate they can properly operate it according to the manufacturer's instructions and perform the accuracy checks required. The officer's own testimony showed he fell short of this standard.

Most importantly, the court emphasized that the officer "should be guided by all the manufacturer's instructions" and must be able to follow the proper procedures. When an officer admits they can't do the fundamental things the manual requires, their evidence lacks the necessary foundation.

Key Takeaway

An officer who admits they can't perform the manufacturer's required tests has destroyed the foundation for their radar evidence.

If you're facing a radar charge, ask detailed questions about the officer's qualifications and whether they actually performed all the tests specified in the equipment manual. Their own admissions of incompetence can be your best defence.