Ontario’s street racing law has been under the gun since it was passed over two years ago. Among its various criticisms, last week we reported corruption within the OPP ranks. Further deteriorating the validity of the stunt driving law, a judge has ruled that the charges laid against a 62-year-old grandmother are unconstitutional.

Jane Raham was caught speeding near Kaladar, Ontario, while passing a truck on highway 7. Her speed was clocked in at 51 km per hour, I km over the limits for receiving the usual speeding ticket and resulting in a stunt driving charge. Raham’s car was immediately impounded and her license suspended for seven days.

In September, Napanee Judge G.J. Griffin overruled the conviction against Raham. He commented that the grandmother did not fit the typical profile of a stunt-driver and justified his decision by identifying the law as unconstitutional.

From CTV.ca:

The judge said convicting someone who is “morally blameless” of an offence that carries a jail sentence as its penalty breaches the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. “Essentially, his decision was that somebody who is speeding and doing nothing but speeding shouldn’t be exposed to the possibility of a jail sentence,” said Brian Starkman, Raham’s lawyer.

By law, speeding is considered an absolute liability. A driver can’t argue they didn’t know they were speeding and hope to get acquitted. However, the driver could very well be `morally blameless,’ meaning the motorist thought she was going at the speed limit even though she was not, Morton said. “The defence of due diligence is not a defence because of the way the legislation is written,” he told ctvtoronto.ca. “You would still be convicted even if you tried not to speed.”

The Ontario Attorney General has said that it will appeal the judge’s decision. (Stay tuned for future posts as we cover this fascinating case.)

Critics of the street-racing law contend that parts of the legislation are redundant and the definitions outlined are debatable. From thestar.com:

“The law defines stunt driving in several different ways,” Starkman said. “One of them is driving a car while you’re not seated in the driver’s seat. I’d say that’s a pretty good definition of stunt driving.

“But why should driving 50 (km/h) above the speed limit be stunt driving? It’s speeding. There’s another section that deals with speeding, and it already includes penalties for going 50 past the limit and more.”

It is important to note that despite Justice Griffin’s ruling, the law is still being enforced because of a reported 30% decrease in highway fatalities. In addition, the judge’s ruling will not affect street racers, as they would be tried under a different subsection of the law dealing specifically with racing and stunt driving.

However, the hundreds of currently open stunt driving charges now have the opportunity to be argued and dismissed. If you have a speeding ticket or stunt driving charge to fight, contact Legal Action today for a consultation.