How is that possible?

Based

Since you asked...from another article on this:

Careless driving (three counts)

 Driver failing to surrender licence (three counts)

 Failing to surrender inspection schedule (two counts)

 Failing to enter defect in daily inspection report (two counts)

 Improperly driving a commercial motor vehicle with a minor defect in it

 Unnecessary slow driving (two counts)

 Failing to maintain daily log (two counts)

 Failing to take 10 hours off in a day

 Exceeding 13 hours driving time without eight hours off

 Driving after 14 hours on duty without eight hours off

 Driving after 16 hours since last break without eight hours off

 Failing to surrender daily log

 Driver in possession of more that one daily log

 Failing to keep record of duty status

 Failing to manually input information into ELD

 Entering inaccurate information in record 

Aim high

Either the officer in question was being a try hard, or the truck driver was being an ass and the cop decided to make him pay for it.

Driving unnecessarily slow? Where was this? I want to live where these assholes get ticketed.

Edit: Ontario Canada. Of course, couldn't be the US, the Karens would flip the fuck out about having to do the speed limit in the left lane.

> Failing to take 10 hours off in a day

> Exceeding 13 hours driving time without eight hours off

> Driving after 14 hours on duty without eight hours off

> Driving after 16 hours since last break without eight hours off

Being that he was pulled over twice, and given tickets both times, I'm pretty sure only two of these are valid.

Amung some of the other ones that are duplicates.

When do we revoke licences, exactly?

We was stopped multiple times by multiple officers in several locations along Ontario. After multiple complaints to police re dangerous driving

I mean like not a big fan of cops but this time it doesn’t appear too overzealous.

>I'm pretty sure

AKA: an inaccurate guess that disagrees with the law.

Don’t underestimate Brampton drivers, they are the worst in the world

>AKA: an inaccurate guess that disagrees with the law.

>Purpose

>The purpose of section 11(h) is to protect against double jeopardy (Whaling, supra at paragraph 33). Generally, the principle against double jeopardy prevents double punishment for the same acts, as well as the unwarranted harassment of an accused by multiple prosecutions.

Charging a driver for being over-hours 4 different ways is still one act of being over hours.

>(i) Being tried again for the same offence

>This aspect of section 11(h) “is directed at preventing the State from making repeated attempts to convict an individual” (Shubley, supra at 15). In other words, it precludes both (a) trying a person again for an offence that he or she has already been acquitted of, and (b) trying a person again for an offence that he or she has already been found guilty and punished for (Whaling, supra at paragraphs 54, 56).

>(ii) Two offences the same

>The two offences with which the accused is charged or punished must be the same. They must contain the same elements and constitute one and the same offence arising out of the same set of circumstances (R. v. Wigglesworth, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 541; Van Rassel, supra).

Based on the law above, I am pretty sure.

We're ignore the 7-hour time difference and Just go with the fact that you don't understand what double jeopardy is.

Double jeopardy is for the EXACT SAME crime - as in the same charges from the same incident that happened at the same time. Double jeopardy isn't killing someone and never being able to be charged with murder again and it isn't getting out of every speeding ticket because you got one in your life.

It may be possible to argue double jeopardy if he had received the ticket and then a few miles down the road while in route to a place that he can bring himself into compliance he received the same tickets but that isn't what happened.

What happened is he broke the law.

7 hours later he broke the law again

He doesn't get a get out of jail free card just because he already broke those laws.

>It may be possible to argue double jeopardy if he had received the ticket and then a few miles down the road while in route to a place that he can bring himself into compliance he received the same tickets but that isn't what happened.

>Double jeopardy is for the EXACT SAME crime - as in the same charges from the same incident that happened at the same time.

He was stopped twice, given tickets twice, but has four tickets for driving more than 8 hours without a break.

>What happened is he broke the law.

>7 hours later he broke the law again

And got 4 tickets for driving without an 8 hour break, the EXACT SAME CRIME.

That is why I said "pretty sure only two of those are valid". One from each time he was pulled over, totalling two.