Justice sides with St. Albert accused in Barrhead traffic trial

BARRHEAD - An Alberta circuit justice did not believe a St. Albert man's entire story, but she found that the evidence he presented cast enough doubt to find him not guilty.

On Nov. 12, Justice Carrie-Ann Downey found Daniel John Van Muyen, who represented himself, not guilty of exceeding the speed limit by 47 km/h during a Barrhead Court of Justice sitting.

The offence is alleged to have taken place on July 13, 2024.

"I don't entirely believe you, but I am left in doubt of what happened in this particular circumstance," she said. "But please do not drive like that again."

Alleged facts

Provincial traffic Crown prosecutor R. Rees called County of Barrhead community peace officer Shae Guy to testify to the event.

He said on the date in question, he was travelling southbound on Highway 33 when he observed the suspect vehicle, a Toyota Sienna, travelling northbound on the same road, rapidly passing a vehicle towing an enclosed horse trailer.

"I estimated the target vehicle's speed to be about 150 km/h in the 100 km/h," Guy said, adding it was then that he utilized his radar device, which devised the vehicle was travelling 147 km/h.

He said he then conducted a traffic stop and issued the accused a speeding ticket.

Guy noted, along with the accused, that an adult female was in the passenger seat, and two young children were in the rear seats.

Rees asked Guy about traffic and road conditions and if he ever lost sight of the accused's vehicle before the traffic stop.

Guy replied that he always had the accused's vehicle in sight and that the traffic was light, with only the two vehicles (the vehicle pulling the horse trailer and the accused's) vehicles on the road.

He also noted that the offence happened on a straight stretch of the road and that visibility was good.

During his cross-examination, Van Muyen asked Guy if he knew how fast the vehicle with the horse trailer was travelling.

Van Muyen, testifying on his own behalf, estimated that the vehicle with the horse trailer was travelling "95ish" and opted to pass it because it was throwing "small pebbles" at his vehicle.

"I felt, with that happening and the light traffic, that it would be safer to be in front of it," he said. "It wasn't because I wanted to get where I was going quicker."

Van Muyen added that as he started to pass the vehicle, it began to "speed up, so I had to have more punch with my vehicle to get past it."

He also said they were approaching a slight incline or hill in the road, hampering his visibility of what was coming.

"So I thought I should get out and in front of this vehicle quickly for the safety of my family," Van Muyen said. "He did clock me at a higher speed, but it was because I thought it was unsafe to be behind this truck and trailer." 

In her cross-examination, Rees asked for clarification on the "small pebbles" the horse trailer was throwing.

"What exactly were they doing, and how far were you following behind the trailer," she asked.

Van Muyen replied that the pebbles were hitting the bumper of his car, but he was concerned that they could hit his windshield. He added that he estimated the trailer was roughly two vehicle lengths ahead.

She also asked why the accused did not slow down and fall back behind the trailer instead of speeding up to 147 km/h to pass the vehicle.

"I was already more than 50 per cent past him, so I thought it would be safer to continue," Van Muyen answered.

Barry Kerton, TownandCountryToday.com