56-year-old Niagara Falls woman That Was Stopped from driving for a year caught with high tech camera…

56-Year-Old Niagara Falls Woman Banned from Driving for a Year Caught with High-Tech Camera

Niagara Falls, ON – A 56-year-old woman from Niagara Falls, previously banned from driving for a year, is facing new scrutiny after being caught with a high-tech camera system in her possession during a routine police stop. Authorities are investigating whether the device was being used to skirt her driving ban or involved in other potentially illicit activity.

The woman, whose name has not been released due to pending charges, was initially prohibited from driving in early 2024 after a series of traffic violations that culminated in a DUI conviction. As part of her sentence, she was barred from operating any motor vehicle for 12 months and was warned by the court that any breach of the ban could result in further criminal charges.

According to Niagara Regional Police, officers stopped the woman on Wednesday afternoon while conducting a vehicle-related investigation near Lundy’s Lane. Though she was not driving at the time, officers say they found a compact but advanced surveillance-grade camera system in her bag. The camera—equipped with motion sensors, night vision, and real-time GPS tracking—raised immediate red flags.

“This isn’t your standard consumer device,” said Constable Lisa Moretti of the Niagara Regional Police. “It’s a type of equipment typically used in private investigation or vehicle tracking. Given her driving prohibition, we have to consider whether it was intended to help monitor law enforcement or avoid detection.”

Authorities have not yet confirmed how the woman acquired the device or whether she had assistance. The camera system is reportedly valued at over $1,500 and was pre-programmed with several locations of interest, including traffic monitoring points, speed traps, and common police patrol zones in the Niagara region.

“What concerns us is the apparent intention behind the device,” said Moretti. “If this was used to plan routes or observe where police might be stationed, it could represent an effort to undermine the court’s driving ban.”

While she was not caught behind the wheel, investigators are now working to determine if she has violated the terms of her prohibition through indirect means. Surveillance footage and data logs from the camera are currently being analyzed.

The incident has reignited discussions around how modern technology is sometimes used to bypass legal restrictions. Experts say it’s part of a growing trend.

“People under driving bans or other restrictions are increasingly turning to tools that were once only available to private detectives or security professionals,” said Dr. Mark Steele, a criminologist at Brock University. “This raises challenges for law enforcement and courts who are dealing with an entirely new category of potential violations.”

Neighbors in her quiet Niagara Falls neighborhood expressed surprise at the news. One resident, who declined to be named, described her as “quiet, but always on edge since her license was suspended.” Another mentioned they had seen her “walking with purpose down to the end of the street often, phone out, maybe filming or recording something.”

Whether she will face charges related to the possession or potential use of the camera remains to be seen. Police have indicated that any charges would depend on what they uncover in the digital logs and footage stored on the device. If it’s found she used it to facilitate driving or track police presence with the intent to drive, she could face obstruction charges or additional penalties.

“At this time, the matter is still under investigation,” said Constable Moretti. “We remind anyone subject to court orders, including driving bans, that attempting to outsmart the system using technology still counts as non-compliance.”

The woman was released pending further investigation. Police say they are also exploring whether others may have been involved in providing the technology or aiding in its setup.

As authorities continue to probe the case, it serves as a cautionary tale about how even indirect actions can have serious legal consequences. In an era where surveillance and tracking technology is more accessible than ever, the line between curiosity and criminal intent can blur quickly.