[TChris]

If they were that good at it, then they would sweep down TWO cars when both are speeding rather than cutting the faster car loose.

According to your standard, sure.

An officer has some discretion as to whom he pursues.

If a defendant wants to challenge the officer's accuracy, I'm sure he can do so during trial. If the officer can't consistently estimate speed with reasonable accuracy, then the defendant could be found not guilty.

But this ruling means the burden of proof would be on the defense to show that the officer's estimate was wrong.

[a fool in paradise]

But this ruling means the burden of proof would be on the defense to show that the officer's estimate was wrong.

So the defendent has to prove his innocence rather than the accuser proving guilt.

[CSM]

“But this ruling means the burden of proof would be on the defense to show that the officer’s estimate was wrong.”

In other words, the defense is now carrying the burden to prove innocense.......

If this is such a good decision, why not just allow the officers to write down plate numbers to mail tickets later. Then they could get the multiple speeders and not be bound by their discression to pull one over instead of another...

[TankerKC]

But this ruling means the burden of proof would be on the defense to show that the officer's estimate was wrong.

And you think that's ok?