In article . com>,
says...

>Well I suppose you could -if- you had another piece of corroborating
>evidence such as the radar the cop had. This whole thread is
>rediculous. The statement by the lead driver isn't even needed and may
>not even be entered in the report.
>I am all for beating tickets when possible (even when not) but trying
>to get this one pitched on the basis of the lead drivers statement
>ain't gonna fly. Attack it on the cop not estimating the following
>distance/speed accurately - yes, because lead said the following one
>was at same speed - no.

If the officers report says that he observed the car maintaining the
distance while timing the lead car, then he is lying. The fact that he
had to ask the lead driver is proof of this. The officers testimony
that he timed the car in front, also means that the radar reading does
not apply to the car in back. It then comes down to the officers guesstimate
of the follow car, which is suspect since there was a car in front of him.
This cop must have been running low on his quota at the time he did this.
----------------
Alex