I'm going to guess that mine isn't the first "speeding ticket" question ever posted here, but I'm having a tough time trying to make my case that what the officer claims was virtually impossible given the distance that he claims to have done it in. IF this is not the correct forum or is an inappropriate question for here, please be gentle with the butt-kicking, I just need the help and hopefully I can articulate the problem well enough to make it easy enough to determine. The total possible distance within the claim I was paced for 3/10ths of a mile is 2.0 miles from maximum Point A to stop light at Point B. From a dead stop, police officer claims he saw me go past. From a dead stop, parked on a side street/driveway, pursuit begins. The claim, I was doing an astounding 60mph in a 35mph zone. His method of timing was "pacing" using his car's speedometer for the minimum legally required 3/10ths of a mile. I'm trying to figure out how long it would have taken him (over what distance) to catch up to me , from a dead stop, with me passing his location and sustaining 60mph as I went past. Now, I know no one was "ever speeding" like the officer says s/he was, but I was truly flabbergasted that he claimed what I claimed, particularly since I saw where he was parked as I went by and was prepared to be pulled over for having a headlight out. Let's operate on the assumption his version of events is accurate. I'm doing and sustaining 60mph as I pass his location. Let's presume a 1-second or 2-second reaction time on the part of the officer in his Crown Victoria, probably equipped with a police interceptor motor. Test data: 0-30: 2.6 seconds 0-40: 3.9 seconds 0-50: 5.7 seconds 0-60: 7.8 seconds 0-70: 10.2 seconds 0-80: 12.9 seconds 0-90: 16.7 seconds The irrelevant details are these: - I saw him pull out and come after me. When he started tailgating me, I signaled to turn into a local little league park. He backed off, I disengaged my signal and continued straight at the speed limit until I got to a red light .6 miles from the park. - The traffic stop was initiated after that. My contention was that in kangaroo local district court that what the officer claimed he did, pacing me for .3 miles, was impossible given the story he told and the available distance. The local judge commended my compelling case but was going with the officer's claim that he did pace me for .3 miles at 60mph... this despite not refuting my claim to have slowed down and signaled to pull into the parking lot of the ball park... and claiming he was closer to the park that I testified to. My appeal is being heard at county court in 2 days and as good a job I did at the local level, I'd like to present a more salient T/S/D effort with math and all of that and I really suck at it. Making matters better for me (in my opinion), the officer claimed that he was not at the location to start as I testified because it was "out of his jurisdiction and he wouldn't have been there" but that he could not recall where he first saw me go by and attract his attention on the night in question. All this means is that the distance would have been shorter than 2-miles. Distance from my claimed Police Officer start point to the park = 1.4 miles. I contend he could NOT have caught me and paced me for 3-tenths of a mile before the park at 60mph at the 1.4 mile distance. It would be even more impossible if, as he claimed, he was closer to the park - even if he couldn't recall specifically where. Too much gibberish? Can anyone help?