OK, as a former prosecutor, what would you have made of a ticket for running through a school zone at, to any reasonable man's estimate, well over the posted 25mph speed limit? You have a police officer's eyewitness report as well as, say, the crossing guard's. Would you not pursue it because there was no "hard evidence"? If a person is doing nearly a hundred miles per hour, does a policeman have to let him go simply because he can't clock him? What I would like to know are the particulars of this ruling. What, exactly, happened?
And, from your experience, does it follow that all police officers are corrupt, liars, etc? I've known one or two guys who should never have been policemen, myself. That doesn't mean that the rest of the barrel is rotten.