So I recently was sitting in court and a lawyer was asking for the officers recount of what occurred. The officer states the reason he pulled the driver over was because the user stopped WAY past the stop line. Then the officer stated he believed the driver had become distracted because they saw him driving in their rear view mirror and he believed that’s why they were looking in their rear view mirror and missed the stop line. The lawyer asked them again why they were pulled over and what they were looking for and such as a tactic to try to get it on record if the officers story changed at all. About 3 minutes later of questioning and the officer stated the driver had stopped with about half his car over the stop line.

Being in an area with no sidewalks (sucks, even if there were a crosswalk their car wouldn’t have blocked it) but here is an example of what this would look like, but no other cars are at the intersection, just the white car if it pulled forward to the red lines and an officer who admitted to driving over the speed limit to catch up to this car (without reason because his reason for pulling him over was stopping to late)

The officer then proceeded to pull the drive out of the car and perform a field sobriety test. No mention of swerving, no failure to maintain lane etc. Just that a police car speeding up behind him made the driver do something “wreckless” stop late. No one is in any danger in this situation until the officer inserted themself and caused an infraction.

The whole thing was annoying that it was going that far that they would end up needing a trial. Waste of our tax money to harass the population