Ticketed After Rear-Ending, Unfortunate Circumstances

[mjw09]

My question involves a traffic accident in the State of: Florida

I was driving up a hill on a rather rainy day, traveling about 30-35 MPH, (speed limit was 35). After reaching the top of the hill, I could see traffic ahead of me (about a line of 5-7 cars 100 yards or so ahead of me) was coming to a stop because of the red light. I began to apply my brakes about 70 yards away, and at this point all traffic ahead of me was completely stopped or VERY close to it. The hill was at a decently steep decline (35 degrees or so) and roads were rather wet. After applying more pressure to my brakes (not slamming), the tires lost traction and I hydroplaned 40 yards into the car in front of me. No one in front of me slammed on their brakes, nor did I, and I had all the time to brake and decide what to do. I could not go into the left lane because of traffic, and to my right was a wall so I did what I could to avoid the other driver's car by turning as close to the wall as possible.

I relayed this information to the officer but he informed me he was required to ticket me because there was an accident. When I asked him about contesting it, he said he could only testify about what he saw or knew, and that was only an accident.

I know that my car struck the other driver's vehicle, but I was not following closely and had the complete capacity to stop the car, but my brakes/tires failed, which never happened before. I couldn't have any prior knowledge to use in order to properly adjust my braking or decision-making.

I've already chosen court, and my arraignment is next week. Should I bother trying to contest by myself or with a lawyer, or just plea no contest?

Thanks for the help and for reading.

[flyingron]

It takes 136 feet to stop from 35 mph even under dry road conditions. Your tires probably hydroplaned a bit. You are still guilty of going too fast or following too close for the conditions.
Your decision making is faulty.

[mjw09]

It takes 136 feet to stop from 35 mph even under dry road conditions. Your tires probably hydroplaned a bit. You are still guilty of going too fast or following too close for the conditions.
Your decision making is faulty.

As stated before, I began breaking well before 136 feet. The tires did not "hydroplane a bit", they hydroplaned for a long time and were the cause of the accident. When my car started hydroplaning, I was probably down to 20 MPH and 40 yards away. I believe I acted and braked at the appropriate time, even when taking the conditions into account. If that constitutes as violating the law, I disagree personally, but it is the law so I can't do much I guess. I understand the way to drive is "defensive" and to anticipate all outcomes, but that simply is not always possible. It just seems silly to me that without any witness, me rear-ending the driver serves as the proof that I was following too closely, instead of the result. If the rule is if A then B, that doesn't necessarily mean if B then A happened. Alas, this isn't an argument to be made in the court.

Edit: Also, is it even possible to be ticketed for "following too closely" when the car was stopped? I realize there is another statue more appropriate for rear-ending a stopped car, but I'm more just wondering if the car being stopped will help my case in fighting this specific issued ticket.