Memory is not permanently fixed. If you find an inconsistency in an officer's statement, you can cross-examine the officer about that inconsistency. As was previously noted, from what you have written the change benefited you such that you and your lawyer chose not to challenge the officer's testimony. If the officer were trying to lie and harm you, quite obviously his changed testimony would have been designed to hurt you, not help you.

As for trying to dig out what the motion to strike is about or what your response might be, you've buried the information under an avalanche of irrelevant material - and from what I have been able to dig out it's not even clear you've shared sufficient information such that you could get an informed opinion. Talk to your lawyer.