That story would get you nothing in court. Chances are, the judge hears that a few times each week, along with a description that it was "EXACTLY the same EXCEPT..." or words to that effect. You're free to try it if you wish!
True!
OK, so how does he get from two identical cars passing him, one speeding the other going the flow of traffic... All the way to him pulling over the wrong car -YOU- but issuing the citation and writing the other car's license plate number???
The likelihood that he was able to read the speeding vehicle's license plate number while it is moving at 90 mph is zero (unless he was moving alongside traffic)...
There is little chance he took a picture but again, at 90mph, and unless he's got a decent camera, that has an instantaneous focus capability and a high powered zoom lens, and assuming he timed it correctly, there is a chance he might get a peak at the other vehicles plate in between other cars... Still, I don't think he reviewed pictures...
So he still does NOT have an alternate license plate number to on your citation. And yet, you still would have us believe that he would stand there next to or slightly behind your vehicle, a few feet away from your actual license plate, with your vehicle registration card in hand, only several inches from his eyes, and rather than copying the plate number from either of those places, he opted to commit to a plate number that he had a minuscule chance to glance at but even if he did, he could not have been able to read all seven digits and memorize them!
Am I missing something?
Let me assume that he was driving along with traffic... And that he was able to read the other cars plate number. do you think that in the process of pulling you over, he would have noticed the your plate is different than what he remembers? And yet he still realized that AND still wrote a different plate number on your citation?
Not only would it not hold up in court... You couldn't sell that story to a 4 year old child without having him/her go "HUH??? Whatchootalkingaboutwillis???"
First you say you were speeding....
Then you add that you have no evidence that you weren't speeding (and you don't need to have evidence that you were not speeding, they have to have evidence that you were (which, by the officer's testimony, they do have evidence of that ))...
Then you say he didn't clock you speeding (even though you just admitted you were speeding)...
Then you add that he estimated your speed. Well, if you were in traffic and ghe decided to "estimate" your speed, it was likely that you were going the fastEST... But even if you weren't the fastest, merely exceeding the 65mph limit means you are speeding, and you have to understand that the officer isn't going to pull everybody over. You had to have done something to attract his attention.
It is possible that when your Escort alerted you (and the only time it will alert you) is when it receives a radar signal from the officer. That may have been the time he clocked you at 90 before you slowed down!
I am still not feeling your explanation as to why you suspect he clocked another vehicle but pulled you over. You should keep in mind that you need not explain anything - UNLESS- you have a really solid defense; the burden to prove the case lies upon the prosecution. And in my opinion, in this case, it is in your best interest to either remain silent, or to think up of another story to use... This one isn't going to fly!
Good luck!

