I very much appreciate your much needed wisdom PT. Truly, I've found myself in a helpless situation. It's likely that I may work something out with the prosecutor if I'm unable to build a strong case...

When I was questioning whether he indicated what radar was checked I noticed that the officer indicated what radar he used, then ended his sentence and stated he had "checked the radar."

As for my statement, I'd say unawareness is not admission. For the record, the officer paraphrased inaccurately. Of course, I wouldn't argue that at my hearing.

Nevertheless your point that it's all quite weak is very true. Perhaps in practice, totally useless...

I'll stay hopeful that my inquiries will bring about some miracle angle, though I'll ready myself for what seems now inevitable.

- - - Updated - - -

Another very confusing detail I noticed can be found here: https://fortress.wa.gov/wsp/smdsearc...ceDisplay/1788

The technician's both signed the document as done August 2014, however the certification reads July 2013. Finally, the certification standards read January 2013. Are these variables of any significance. If not, can anyone observe any variables that may assist my case within the SMD certification? Thank you very much!