I will repeat this ONE MORE TIME! You were NOT charged with speeding. Where, exactly, do you see the word "speed" or "speeding" in the statute?
The officer claims to have visually observed you travelling at three times the speed limit. That's just an estimate, but even if was only TWICE the speed limit, I'd like YOU tell me how that does not endanger EVERY person on the road with you? Including your passenger AND YOURSELF?
The officer's statement is "testimony", which, if accepted (and you would have to find some reason for it not to be accepted), is considered "evidence". The prosecution does NOT need to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that you committed the infraction. They only need to show, through a "preponderance" of evidence, that it is "more likely than not" that you committed the offense. If you stand up in court and say "I didn't do it", that's also testimony. Guess who's testimony is likely to carry more weight?
As I said, go for a deferral -- because, personally, I think you got off easy. Negligent Driving is still only a traffic infraction, Reckless Driving is a misdemeanor. And RCW 46.61.465 states:That's up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine.Quoting RCW 46.61.465
Barry

