Here is what I was thinking:

1) The only "testimony" concerning your Negligent Driving concerns your speed.

2) The only "testimony" concerning your speed is the officer's visual estimation.

3) Before evidence of the officer's visual estimation can be introduced, the prosecution must establish a "foundation" showing that the officer's visual estimates are reliable. This can be done by citing the officer's training and experience.

4) So the question becomes: If the officer's statement does not include any other information about his training or experience, does the statement "I am confident in my estimation of the suspect vehicle's actual speed...." constitute a sufficient foundation for the introduction of evidence relating to speed? In my opinion it would not -- but I've certainly been know to be wrong on MANY occasions.

Now, please understand that I am NOT an attorney, and this approach -- if it's even valid -- requires a formal understanding of the law. Knowing when and how to object to this evidence is critical. Remember, an objection which is not timely made is considered waived.

One last point, I did some searching for case law which might support this approach. The only thing I found was an unpublished opinion (which is not binding nor citable). However, this one went against the defendant -- in a situation very similar to yours.

So, if you want to contest this, I'd advise getting a good attorney. You may end up paying more than the $550 ticket, but, if you win, it won't go on your record and it won't affect your insurance.

Barry