I was pulled over on a bruce country highway. The officer claims i was doing 117 kph but he cut it down to 115. I think he's crazy. I saw a vehicle coming towards me and it pulled over to the side of the highway. I was coming down a hill and went by it. I watched in the rear view and checked my speed. Eventually the car did a U-turn and followed me for about 5 minutes. Eventually the lights went on so i pulled over, rolled down my window halfway,turned off the car and got my papers ready. He asked for them , I handed them over , goes back to his car, he comes back a few minutes later, tells me i was doing 117 but he cut it down to 115 and i should be careful and watch for deer. Thats it, the whole conversation. At the time he pulled me over, i was doing 95 kph. I didn't ask to see the radar cause i didn't know you could do that. It doesn't make sense that if i was going that fast , why wouldn't he put the lights on right away and pull me over then. Not sure why follow me and then pull me over.

So i'm thinking i'll try the idequate notes approach. I remember reading about the kid from wasaga beach who was doing something like 85 over the speed limit , led the cops on a high speed chase and then wouldn't give his license. He ended up getting off because the cop failed to make notes that he lost sight of the vehicle when it made the initial U-turn and then a right turn and then going over a hill. The judge through it out because of the inadequate notes. I'm sure it had more to do with the kid being a cops son but hey , i'll try it. The officer pulled over initially , so one lost contact , then the u-turn , so second lost contact and thirdly we had a hill we both went over which depending on close at the time , another lost contact. i doubt he recorded any of those lost contacts.

Thoughts, anyone