I'm not at all worried about the situation. The other driver admitted liability. the other insurance company accepted liability. everything turned out right, in spite of the probabilities.
Jhenry, it was a soccer mom at a tanning salon, with the names of her kids on the back window. I could have been so totally screwed. When I did present the cop with inconsistencies, the cop agreed that the witness was full of crap, and that I would just have to present these things and prove that he was a liar. No changes.
the driver had all windows tinted, and couldn't see out of them. she looked to both sides, as witnesses said, but she didn't look in the mirrors. she backed straight into the open door of my vehicle, pinning my daughter in the door. huge bruises, no broken bones. Frankly, I'm lucky there was an injury in my car and she felt guilty, because otherwise, I'd ahve been screwed. she would have fought it. I'm absolutely lucky that the cops didn't find the empty beer can that fell out of my recycling in the back of the truck.
I'm trying to point out that all of the people who doubt that they are at risk when presented with a shoot/don't shoot scenario,
THIS IS WHAT IS GOING TO OCCUR.
The accomplices and witnesses are almost certain to lie and provide erroneous information. Then, you get to court.
You are going to be one person against a lot of hostile people. Don't expect it to end well just because you think it ought to.
It has nothing to do, really, with the beat cop, the judges, or even the entire system. It's a matter mostly relevant to the hostile lawyers and juries, the public, and the fact that to a whole lot of people, truth doesn't matter.
Why else would a witness tell an obviously and very poorly fabricated lie to a policeman? he wanted the long haired freak in the beat up truck to get what he deserved, and he wanted the poor soccer mom in the black escalade to walk free.
Life is dangerous.