Hello, Roma Mik, you wrote: > Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U>>>> 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . >>> you in the protocol agreed, what intersected the continuous? GAI OFFICERS (or at least you) wrote, what you on the left turned? U>> they wrote that I made driving on a counter band and 12.15.4. I wrote that do not agree, turned on the left and it is 12.16.2. U>> it is simple "left on a counter band and made on it driving". > It . My words, what not the lawyer is necessary were in case the protocol - "good". And here can and it is necessary to consult to the professional as it is better to prove that you turned. >>> That you generally broke nothing the judge does not check, since 1) there are no bases not to trust police officers, 2) indications of the witness of trust do not cause. I would not began and to try, only to irritate the judge. U>> did not begin to try that? To cause the witness or to try to justify? > to Try to prove that generally broke nothing. If told that you left on anything any more does not overpersuade the judge, and to try to dispute it - 1) in vain to spend the time, 2) to distract attention of the judge from important factors, in this case, that you turned, instead of is simple on left. > the Witness is useful to prove that you turned. Well I actually also do not deny that broke, without making out a marking. I.e. is direct to break here it was not deliberate there sense.