TexasCHLforum.com

If (and these are a lot of ifs - we are working with limited information here)....

If the camera was not focused on the car 100% of the time, for instance, if the officer saw her swerve before turning in behind her, or if the camera doesn't turn on until the emergency lights are turned on...

Then the officer's word SHOULD be better than the camera.

If, however, the camera showed the car 100% of the time that the officer saw it, for instance, if the officer approached from the rear from a distance and had her in the camera's sights for the full duration of his observation, then I'd feel less comfortable with this decision. As an example, if he testifies that he saw her swerve off the road and pulled her over right away, but the camera showed her driving perfectly OK for 5 full minutes before he pulled her over, then I'd find reason to disagree with the decision.

But baldeagle is right - this is not suggesting that the officer's statement will always overrule the camera 100% of the time. This doesn't seem to be setting a broad-reaching precedent here.