so the offence is losing traction with one wheel.?
May it please your Honour, the defence is that all the traction that was available to the rear wheel was transferred to the front wheel. It is an inescapable fact of physics that when brakes are applied on a vehicle, the weight balance of the vehicle alters, and weight "Transfers" to the front of the vehicle. Your Honour will be familiar with the effect of same when your Honour is swayed forward when your Honour's chauffeur applies the braking pedal on your Honours Bentley Arnage. Say on a normal stop there is 70% weight transfer to the front wheel, 30% to the rear. Obviously you cant have more than 100% traction at any given time, so in that example we have 70% traction on the front and 30% traction on the rear. those two figures equal all the traction available, i.e. 100%.
Now, in the present situation, all of the weight transferred to the front wheel. So ALL of the traction did too, So, may it please your Honour, in fact there is NO nett loss of traction at all, due to all of the traction that was previously available to the rear wheel, due to the physical laws governing weight transference, being utilised by the front wheel.
May it please your Honour, the defence submits that due to the inescapable logic outlined above, the prosecution must fail, the exhorbitant fee must be refunded, AND the officer must pen a personal letter of apology, countersigned by the Chief of Police, to our client.
The defence rests.
Theres a reason I dont do Court work........

Bookmarks