Would be lovely if the due process of law could be reduced to pure fact and math. It can't. That's why a judgement factor pops into these things at each step. Cop makes a judgement, his perception of what is fact. After that, and sometimes as part of his judgement, the intent of traffic laws is weighed against a multitude of other facts and perceptions entering into the particular case at hand. All we are really looking for is seriousness among drivers to control their vehicles in a manner which is not unreasonably risky. Thus, judges have the power (the responsibility) to figure what's gonna achieve that end. Some drivers are particularly resistent to learning, and they need hard lessons. Some are straightened out, reminded of their responsibility, simply by having been pulled over on a lonely road by an armed man, and having to take a day off for court. Very likely there are a billion instances of a driver speeding, every state, any day of the week, and only a minute fraction of 1% of those instances are brought to court.
All this has a place in our contemplations, particularly if we are drivers. Nobody who drove today can prove they did not speed. How much less guilty are you than the few a cop found it easy to stop and cite? Justice is more than getting off by luck of the draw. This deal is not black or white, according to who gets stopped.