The Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision sustaining the charged violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2, “Prima Facie Limits.”  The trooper testified that his radar equipment, which had been calibrated both before and after his shift,  indicated that the Defendant’s vehicle had been traveling at 38 mph in a 25 mph zone.   Defendant argued the decision should be reversed because the Officer lacked credibility and lied under oath.  Specifically, Defendant argued that because the Officer wrote two tickets, each containing a different speed, the Officer must not have known how fast Defendant had been traveling.  Although the trooper had apparently concluded his testimony, the trial judge then asked the Officer if he had issued the first ticket in an attempt to be lenient with the Defendant, then written a second ticket for the full amount of the violation after Defendant had become uncooperative.  The Officer answered in the affirmative.  The Panel pointed out that the trial judge found the Officer’s testimony to be credible and that in situations where a motorist is uncooperative, it is not unusual for an officer to use discretion in writing a ticket.  The Panel explained it will not substitute its judgment for that of the trial judge on issues of witness credibility.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violation.