I have heard of cases whereby restraining orders were issued to protect people from police officers abusing their powers of authority and targeting individuals maliciously.

One would speculate that perhaps a civil case could be made against the Police Department if the harassment would continue.

My disagreement stems from the fact that you mean to suggest a way in which the police officer could make a matter of law into a personal crusade. Presumably everything in this case happened in accordance with normal legal process: she appeared to be violating the law, the officer cited her, and it was reversed in court — end of story. This should not expose her to additional scrutiny or have any bearing on how she is treated in the future. ANY personal bias on the part of a police officer is essentially abuse of power; using state-granted authority in the pursuit of a personal vendetta is unethical and blatantly inappropriate.

Encouraging the police to stalk people they think are likely to do something wrong is a miscarriage of justice; the result is finding fault wherever they choose to look, not as fault naturally occurs.

All that said, I seriously doubt that any new evidence came to light in this case. There really shouldn’t be much of any evidence when issuing such a basic traffic ticket - cop says you did X, you say “no I didn’t” or “yes I did, please excuse my conduct.” In this case, it seems that the latter scenario is what occurred. Either way, it seems really suspect that an officer would magically uncover new evidence the day his ticket is dismissed.

So, while it could be the case that there is new evidence, the facts in the article seem to indicate otherwise.

If the officer was smarter he should have waited near her office or home since she is bound to be on the phone again…