> But it's nice to give officers leniency if I got lost on a trail or my horse got out without having to go to court. I think the point [made elsewhere] is tha

> But it's nice to give officers leniency if I got lost on a trail or my horse got out without having to go to court. I think the point [made elsewhere] is that it should not be up to the officer to give leniency for any law breaking. The court can do that (via a jury of your peers) but separation of powers means that the officer is not the judge. This transparency is good because if the officer and you on a dark little back lane come to some private agreement about prosecuting you for a law you have broken, that does not serve the society that wanted the law in place. The court record is a public record for a reason?