That possibility is an excuse. The Major's claims are irrelevant as a matter of law since it is only how he perceived the law enforcement actions. A true officer would have accepted the ticket, not let the situation escalate, and resumed his journey.
Justice must not only be done, but also seen to be done. The outcome of the investigation and the punishment must be made public.
You have again written a post which is uni directional and you are biased and 1000% sure that army personnel was at fault.
1)
Why are the major's claims irrelevant?
He has every right to prove his innocence and deserves a fair trial before he can be called guilty.
He broke a law by over speeding. No one is denying that. So does that makes him pro brawl or a hitman as well??
2) "since it is only how he perceived the law enforcement actions"
Well the same way the patrolling officer perceived the major was trying to influence him by telling him his occupation and rank.
3)
u say "a true officer would have accepted the ticket, not let the situation escalate and resumed his journey"
Well till the major is proven guilty and you are sure that he is at fault then why don't you rephrase your sentence as... A true officer would have accepted the ticket, listen to abusive language, crap about armed forces, not let the situation escalate by saying thank you and resumed his journey.
For heavens sake do you even try to see the other side of the picture. Do you see how hypocrite you sound?
You might be hurt as an idiot of a major has tarnished the reputation of the armed forces and may be tried to influence by acting above the law. I am hurt rather angry as well. But I refuse to take sides and pass judgement till the guilty party is announced.
Please try to be open to alternative argument.