The cops have to ID the driver, it is NOT up to a company to become
police. Another example of the failure of the 'system' in that
presumption of guilt is made first and that everyone must 'snitch'.

Yes, there is a valid "presumption of guilt", because it was pointed to by
an impartial traffic camera. The car's owner was clearly identified and it
was the USPS.

It is USPS's duty to report who was the driver, as it is the duty of any of
us who borrowed his car to somebody. If we don't do it, for any reason, we
are considered by law as being the driver himself, and we are considered
responsible for the consequences. The ownership of a car, that can be used
also as a deadly weapon, entails various responsibilities, like it or onot.

The cops 'consider' much that is against the Constitution. Judges
often go along, only to be overturned!

As an example, it is 'illegal' to lie to a cop. But it is 'considered'
legal to lie to a suspect to induce a supposed confession!

They also hide exculpating evidence, destroy records, etc.

Traffic cameras are 'evidence', and should not be confused with
'presumption of guilt', but then cops have such a poor performance
record ...!

Seattle cops ae under Federal scrutiny for abuse, so they are being
counseled and re-trained. Trained in how to beat up a suspect and NOT
leave marks and make sure there are NO cameras.

Same old, same old! Power corrupts. Absolutely!