Actually, that's not the case. There is often disagreement among cops, attorneys, judges, etc. over what is what in specific cases. It is not at all uncommon. Interpretation, exigent circumstances, points of view, etc. That has always been so.
If the motorcyclist was guilty of reckless driving, the judge should fine the state trooper for going 128mph as well. Why is it safe for law enforcement officers to travel at 100 mph or more? Last time I checked those guys were every bit as fallible as us ordinary mortals.
kpaul, your idiocy confounds me. The county attorney charged him with reckless driving, not the officers. Several agencies make officers get approval to arrest and the charge. Regardless, there was no danger posed by the speeder or law enforcement did not articulate the speeder was a danger to himself or others at 128 mph, and the judge let him go. The system actually worked out for the biker for once (except for expired tags). This proves the points I brought up in previous posts along with the fact I think you need to take your meds again. You were being half-way enjoyable for a few weeks.
Most cops I know personally are great guys, come and get you when you're in a bind, whole nine yards...good people. And every one of them that's been on the job awhile thinks he's Remo Williams. Mostly, they don't spend time considering whether they might be destructible, or whether they might be wrong. Dunno; maybe if they did so consider, their internal armor would crack, and they'd have to turn in their wings...or badge...or pouch of fairy dust...or regulation mustache, or whatever. (Only kidding, guys!)
And never mind that a Crown Vic isn't widely reagarded for it's at-the-limit handling. Wasn't there just a story about a biker who went to jail because the cop chasing him became viability-challenged when he lost control of his Vicky at speed?