People who did not commit the offense are the exact type of people who would take the D/A option.
What you are essentially saying is, "judge, I did not do this, I have a clean record, and if you delay starting the trial for this for XX days, you will see I will not commit any offenses before then. In fact, I am so sure of this, if I do commit an offense, I will not fight this charge and will plead guilty. And the judge says, OK, you stay clean for XX days and I will toss out this charge." Deal.
Thus valuable court time is not wasted trying good folks, and good folks do not have spend $$$ to prove they are innocent.
So it is BS that D/A is treated like a guilty verdict.
I agree with you 100% there buddy. I got a ticket about 12 years ago for 75 in a 70. I was only going 65 and I went to the JP the next day to complain about it. I dont speed, I dont get speeding tickets! This D/A is what he and I agree on for 90 days. If I failed to live up to my word, the results would have been harsh. In the end, everything worked out fine.
I always thought D/A would keep the mess off you record, but I guess in this case it didnt.
So why is he having this problem.