If the pre-trial does not result in settlement, the next step is trial. At trial the municipality/prosecution has what is called the "burden of proof.” This concept means you don't have to prove yourself innocent, the prosecution must show by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence that you are indeed guilty of what you are charged with. After 1-01-11, this standard becomes evidence that is clear, satisfactory and convincing to a reasonable certainty.

Since the prosecution has this burden, they go first in presentation of witnesses, followed by the defendant's witnesses. Each party has the right and opportunity to cross-examine (question) the other party's witnesses. After the conclusion of all testimony, review of any evidence (written documentation, pictures, diagrams, etc.) presented during the course of trial, and a review of specific law, Judge Steinle will make a determination of either dismissal or finding of guilt on the citation. There is one clear winner and one clear loser at trial. The prevailing party may be awarded some minor statutory costs, where allowed.

Under the laws of this state, certain evidence, such as a radar speed reading, is generally presumed scientifically accurate with foundational testimony by the officer. This long standing rule of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is found in the National Transport (1973) case (stationary radar) and Hansen (1974) case (moving radar). Under these cases, radar essentially acts as a witness against the person who was driving the vehicle that was clocked. In these situations, it is no longer a matter of the driver’s word against the officer's word.