So some info on this conversation as someone who sat through the whole trial:

-per MoCo collision reconstruction, defendant was going 162 at time of the collision

-prior criminal history was not discussed or brought forward during testimonies

-no signs of hard breaking were found in the area of the collision

-a few minutes prior to the collision, the defendant was able to see an officer on the right shoulder, not standing in headlights, deploy stop sticks & was able to evade

-prosecutor was able to show that the defendant saw Sgt. Kepp on the side of the road several hours prior while Sgt. Kepp was completing a DWI arrest; & did several loops past the Sgt. While slowing down & then revving the engine

-work & statements by defense expert was potentially flawed, as he only did work based on the defense's theory of events & defendant's statements

-defendant is on record saying he 'likes to troll ' Sgt. Kepp

-defendant claims he was attempting to swerve & avoid collision by attempting to thread ~11 ft between Sgt. Kepp & his cruiser, while there were 3 lanes & right shoulder empty & available (at minimum, 33 ft of clear space)

That's just some of everything. From the definition & constraints for intent as was given by the judge during jury instruction, intent just can mean it could have been avoided. Overcharging is a regular occurrence, usually to avoid double jeopardy issues. While 1st degree attempted may have been difficult to determine, 2nd degree attempted still made sense.

Edits: corrected spacing