Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
Field Sobriety Tests For DUI Don't Work!
Law enforcement officers use field sobriety tests (FST's) to determine whether a driver is under the influence of alcohol. In Colorado they typically use three tests, the nystagmus "(follow the flashlight with my eyes"), the walk and turn, and one leg stand test. Although the tests appear to be "scientific", they have no basis in science and are useless in determining whether or not a suspect is under the influence of alcohol.
The tests all depend on the officer's judgment of the suspect's performance. Since the officer's has pretty much decided that the suspect was impaired before asking them to take the test; they will see what they expect to see.
The tests are also administered under conditions that almost guarantee failure: on an sloped surface, late at night on the shoulder of the road, only feet from oncoming traffic, with the police car lights and strobe lights providing the only illumination, and given to a nervous person who is not familiar with the tests. That person also may have difficulty hearing the officer, understanding English, or have health problems that make the tests difficult if not impossible to perform. Finally, the suspects clothing can hinder their ability to perform the tests.
For example, one of my clients was required to perform the tests on a snowy evening while wearing an evening gown and 3 inch stiletto heels. The tests were given on the inside shoulder of Interstate 25 with cars and trucks passing by at 60 miles per hour. Nobody could have passed a test under these conditions.
The three most common tests were developed by the for profit Southern California Research Institute. They were paid for with a government grant from the Department of Transportation. According to their own research, 47 percent of the subjects tested would have been arrested for DUI - even though they were under the .10% limit. (Burns and Moskowitz, Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest: Final Report, DOT-HS-802-424, NHTSA, 1977.)
Independent testing shows that the roadside sobriety tests are not reliable. In 1991, Clemson University researchers conducted a study on the accuracy of the tests. They videotaped sober suspects taking the tests, showed the tapes to police officers and asked them to interpret the results. The results were astounding. According to the officers 46% of the sober suspects were too drunk to drive.(Cole and Nowaczyk, "Field Sobriety Tests: Are they Designed for Failure?" 79 Perceptual and Motor Skills Journal 99 (1994).
This presents a double-edged problem.First, the police, judges, prosecutors and jurors shouldn't rely on these tests to make a decision about whether or not to prosecute or convict a defendant. Also, the fact that you can stand on one leg or walk a straight line after drinking doesn't mean that you can safely drive home. Aside from not drinking, the only way to ensure that you won't drive under the influence is to use a cab or have a designated driver.
Peter M. Johnson JD
4610 S. Ulster Street #150
Denver, CO 80237
(303) 770-4417
http://www.johnsonlawfirm.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Peter_M._Johnson
The tests all depend on the officer's judgment of the suspect's performance. Since the officer's has pretty much decided that the suspect was impaired before asking them to take the test; they will see what they expect to see.
The tests are also administered under conditions that almost guarantee failure: on an sloped surface, late at night on the shoulder of the road, only feet from oncoming traffic, with the police car lights and strobe lights providing the only illumination, and given to a nervous person who is not familiar with the tests. That person also may have difficulty hearing the officer, understanding English, or have health problems that make the tests difficult if not impossible to perform. Finally, the suspects clothing can hinder their ability to perform the tests.
For example, one of my clients was required to perform the tests on a snowy evening while wearing an evening gown and 3 inch stiletto heels. The tests were given on the inside shoulder of Interstate 25 with cars and trucks passing by at 60 miles per hour. Nobody could have passed a test under these conditions.
The three most common tests were developed by the for profit Southern California Research Institute. They were paid for with a government grant from the Department of Transportation. According to their own research, 47 percent of the subjects tested would have been arrested for DUI - even though they were under the .10% limit. (Burns and Moskowitz, Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest: Final Report, DOT-HS-802-424, NHTSA, 1977.)
Independent testing shows that the roadside sobriety tests are not reliable. In 1991, Clemson University researchers conducted a study on the accuracy of the tests. They videotaped sober suspects taking the tests, showed the tapes to police officers and asked them to interpret the results. The results were astounding. According to the officers 46% of the sober suspects were too drunk to drive.(Cole and Nowaczyk, "Field Sobriety Tests: Are they Designed for Failure?" 79 Perceptual and Motor Skills Journal 99 (1994).
This presents a double-edged problem.First, the police, judges, prosecutors and jurors shouldn't rely on these tests to make a decision about whether or not to prosecute or convict a defendant. Also, the fact that you can stand on one leg or walk a straight line after drinking doesn't mean that you can safely drive home. Aside from not drinking, the only way to ensure that you won't drive under the influence is to use a cab or have a designated driver.
Peter M. Johnson JD
4610 S. Ulster Street #150
Denver, CO 80237
(303) 770-4417
http://www.johnsonlawfirm.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Peter_M._Johnson
Monday, May 4, 2009
DUI Crackdown: Report Drunk Drivers, Call 911 - OTS Reference - The Office of Traffic Safety, California Highway Patrol, and local law enforcement want everyone to drive safely and responsibly.
Sleep-Driving – A Recently Reported Sleep Disorder - Have you ever woken up and found yourself behind the steering wheel of your car and driving? Patrick Kennedy, yes, THE son of Ted Kennedy has! He drove to the US Capitol believing he had to vote, crashing his car into a security barrier ...
Minnesota Court Orders Access to Breathalyzer Source Code
The Minnesota Supreme Court ordered CMI, maker of the Intoxilyzer 5000en to turn over its source code. The source code is responsible for calculating a suspects breath alcohol concentration and is often the only relevant evidence in DUI cases.
Read More
Read More
Thursday, April 23, 2009
DUI Crackdown: Report Drunk Drivers, Call 911 - OTS Reference - The Office of Traffic Safety, California Highway Patrol, and local law enforcement want everyone to drive safely and responsibly.
DUI offenders are eligible Thursday for new 'ignition interlock ... - DUI offenders are eligible Thursday for new 'ignition interlock license'
Monday, April 20, 2009
Out of State DUI News
DUI Crackdown: Report Drunk Drivers, Call 911 - OTS Reference - The Office of Traffic Safety, California Highway Patrol, and local law enforcement want everyone to drive safely and responsibly.
DUI offenders are eligible Thursday for new 'ignition interlock ... - DUI offenders are eligible Thursday for new 'ignition interlock license'
Dui Acquital: Editorial confuses issue with misinformation ... - Dui Acquital: Editorial confuses issue with misinformation: (Scroll to view)
Three Ways To Commit Drunk Driving In Colorado
You can commit drunk driving in one of three ways: (1) driving while having a blood alcohol content above the limit set by law; (2) driving under the influence of alcohol or (3) driving under the influence of other drugs or prescription medications. To find a person guilty under the first definition, a jury must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the person drove a motor vehicle while their blood alcohol content (BAC) exceeded .08 (or 8 percent).
In contrast, the second definition does not refer to any particular BAC; it focuses on the driving behavior of the person. If the person’s driving is impaired by the consumption of alcohol, he or she can be found guilty of drunk driving. Instead of presenting evidence of the BAC to a jury, the prosecution seeking a conviction under this definition generally presents testimony about the person's driving and consumption of alcohol. A police officer will often describe the impaired driving that lead him to pull the person over and the person's ability (or lack thereof) to perform field sobriety tests, such as walking a straight line. Evidence is also usually presented concerning the person's consumption of alcohol. Often, the defendant has admitted that they had been drinking. Sometimes there are open containers in the car. If the jury then concludes that the prosecution has met its burden of proof, it will convict the person of drunk driving.
The third definition deals with situations where a person drove a motor vehicle under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. Some cold remedies also contain alcohol. Other types of drugs such as sedatives, allergy medicines, and other prescription medications can impair your driving ability. This definition also includes situations where the person drove under the influence of illegal drugs as well.
In contrast, the second definition does not refer to any particular BAC; it focuses on the driving behavior of the person. If the person’s driving is impaired by the consumption of alcohol, he or she can be found guilty of drunk driving. Instead of presenting evidence of the BAC to a jury, the prosecution seeking a conviction under this definition generally presents testimony about the person's driving and consumption of alcohol. A police officer will often describe the impaired driving that lead him to pull the person over and the person's ability (or lack thereof) to perform field sobriety tests, such as walking a straight line. Evidence is also usually presented concerning the person's consumption of alcohol. Often, the defendant has admitted that they had been drinking. Sometimes there are open containers in the car. If the jury then concludes that the prosecution has met its burden of proof, it will convict the person of drunk driving.
The third definition deals with situations where a person drove a motor vehicle under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. Some cold remedies also contain alcohol. Other types of drugs such as sedatives, allergy medicines, and other prescription medications can impair your driving ability. This definition also includes situations where the person drove under the influence of illegal drugs as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
