Bulletin: Massachusetts: Reliability of alcohol breath testing machines: Lawyers representing more than 500 defendants have asked the state’s highest court to intervene in a case that challenges the reliability of alcohol breath testing machines used across Massachusetts..."The defendants argue evidence produced by the breath-analysis machines is not scientifically sound."..."As many as 1,000 drunk driving cases have been stayed pending a hearing on the issue, which is being heard by Judge Robert A. Brennan. Brennan, who sits in Salem District Court, previously agreed to allow a defense expert to review the machine's source code. However, defense lawyers say their expert balked when the German manufacturer, Draeger Safety Diagnostics, asked him to sign a nondisclosure agreement, which they described as vague and overly restrictive, placing their expert in potential legal jeopardy. “It really exposed the expert to litigation throughout the United States and Germany,” lawyer Gregory Oberhauser said last month, explaining it contained “loose” definitions of confidential information, breaches and other legally sensitive concepts." Milford Daily News.

"Lawyers representing more than 500 defendants have asked the state’s highest court to intervene in a case that challenges the reliability of alcohol breath testing machines used across Massachusetts. Hundreds of accused drunk drivers have joined a consolidated case being heard in Concord District Court. The defendants argue evidence produced by the breath-analysis machines is not scientifically sound.........Lawyers are also challenging a protective order that spells out the terms under which an expert hired by the defendants will be allowed to review the computer software that powers the machines. The defense team argues it has been unable to find an expert willing to abide by the order, which includes safeguards to protect the manufacturer's proprietary computer code. “We are trying to protect the interest of the consolidated class, the group of breath test defendants, which is hundreds of people,” said Michael S. Bowser, one of five lawyers representing the defendants. “By going up to the single justice, we’re seeking a more transparent hearing process in terms of additional discovery, the use of an expert of our choice who’s not restricted by the court’s protective order, and hopefully just a fuller, more fair, hearing process.” The instrument at issue in the case, the Draeger Alcotest 9510, has been used by police departments across Massachusetts since 2011. Legal challenges began mounting against the device last year after the state Executive Office of Public Safety and Security disclosed the machines were never programmed with the correct tolerance settings when the state purchased them. Public safety officials maintain there is no evidence the devices were malfunctioning, and that police using the machines should have caught any tolerance problems. Nevertheless, the revelation led a slew of defendants to argue the evidence produced by the machines is invalid. As many as 1,000 drunk driving cases have been stayed pending a hearing on the issue, which is being heard by Judge Robert A. Brennan. Brennan, who sits in Salem District Court, previously agreed to allow a defense expert to review the machine's source code. However, defense lawyers say their expert balked when the German manufacturer, Draeger Safety Diagnostics, asked him to sign a nondisclosure agreement, which they described as vague and overly restrictive, placing their expert in potential legal jeopardy. “It really exposed the expert to litigation throughout the United States and Germany,” lawyer Gregory Oberhauser said last month, explaining it contained “loose” definitions of confidential information, breaches and other legally sensitive concepts." http://www.milforddailynews.com/article/20160324/NEWS/160327158