Sonja Farak: Massachusetts: Daily Hampshire Gazette editorializes on a "costly lapse in drug lab oversight," but notes that the cost extends beyond the review of thousands of cases: "There are other costs here too: unfair prosecutions, lost faith in the judicial system and the likelihood that guilty people who trafficked in drugs will have punishments lifted. This toxic legal landscape will take years to clean up." The gazette also provides a dollop of "even more bad news" for the judicial system..."The AG’s review found that the Amherst lab manufactured its own “reference” drugs, which are used to compare test results. That is not a common practice. The lab did not audit its supply of these drugs, also known as “standards.” And lab workers used only visual inspections to certify prescription drugs submitted for testing, raising questions about the validity of the work."

"The cornucopia of drugs Sonja Farak ingested while working at an Amherst lab came free to her, but make no mistake: Massachusetts will pay a heap of money to unravel her mess. Officials first said the impact of Farak’s tampering would be limited. They were wrong. It’s now clear, thanks to a new attorney general’s report, that Farak’s years-long drug abuse spree taints drug prosecutions across the state. It may not rival the legal tangle created by fellow chemist Annie Dookhan, whose malfeasance at the Jamaica Plain drug lab called 34,000 cases into question. As with the Dookhan affair, special court sessions will be needed to determine whether defendants were wronged because of what Farak did at her lab bench in the Morrill Science Center at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Meantime, thousands of drug defendants wait for answers, more than three years after Farak’s perfidy was laid bare.........There is even more bad news for the judicial system. The AG’s review found that the Amherst lab manufactured its own “reference” drugs, which are used to compare test results. That is not a common practice. The lab did not audit its supply of these drugs, also known as “standards.” And lab workers used only visual inspections to certify prescription drugs submitted for testing, raising questions about the validity of the work. The state Department of Public Health ran a shoddy operation in Amherst, with inadequate security and non-existent monitoring of lab workers. But the lab is now managed under with better rules by the state police, so that’s no longer a policy matter.
What remains is the legal taint. The challenge now is figuring out what’s valid in Farak’s lab work, and what’s not. Given the conduct detailed in the AG’s report, there may be no coming back. Defense attorneys have good reason to ask juries: Why take this woman’s word? Gov. Charlie Baker says he will find money to review thousands of cases. District attorneys are racing to figure out which ones need a fresh look, but the numbers by county are mounting, according to a Boston Globe survey – 1,800 in Berkshire, 500 in Suffolk, 400 in Middlesex, 300 in Norfolk, 190 in Essex and 100 in Plymouth. The list for the upper Valley is still being compiled. The Hampden County DA estimates that thousands of cases there are in question. The Berkshire DA actually believes all cases are affected. There are other costs here too: unfair prosecutions, lost faith in the judicial system and the likelihood that guilty people who trafficked in drugs will have punishments lifted. This toxic legal landscape will take years to clean up."
http://www.gazettenet.com/Costly-lapse-in-Amherst-drug-lab-oversight-1974508