PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The Springfield Republican reported Wednesday that Brennan said the Office of Alcohol Testing must undergo major reforms, including providing additional training for staff and instituting rules for complying with discovery requests similar to those followed by the state police’s crime management unit. The decision comes after a judge found that the office failed to release evidence to lawyers representing drunk-driving defendants that showed about 400 Breathalyzer results were flawed. The technical leader of the office was fired, and prosecutors tossed evidence from thousands of drunk-driving cases as a result."
--------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Breathalyzer court ruling roils prosecutors,
police," by reporter Norman Miller, published by Metro West Daily News
on January 11, 2019.
GIST: It would be wrong for people charged with operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor to be jailed when the tests could be flawed, said Daniel Cappetta, a Framingham-based defense attorney.
https://www.
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/
GIST: It would be wrong for people charged with operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor to be jailed when the tests could be flawed, said Daniel Cappetta, a Framingham-based defense attorney.
Prosecutors trying to get
convictions for people
suspected of driving drunk have seen their jobs get much more difficult
after a Massachusetts judge ruled this week that Breathalyzer tests
cannot be used as evidence in court. Judge Robert
Brennan, who was hearing a consolidated test case that involved more
than 400 Breathalyzer exams throughout the state, ruled the tests can’t
be used until the Office of Alcohol Testing proves it results are
accurate. Brennan’s ruling is being hailed by MetroWest defense
attorneys as fair. “I
think it’s the right decision,” said David Levinson, a Framingham
lawyer. “There have been so many issues with the various testing
devices. There has to be some kind of accountability.” It
would be wrong for people charged with operating a vehicle under the
influence of liquor to be jailed when the tests could be flawed, said
another Framingham-based attorney, Daniel Cappetta. “Right
now, there’s serious cause to doubt the scientific results,” he said.
“Judge Brennan has rightly decided these tests shouldn’t be used to take
anyone’s liberty.” A Breathalyzer is a device for
estimating blood alcohol content from a breath sample. It is illegal
throughout the United States to drive a vehicle with a breath alcohol
concentration of .08 percent or higher. The Springfield
Republican reported Wednesday that Brennan said the Office of Alcohol
Testing must undergo major reforms, including providing additional
training for staff and instituting rules for complying with discovery
requests similar to those followed by the state police’s crime
management unit. The decision comes after a judge found
that the office failed to release evidence to lawyers representing
drunk-driving defendants that showed about 400 Breathalyzer results were
flawed. The technical leader of the office was fired, and prosecutors
tossed evidence from thousands of drunk-driving cases as a result. The
office plans to apply for national accreditation by August.
In a statement, Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan said her office is monitoring that accreditation process. “We
are reviewing yesterday’s ruling,” she said, according to the
statement. “Moving forward, we will continue to be in contact with OAT
regarding the date for their compliance with the judge’s order.” Bellingham
Police Chief Gerard Daigle said the news will change how
drunken-driving cases are handled in court. According to state law, if
someone refuses a Breathalyzer test, that cannot be revealed in court so
as to not prejudice a judge or jury. Daigle said that forces officers
to testify to other evidence to prove someone was driving drunk.
Now, Daigle said, every case will be like that. “I
expect to see more of an emphasis on observations of the subject, both
at the scene and at the station while being booked and in custody,” he
said. “Recognition of the signs and symptoms of impairment will be
crucial. It’s similar to what is needed if the tests were refused.” But Natick police spokeswoman Lt. Cara Rossi said it won’t
change how officers handle drunk-driving investigations, and that
Breathalyzers will still be administered. “It is not
going to have an effect on how we conduct business,” she said.
“Obviously, roadside, nothing will change. This will be an issue in
court, but not for the men and women out there trying to prevent
tragedies by recognizing and arresting impaired drivers. We will
continue to do our jobs to the best of our ability and continue to try
to make our roadways as safe as possible for all of us.” In
Marlborough, police spokesman Sgt. Daniel Campbell said police are
waiting for direction from the District Attorney’s Office on how to
handle the ruling."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/
