Saturday, November 9, 2019

Technology: Part 1: Unreliable alcohol breath tests: The New York Times (Reporters Stacy Cowley and Jessica Silver-Greenberg) focusses on "Machines Can Put You in Jail" - and offers some prescient advice: "Don't trust them." It's a major take-out on these every-day "often unreliable" tests, which are described as "a bedrock of the criminal justice system." Reporters Stacy Cowley and Jessica Silver-Greenberg. (A remarkable piece of journalism. HL).


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This is a massive article  on a flawed technology often used in U.S. criminal courts and elsewhere which I have often referred to on this Blog- and it is  accompanied by supportive documentation. I have merely provided a taste in the copy below - and heartily recommend a read of the entire piece.

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

-----------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "These Machines Can Put You in Jail. Don't Trust Them," by reporters Stacy Cowley and Jessica Silver-Greenberg, published by The New York Times on November 3, 2019.  Stacy Cowley is a finance reporter with a focus on consumer issues and data security... Jessica Silver-Greenberg is a reporter at The New York Times who writes about finance and its impact on consumers, businesses and the legal system.

SUB-HEADING: "Alcohol breath tests, a linchpin of the criminal justice system, are often unreliable, a Times investigation found."

GIST: "A million Americans a year are arrested for drunken driving, and most stops begin the same way: flashing blue lights in the rearview mirror, then a battery of tests that might include standing on one foot or reciting the alphabet. What matters most, though, happens next. By the side of the road or at the police station, the drivers blow into a miniature science lab that estimates the concentration of alcohol in their blood. If the level is 0.08 or higher, they are all but certain to be convicted of a crime. But those tests — a bedrock of the criminal justice system — are often unreliable, a New York Times investigation found. The devices, found in virtually every police station in America, generate skewed results with alarming frequency, even though they are marketed as precise to the third decimal place. Judges in Massachusetts and New Jersey have thrown out more than 30,000 breath tests in the past 12 months alone, largely because of human errors and lax governmental oversight. Across the country, thousands of other tests also have been invalidated in recent years. Technical experts have found serious programming mistakes in the machines’ software. States have picked devices that their own experts didn’t trust and have disabled safeguards meant to ensure the tests’ accuracy. "There are more than a million drunken driving arrests in America each year, but the devices the police use to test drivers’ breath may not even work. Technical experts have found serious programming mistakes in the machines’ software. States have picked devices that their own experts didn’t trust and have disabled safeguards meant to ensure the tests’ accuracy. The Times interviewed more than 100 lawyers, scientists, executives and police officers and reviewed tens of thousands of pages of court records, corporate filings, confidential emails and contracts. Together, they reveal the depth of a nationwide problem that has attracted only sporadic attention. A county judge in Pennsylvania called it “extremely questionable” whether any of his state’s breath tests could withstand serious scrutiny. In response, local prosecutors stopped using them. In Florida, a panel of judges described their state’s instrument as a “magic black box” with “significant and continued anomalies.” Even some industry veterans say the machines should not be de facto arbiters of guilt. “The tests were never meant to be used that way,” said John Fusco, who ran National Patent Analytical Systems, a maker of breath-testing devices. Yet the tests have become all but unavoidable. Every state punishes drivers who refuse to take one when ordered by a police officer. The consequences of the legal system’s reliance on these tests are far-reaching. People are wrongfully convicted based on dubious evidence. Hundreds were never notified that their cases were built on faulty tests."

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/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
Continue reading the main storyThe Times interviewed more than 100 lawyers, scientists, executives and police officers and reviewed tens of thousands of pages of court records, corporate filings, confidential emails and contracts. Together, they reveal the depth of a nationwide problem that has attracted only sporadic attention