Skip to main content

False "Science": DWI Hyprocrisy


Where do I begin? Judges, jurors, district attorneys, cops, MADD? Let's start where it belongs: the National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA). Back in 1977, the government gave NHTSA a grant to create some roadside tests for DWI arrests. Dr. Marcelline Burns, who holds a Ph.D in psychology was given carte blanche authority on this project. She came up with the field tests we know today. Her research was so bad (flunking on both the validity and reliability scales researchers measure tests against), that she reattempted her same research in 1981 with the same scientifically unacceptable results. This time she refused to release the validity data. Same story- when the feds lowered the legal limit from .10 to .08 she conducted three "studies" (San Diego, Colorado, and Florida) in an attempt to justify her tests to the lower legal limit. It was such a massive failure she refused to release the validity or reliability data. Federal judge Grimm in an exhaustive review of her data and current scientific peer review research held in U.S. v. Horn, 185 F. Supp. 2d 530 (D. Maryland 2002), that what law enforcement calls as the "standardized" field sobriety tests are unsuitable for use. Yet, law enforcement all across the country continue to use these substandard tests and imprison people on this basis. Throughout the years, although the tests have not changed (that is why they call them "standardized") NHTSA has removed critical limiting language. For example, the portion that warns that the "validity of the tests may be compromised" if the tests are not given in a standardized manner has been removed. In a brazen move, they have even now inserted a provision that these tests are not affected by varying environmental conditions. It does not take a Ph.D in psychology to know that ice, wind gales and wet, slippery surfaces will affect the tests despite their catchall disclaimer.

I am ashamed we have a federal agency that is so dishonest. I am ashamed that law enforcement does not reject research and tests that do not meet basic mathematical and scientific peer review standards. The fact we allow our fellow citizens to be arrested, convicted and have their lives ruined on this is unacceptable. This is reality. This is truth and this is wrong.



*I have a paper and powerpoint on this topic that has been published and presented nationally. I am happy to share upon request.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Can A DWI Affect My Eligibility For Global Entry?

In general, all United States citizens and lawful permanent residents possess eligibility to apply for Global Entry. This is a program through Customs and Border Protection that allows for expedited clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers. That said, Customs my deny eligibility for a variety of reasons such as providing false information on the application and a finding of customs violation for *any* country (not just US Customs violations). However, there are 3 important reasons related to criminal defense that everyone should know. First, Customs may deny eligibility if you have been denied for the purchase of a firearm. This restriction is important because firearm restrictions may, on occasion, be a condition of a criminal charge, even if the charge is dismissed. Further, a denial of a firearm purchase may show Customs that you are not a “low-risk” traveler based on the reason for denial. Second, Customs may deny eligibility if you are the subject of an *ongoing investiga...

Lying Witnesses: The Shabby State of Criminal Justice in our Country

The American Criminal Justice System: “Houston, We have a Problem.” James Ferguson Mark Fuhrman, convicted of a felony perjury after the O.J. Simpson trial, is now a national Fox legal analyst, an “expert witness” on police matters. Last week, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio, ruled “Dr.” James Ferguson, a state toxicologist, convicted of perjury, could NOT be sued or found liable for lying in a murder case where his expert witness testimony was relied upon by the judge for the conviction. Fred Zain, toxicologist at the West Virginia Department of Public Safety, falsified lab results which resulted in as many as 134 wrongful convictions. Once under investigation, he merely picked up and moved to San Antonio, Texas to work as a toxicologist where an investigation found at least 180 cases in which fraud may have led to wrongful convictions. He died in the comforts of his Florida home in 2002. Picking up the pieces in Boston, Massachusetts, over 34,000 lab...

The Biggest Misconception in a DWI

The biggest misconception in a DWI is to correlate a single bad driving behavior with guilt in a DWI. Whether it be a jerk (failure to maintain a single lane), accident (losing control and hitting something like a curb, pole, or another car), or stopping too long at a stop light, this may very well be evidence of driver inattention unrelated to intoxication. I have analyzed thousands of DWI cases and have tried over 300. What I typically find is a prosecutor who argues that the driving behavior which so often happens due to driver inattention be argued as clear evidence that a person is intoxicated. This is simply not fact. The facts are that every day drivers commit these violations due to distraction, inattention, fatigue or a host of other factors. Accidents are so common that the law mandates a driver operate a motor vehicle on our public roads with liability insurance. The mere fact that a driver commits these with alcohol or a substance (medication, drugs, caffeine, etc.) in ...