How to beat a DUI in Florida

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/06..._out_duis.html

Judges toss out DUIs because breathalyzers' source code is secret
Florida judges are tossing out DUI cases when defendants ask to see the source code for the breathalyzers that busted them -- the manufacturers won't turn over the source, and since the machine's correct operation is critical to establishing the case against the DUIers, the case is dismissed when it can't be produced.

All four of Seminole County's criminal judges have been using a standard that if a DUI defendant asks for a key piece of information about how the machine works - its software source code, for instance - and the state cannot provide it, the breath test is rejected, the Orlando Sentinel reported Wednesday...

Seminole judges have been following the lead of county Judge Donald Marblestone, who in January ruled that although the information may be a trade secret and controlled by a private contractor, defendants are entitled to it.

One of my family members where kill'd by a stupid teen who thought he could drive drunk.

Don't they take a blood or urine test after a positive breath sample in Florida?. They have the right to ask and a refusal to give a sample is the equivalent of a positive test. I guess they should start to do it in all cases from now on.

I also have lost loved ones due to a drunk driver. My condolences Ziggy.

I believe procedure should be followed to ensure a fair trial, however it seems that the source code for these machines is not really relevant if it is proven they are accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

Don't they take a blood or urine test after a positive breath sample in Florida?. They have the right to ask and a refusal to give a sample is the equivalent of a positive test. I guess they should start to do it in all cases from now on.

I also have lost loved ones due to a drunk driver. My condolences Ziggy.

I believe procedure should be followed to ensure a fair trial, however it seems that the source code for these machines is not really relevant if it is proven they are accurate.

---

There is a case for seeing the source code. Especially if you are not happy with the the method of testing the machines or the result in your particular case. The source code contains the upper and lower limits for displaying results. If you think that the machine is not working properly then you should have the right to see the source code, in case there is a flaw in it.

Speed trap machines are tested(Or should be) before and after each day of use. Failure in the end of the day test negates all readings taken that day.

If they are looking for volunteers to test the breathalizer I would be willing to put my name forward.:lol:

I'll have to tell my uncle about this when I go down on the 30th.

Due process can be a bitch sometimes.

However, if as boab says there is a doubt as to the accuracy of this evidence then the defendant has a right to question it. Particularly when the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

If the judges think the right to commercial confidentiality outweighs the consequences of letting drink drivers walk away from the case then it is a shame indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

Due process can be a bitch sometimes.

However, if as boab says there is a doubt as to the accuracy of this evidence then the defendant has a right to question it. Particularly when the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

If the judges think the right to commercial confidentiality outweighs the consequences of letting drink drivers walk away from the case then it is a shame indeed.

---

they should just do away with the breath test and take blood. Problem is it takes time for the reslts to come back, so perhaps use the breathalizer to hold someone overnight, take the blood while they are in custoday, then have the results ready for court. I too lost a friend who decided to drive drunk one night, 1 month after I had taken his keys from him on a business trip in Pennsylvania that we took together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RPerry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

Due process can be a bitch sometimes.

However, if as boab says there is a doubt as to the accuracy of this evidence then the defendant has a right to question it. Particularly when the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

If the judges think the right to commercial confidentiality outweighs the consequences of letting drink drivers walk away from the case then it is a shame indeed.

---

they should just do away with the breath test and take blood. Problem is it takes time for the reslts to come back, so perhaps use the breathalizer to hold someone overnight, take the blood while they are in custoday, then have the results ready for court. I too lost a friend who decided to drive drunk one night, 1 month after I had taken his keys from him on a business trip in Pennsylvania that we took together.

---

I agree, I think someone said it earlier. If there is a positive breath test then take a blood test as a matter of course. That way the result is available for examination and the whole problem with questionable results from the breath test / commercial confidentiality is obviated.

I don't know the situation in the USA, however I believe in the UK some things like taking such samples can only be carried out by medically trained people. That would mean getting a Doctor or Nurse to do it, and getting the sample analysed. Rather than just producing a result from the machine itself.

Sadly I think the limiting factor may be cost. In taking the sample, analyzing it and producing the evidence. As opposed to the result of a breath test taken by a Police Officer on duty.

The Hippocratic Oath requires physicians to put their patients’ needs and desires first, to defend their patients’ privacy, and to respect their decisions to decline medical procedures. Therefore, the American College of Emergency Room Physicians opposes permitting, much less requiring, physicians to give blood test results to police because it conflicts with the appropriate and fundamental role of physicians in the physician-patient relationship.

Can't police take a small blood sample like diabetics do all the time? No need for needles, Nurses or Doctors.

If the people that gave a positive test were so sure they were innocent why didn't they ask for a blood or urine test... I know I would