BAC Analysis in a Lab Without Bracketing Controls is at Best Qualitative not Quantitative

Purpose: To obtain an admission that when government scientists conduct a quantitative analysis to determine blood alcohol concentration using blood, urine, or serum, they use positive and negative controls. To obtain an admission from the government scientist that when they conduct such quantitative analysis they use a low control, an expected midpoint control, and a high control. To obtain an admission from the government scientist that they would never use just one control at 100 mg/100mls. To obtain an admission from the government scientist that using just one midpoint control would be unacceptable laboratory practice. To suggest that use of only one midpoint control in a laboratory doe

Relevance of Contemporaneous Documentation by Inspector Taking Instrument Out of Service

Purpose: To establish that if there is an indication in the maintenance records that the instrument was taken out of service for consistently low checks, it is necessary to obtain disclosure or production of the contemporaneous documentation by the inspector, who made that decision, and the printouts obtained by the inspector from the Intoxilyer to understand the context and significance of that decision to take the instrument out of service. #annualmaintenance #inspection #calibration #ITP #controltest #documentation

Change at One Point but Not at Another Point that is Equivalent

Purpose: To suggest that there is empirical evidence in the matter before the Court of change in response by the approved instrument at the lower end of the measuring interval (reading much lower) and at the upper end of the measuring interval (reading slightly higher) without corresponding change in response at the single data point control test level. To suggest that linearity has therefore changed, and in other words, the calibration curve programmed into the instrument, at the factory or on the last re-calibration, is no longer reliable. To lay the foundation for the O'Connor order. To connect the lack of multi-point calibration of an approved breath instrument with the lack of adequate

Start By Defining "Reliability" don't focus on "Accuracy"

Purpose: To remind the Court, "thing 1" in 258(1)(c) is unconstitutional under Charter 11(d) (R v St-Onge) but is saved by section 1. To remind the Court that 258(1)(c) is saved by section 1 because of Parliament's purpose which is weight consistent with scientific reliability. To demonstrate to the Court that the SCC in St-Onge relied on the paper by Brian Hodgson. To bring that paper before the Court and make it an exhibit. To ask the government scientist to concede the definition of "accuracy" in the Hodgson paper. To ask the government scientist to concede the definition of "precision" in the Hodgson paper. To ask the government scientist to concede the definition of "reliability" in the

ABA Sequences v ACA Sequences

Purpose: To explain to the Court, the differences between ABA (Esc Esc B) and ACA (Esc Esc C) sequences To confirm that ABA sequences are not recorded in COBRA data but ACA sequences are recorded in COBRA data. To explain to the Court why the calibration checks at 40 or 50, 100, and 300 during annual inspections do not appear in COBRA data disclosed. #COBRA #annualmaintenance #inspection #controltest

3 Consecutive Annual Inspections Reveal a Trend Towards Unreliability

Purpose: To obtain an admission from the government scientist that a review of the documents from 3 annual inspections reveals a trend such that indications in the lower portion of the measuring interval are reading low and indications in the upper portion of the measuring interval are reading high, in other words, the response of the instrument to known levels of alcohol standard has drifted such that there has been a trend in change in the accuracy of the instrument. To consider the alternative explanation that the inspectors are not following the same standard operating procedures during inspection from one annual inspection to the next. To obtain an admission that further disclosure or

© 2019 Allbiss Lawdata Ltd.

This site has been built by Allbiss Lawdata Ltd. All rights reserved. This is not a government web site.

For more information respecting this database or to report misuse contact: Allbiss Lawdata Ltd., 303-470 Hensall Circle, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, L5A 3V4, 905-273-3322. The author and the participants make no representation or warranty  whatsoever as to the authenticity and reliability of the information contained herein.  WARNING: All information contained herein is provided  for the purpose of discussion and peer review only and should not be construed as formal legal advice. The authors disclaim any and all liability resulting from reliance upon such information. You are strongly encouraged to seek professional legal advice before relying upon any of the information contained herein. Legal advice should be sought directly from a properly retained lawyer or attorney. 

WARNING: Please do not attempt to use any text, image, or video that you see on this site in Court. These comments, images, and videos are NOT EVIDENCE. The Courts will need to hear evidence from a properly qualified expert. The author is not a scientist. The author is not an expert. These pages exist to promote discussion among defence lawyers.

Intoxilyzer®  is a registered trademark of CMI, Inc. The Intoxilyzer® 5000C is an "approved instrument" in Canada.

Breathalyzer® is a registered trademark of Draeger Safety, Inc., Breathalyzer Division. The owner of the trademark is Robert F. Borkenstein and Draeger Safety, Inc. has leased the exclusive rights of use from him. The Breathalyzer® 900 and Breathalyzer® 900A were "approved instruments" in Canada.

Alcotest® is a registered trademark of Draeger Safety, Inc. The Alcotest® 7410 GLC and 6810 are each an "approved screening device" in Canada.

Datamaster®  is a registered trademark of National Patent Analytical Systems, Inc.  The BAC Datamaster® C  is an "approved instrument" in Canada.