duimetrology.com

Defence lawyers need to convince the criminal justice system that "traceability" of all forensic measurements is a condition precedent to reliability. What does "traceability" mean and is it part of Canadian criminal law? What does the Canadian scientific community have to say about "traceability"? Why is the establishment of "calibration intervals" required to maintain "traceabilty"? Are "étalon" and "norme" the same thing? Are these concepts easier to understand in French?

The concept of "calibration interval" is an important one in measurement science. Unfortunately most criminal law lawyers and Judges are not familiar with this concept. It will probably be necessary to lay a foundation respecting this concept during an examination-in-chief or cross-examination of an expert. You may need the help of a metrologist to do so. This is an example cross-examination that needs improvement. Purpose: To introduce the concept of "calibration interval" i

Purpose: To explain the function of internal standards, the ITP, internal test procedure to the Court. To obtain an admission that the ITP system needs annual or periodic maintenance, just like the optical bench, so that the instrument can continue to function in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. To obtain an admission that any adjustment or re-calibration of the optical bench also requires re-calibration of the internal standards. Sample cross-examination of a C

Purpose: To support argument that the Maintenance History shows that the instrument was taken "out of service", for "consistently low cal. checks" and as a result "requires calibration". Can the matter not be distinguished from Vallentgoed where the maintenance log revealed that the instrument was taken out of service for routine maintenance and periodic re-calibration? To support argument that the Maintenance History reveals that the instrument was taken out of service for a

Purpose of this Argument: To distinguish R. v. Jackson on the basis of a differences in facts. Distinguishing the Jackson[92] Decision As noted in the Notice of Application Form 1[93], the Applicant takes the position that the R. v. Jackson decision can be distinguished because of major differences in facts. The Applicant also takes the position that the expert opinion and evidentiary record in this case is very different from that in Jackson. At paragraph 35 Justice Watt wro

Purpose: To obtain an admission that the ATC Position Paper of 2012 contradicts the federal government policy in the Fairness at the Pumps Act MR. BISS: Q. Well, I want to suggest to you that government policy with respect to the need for specific calibration intervals and periodic inspection changes from time to time. A. Absolutely, just like our training aid changes with new scientific information or case law that may come out. Q. And... A. Often it’s behind or we’re a

Purpose: To obtain admissions from the Crown expert to enable argument that Vallentgoed can be distinguished on its facts - particularly respecting: - recent re-calibration on a regular calibration interval - independence of factory authorized service centre Please carefully read the following excerpt from R. v. Vallentgoed in the Alberta Court of Appeal. Note January 30, 2013 "The instrument then required recalibration". The pattern of "Diary Date for Next Service" and "Som

Why is disclosure of information about the "calibration" of the approved instrument essential to any assessment of the reliability of a particular subject breath test result at time of use? Why does reliability depend on a recent calibration or re-calibration? Purpose: To introduce the concept of "calibration interval" To obtain admissions as to the importance of calibration interval in the international scientific literature To obtain an admission that neither the ATC/CFS no