© 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.

September 28, 2018

What is the purpose in Stinchcombe/McNeil disclosure or O'Connor production of maintenance records and historical data?

Government scientists are right in saying that there is no causal relationship between the historical data and the results of a subsequent subject tes...

May 16, 2018


To confirm that when new instruments are being evaluated, various solutions are used between 50 and 400 mg/100mls.

To confirm that when new instruments are being evaluated, the specified accuracy requirement is  +/- 5 percent of the BAC with a precision requirem...

April 20, 2018


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 t...

April 5, 2018


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 5...

April 4, 2018


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 measu...

March 29, 2018


To obtain an admission from the CFS scientist that the disclosed annual maintenance records indicate that the police failed to take any steps to correct control tests on inspection that indicated the instrument's response had shifted well beyond not only a 3 mg...

March 28, 2018


To demonstrate that when the particular instrument was first placed into service, the tolerance verified by the independent authorized service centre for each of three test values was +/- 3 mmg/100mls.

To demonstrate that the initial verification matched the man...

March 25, 2018


To introduce the concept of "calibration interval" in the international literature.

March 24, 2018


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 accorda...

February 25, 2018


To educate the Court as to the "why" of the unreliability of an approved instrument to measure across the measuring interval if it has not been recently calibrated, inspected, maintained, re-calibrated.

It seems strange to think that a modern "approved instrumen...

Please reload

Featured Posts

OIML R126 is the International Standard for Evidential Breath Analyzers

August 14, 2018

Please reload

Recent Posts