© 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.

Maybe the Instrument Is No Longer Linear Enough to Be An "8000C"

May 22, 2018

Purpose:

To explore the analytical variability of the 8000C as determined by the Alcohol Test Committee during evaluation of the 8000C prior to type approval.

To compare the analytical variability of the individual 8000C used in the subject tests for the client with the analytical variability of the type or class 8000C determined by the Alcohol Test Committee.

To suggest that the instrument in the matter before the Court may no longer be a member of that class or type because it is no longer capable of maintaining the analytical variability of the type or class.

To suggest that the instrument in the matter before the Court may no longer have the linearity of the class or type 8000C because it no longer exhibits the linearity established during evaluation of the type or class.

To establish that we have some evidence,  that the linear kind of relationship, the created linear relationship that’s done by means of the calibration curve in terms of the – how the instrument works, in the case before the Court, we’ve got a possible interpretation that the relationship that normally should appear linear, the way that Ms. Martin found...is not linear.

To explain to the Court that creation of the calibration curve during factory calibration or re-calibration  of an 8000C instrument takes something which is inherently non-linear and turns the instrument  into a measuring device that can be used as if it were linear.

To suggest that if the instrument has lost that capability, over time, through drift, then the instrument ceases to be reliable and ceases to be a member of the type or class 8000C.

To use the ATC evaluations of the 8000C, the CFS 8000C Training Aid, and the Martin paper below to cross-examine a government scientist on linearity of the "approved instrument" before the Court.

 

 

 

Please reload

If you are a Canadian criminal defence lawyer and you wish to learn more about cross-examination on these issues, we suggest that you visit the Members page at www.impaired-driving.com and enroll in the three online courses that are described therein. Once you have completed the three online courses, you can apply to become a full Member at that site, and if you are accepted for membership, you will have access to the much more extensive Members Only Blog at that site, as well as  additional international resources, links, and materials.

If you are a Canadian criminal defence lawyer and you wish to learn more about cross-examination of Drug Recognition Experts we recommend that you attend an online or recorded session at  https://www.impaired-driving.com/dre-tutorial.

Featured Posts

OIML R126 is the International Standard for Evidential Breath Analyzers

August 14, 2018

1/5
Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

Archive
Please reload

Search By Tags