millerboycott.com

As I’ve indicated with numerous examples in earlier posts, these breath machines which determine guilt or innocence in drunk driving cases are not exactly the reliable devices that law enforcement would have us believe. Yet another example of that unreliability is the fact that the results will vary depending upon the breathing pattern of the person being tested. This has been confirmed in a number of scientific studies.

In one, for example, a group of men drank moderate doses of alcohol and their blood-alcohol levels were then measured by gas chromatographic analysis of their breath. The breathing techniques were then varied. 

The results indicated that holding your breath for 30 seconds before exhaling increased the blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) by 15.7%. Hyperventilating for 20 seconds immediately before the analyses of breath, on the other hand, decreased the blood-alcohol level by 10.6%. Keeping the mouth closed for five minutes and using shallow nasal breathing resulted in increasing the BAC by 7.3%, and testing after a slow, 20-second exhalation increased levels by 2%. “How Breathing Techniques Can Influence the Results of Breath-Alcohol Analyses”, 22(4) Medical Science and the Law 275.

For another study with similar findings, see “Accurate Measurement of Blood Alcohol Concentration with Isothermal Breathing”, 51(1) Journal of Studies on Alcohol 6.

Dr. Michael Hlastala, Professor of Physiology, Biophysics and Medicine at the University of Washington, has gone farther and concluded:

By far, the most overlooked error in breath testing for alcohol is the pattern of breathing….The concentration of alcohol changes considerably during the breath…The first part of the breath, after discarding the dead space, has an alcohol concentration much lower than the equivalent BAC. Whereas, the last part of the breath has an alcohol concentration that is much higher than the equivalent BAC. The last part of the breath can be over 50% above the alcohol level….Thus, a breath tester reading of 0.14% taken from the last part of the breath may indicate that the blood level is only 0.09%.” 9(6) The Champion 16 (1985).

Many police officers know this. They also know that if the breath alcohol test contradicts their judgement that the person they arrested is intoxicated, they won’t look good. So when they tell the arrestee to blow into the machine’s mouthpiece, they’ll yell at him, “Breathe harder! Harder! Keep breathing until I tell you to stop!” As Professor Hlastala has found, this method of breathing ensures that the breath captured by the machine will be from the bottom of the lungs, near the alveolar sacs, which will be richest in alcohol — giving a higher (but inaccurate) reading.
 

DUI BLOG

A man originally convicted of first-degree murder in a driving while impaired case is being released from prison today. Authorities had alleged at his trial that he was drinking and taking prescription medication before he was involved in a fatal accident September 4, 1996. Two Wake Forest students were killed in that car accident, a third was injured.

The man was convicted of first-degree murder in 1997, the first person to be convicted of such a crime in a DWI case. The North Carolina Supreme Court agreed with the criminal defense that prosecutors were wrong in seeking the first-degree murder charge. The state’s highest court threw out the conviction.

In 2003, the man faced a new trial, and eventually pled guilty to a second-degree murder charge. The judge imposed a sentence of 15 to 18 years in prison on the subsequent conviction, with credit for roughly six-and-a-half years of time served.

While the case set precedent that first-degree murder charges are not available to prosecutors in a DWI case, the events led to tougher DWI laws in North Carolina. In 1997, North Carolina DWI laws were stiffened as a result of the case. The new DWI law in 1997 set a mandatory minimum sentence for habitual drunk drivers and included a license revocation provision for North Carolina drivers charged with DWI.

The man is scheduled for release from prison after serving roughly 15 years. He will be released on post-release supervision for nine months in Iredell County. During his supervised release, strict terms will be monitored by his probation officer.

Source: Winston-Salem Journal, “Figure in landmark impaired-driving case leaves prison today,” Michael Hewlett, April 11, 2012

Greenville DUI Attorney Blog | North Carolina Underage Drinking Lawyer | Pitt County First DUI Law Firm

I live in a state where the political ads are out of control. Every commercial break is filled to bursting with them. "If you vote for candidate X they’ll continue their job killing agenda." "A vote for proposition Y is a vote for Big Oil." The slogans just go on and on to the point where I have to tune it out for my own sanity.

Personally, I read my voter guide and do my own online research to make my ballot choices. All of these ridiculously expensive commercials are completely wasted on me. In fact, I have less and less respect for the candidates / organizations identified as being behind them. I find their assumptions about my stupidity to be insulting (as if ANYONE decides to vote for job killing bills!).

Anyway, does any else feel the same way? Is anyone using this advertising to make their ballot choices?

I, like yourself, do all my research online (voting records if applicable) and try to stay informed on what candidates stand for what. I talk to so many people who, when describing a candidate or proposition, literally reiterate a commercial that was on the tv. I find it sad that more people base their votes that way as opposed to making an informed vote. This is especially important with the lesser known elections (ie. judicial seats) But the candidates air these commercials based on the assumption that their "registered voters" will vote based on their ads.

Political Campaign Advertising