millerboycott.com

Florida has the unfortunate distinction of being a hotbed for car insurance fraud. While authorities have been taking steps to crack down on fraudsters, many innocent victims are still duped by insurance fraud. Even if you have no intention of committing fraud after a Hialeah truck accident or car accident, being duped could mean that you are accused of taking part in fraud. You may also see your insurance rates rise if you are in an accident caused by a fraudster.

If you have been in a Hialeah car accident, there are many steps you can take to avoid becoming a victim of fraud:

1) Visit legal and medical professionals you trust. Most attorneys and medical professionals are honest and professional, but some in both industries have been involved in fraud. Ask for recommendations or do some quick research if you do not know any professionals in Hialeah. Honest professionals will welcome questions and will have abundant proof that they are honest professionals.

2) Be wary of any offers that seem too good to be true. If someone offers an advance payment or a settlement in person or through the mail that seems very high, be wary. An honest Hialeah personal injury attorney will evaluate your case, will be able to explain how much your case may be worth and why, and will be able to advise you of the strength of your case. No attorney, however, can guarantee a settlement or compensation.

3) Get documentation. If you can, take photos of the car accident site, the damage, and the other car. Keep careful records of witness contact information, contact information for other drivers involved, the time and date of the accident, and any other information. Note how many passengers were in the other car and get contact information for each person. Keep detailed notes about medical treatments received and get copies of any medical records and police records you can.

4) Check your documentation. Compare any statements received against the records you keep. This will help you see whether medical claims are padded with treatments you did not get or if more people are claiming injuries than were actually in the car. Both are common red flag signs of fraud after a Hialeah truck accident or car accident, but many people miss these signs because they do not check the records.

5) Report to the police even if the accident was not major. Any accident involving minor damage and injuries should be reported, since you will get an accident report, which will be important when you file an insurance claim. It is another step in the documentation process. You should also contact the police if you feel that you have been the victim of insurance fraud.

Florida Car Accident Lawyer Blog

Are identity thieves staging car collisions to steal your personal information and your identity? Experts believe so. According to some experts, some identity thieves are staging car accidents – usually minor fender benders – in order to get personal information from a target. The ruse works because after a Miami car accident, victims are usually shaken up and provide more information than is needed. When identity thieves get insurance information, a target’s name, number, address, and other personal information, they often have enough information to steal that person’s identity. With a stolen identity, the thief may be able to access credit card accounts, bank accounts, and other forms of money or may be able to open accounts in a target’s name. To prevent this from happening to you after a Miami truck accident or car accident, follow these expert tips:

1) Be on the alert for signs of a staged accident. If a car seems to have time to avoid a car accident but bumps into you anyway or if you see anything else suspicious, proceed with caution. Document as much as possible – take photos of the other car and be sure to get contact information for the driver and any witnesses.

2) Give out only the minimum information you need to. According to The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), you only need to provide your first and last name and the name and phone number of your insurance company. Giving out your number and your address or other personal details, while seemingly innocent, is enough for someone to pose as you online.

3) Stay calm and be on the lookout for someone trying to get more information than needed. Fraudsters often take advantage of the stress and panic of a Miami car collision to dupe you into providing more information than you need to. It is best to stay calm and only provide the minimum needed. Be wary if someone presses you to provide more identifying information, especially if they ask for things such as birth date and other identifying information. If you do give out personal details, write them out yourself or spell them as the other driver writes them down. Never hand over your driver’s license or other ID – it contains enough information for a fraudster to steal your identity.

4) Check your credit score twice a year, and be careful to check your credit score and credit report after a Miami traffic accident. Your credit report, readily available from any credit agency, will show you if anyone has tried to open a new account in your name. There are three major credit agencies in the US, and you may wish to periodically order a report from each, since each agency has a different way of gathering data.

Florida Car Accident Lawyer Blog

The prosecution’s evidence in many drunk driving cases relies heavily upon the testimony of a forensic toxicologist — an expert in blood and breath alcohol analysis.  In most cases, these "experts" are not independent witnesses, but either work for the police crime lab or have lucrative contracts with law enforcement.  

Increasingly over recent years, the role of these witnesses — who are presented to juries as objective and impartial scientists — has shifted from objectivity to one of being "team players" who will testify in support of the government’s case, regardless of the facts.  And, unfortunately, the defendant is rarely able to afford a truly independent expert to present a more objective view of the blood or breath alcohol analysis.

Just as the objectivity of the prosecution’s "expert" has shifted, so has the incidence of these professional witness’ fraudulent qualifications… 

Court’s Drug Expert Called a Fraud

Dallas, TX.  July 2 – A presumed expert in alcohol, DNA and drug testing, who has testified in hundreds of family and criminal cases, is an unqualified imposter with no college degree, according to a class action in Dallas County Court.

Lead plaintiff B.W.D. sued James W. Turnage, his company Forensic DNA & Drug Testing Services, and Medtox Scientific, in Dallas County Court.

B.W.D. claims that as a result of Turnage’s flawed testimony, thousands of parents have lost access to their children and countless citizens are behind bars…

B.W.D. says Turnage holds himself out as an expert in drug testing and evaluating drug test results, and that Turnage has been appointed to do drug tests in custody disputes and criminal matters in Dallas, Tarrant, Collin and Denton counties for years.

"Turnage, however, lacks even the minimal educational requirements to work in any technical job in a licensed drug and alcohol testing laboratory," the complaint states. "Turner has no college degree and is not a toxicologist; he is an imposter. He has masqueraded for years as a technical or scientific expert in the field of toxicology or drug and alcohol testing and has presented himself to the public and the courts as an expert witness by disseminating non-peer review papers to the legal community that contain false scientific information and data cut and pasted without cited references."

The plaintiff claims that Turnage is qualified only to be a specimen collector, and has failed to distinguish between that job and that of a forensic toxicologist, who is a qualified expert with years of scientific training.

"The impact of Turnage’s unsupervised, unchecked, unregulated mishandling of specimens and his unregulated and unqualified interpretations of test results or deliberate manipulation of the process has a far reaching effect on the citizens of Dallas, Collin, Denton and Tarrant Counties," the complaint states.

"Literally thousands of mothers and fathers have been denied possession of their children and countless number of citizens are behind bars based on Turnage’s handling of the specimens and his interpretation of the test results."

B.W.D. says he submitted urine specimens to Turnage for drug tests, for a child custody matter in March 2010.

Five months later, B.W.D. claims, Turnage testified that a urine specimen he submitted that was analyzed by Medtox was invalid due to dilution.

B.W.D. claims Medtox’s results did not indicate dilution and that because of Turnage’s misrepresentation, he was forced to agree to weekly random urinalysis for alcohol and drugs, installation of a breathalyzer in his car for a year and other onerous terms, to maintain joint custody of his daughter…

B.W.D. claims he has taken about 60 tests with other labs contemporaneously with Turnage’s tests and passed all of them, yet several of Turnage’s test results have come back with false positives, have been resubmitted for retesting, have been tainted or invalidated or were sent to Medtox well beyond 24 hours after collection…

This was a civil child custody case, but as indicated in the story, the same "expert" testifies for the prosecution in criminal cases as well — presumably, to help convict citizens accused of drunk driving.

(Thanks to attorney Michael Kessler of Florida.)
 

DUI BLOG

The critical part of any pre-arrest drunk driving investigation is the administration of the "field sobriety tests" (FSTs).  These usually consist of a battery of excercises involving balance, coordination and mental agility — and are difficult to perform for even a sober person under ideal conditions (see "Field Sobriety Tests: Designed for Failure?"). 

Although there are many different tests (walk-and-turn, finger-to-nose, alphabet, etc.), an increasing number of law enforcement agencies are requiring their officers to use only the federally-recommended battery of three "standardized" FSTs.  The most recently developed of these three is horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN), commonly known as the "eye test".  It is particularly effective in trial not because of its accuracy, but rather because it appears to jurors as scientific in nature.

As I have indicated in previous posts, however, HGN as a test for intoxication is fundamentally flawed and rarely understood or properly administered by police officers.  (See "Nystagmus: The Eye Test", "Nystagmus: The Eye Test (Part 2)", and "Nystagmus: The Eye Test (Part 3)".)

A recent scientific study has now investigated the scientific validity of the nystagmus test:

The Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test was conceived, developed and promulgated as a simple procedure for the determination of the blood alcohol concentration of drivers suspected of driving while intoxicated (DWI). Bypassing the usual scientific review process and touted through the good offices of the federal agency responsible for traffic safety, it was rushed into use as a law enforcement procedure, and was soon adopted and protected from scientific criticism by courts throughout the United States. In fact, research findings, training manuals and other relevant documents were often held as secrets by the state. Still, the protective certification of its practitioners and the immunity afforded by judicial notice failed to silence all the critics of this deeply flawed procedure….

In 1998 the integrity of the statistical evaluation of the original research upon which the validity of the tests rested was unfavorably reviewed [5]. In 2001 new research indicated that the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), the cornerstone of the test battery was fundamentally flawed and that the HGN test was improperly conducted by more than 95% of the police officers who used it to examine drivers suspected of driving whileintoxicated (DWI) [6]. This summary critique demonstrates that it is scientifically meretricious and that the United States Department of Transportation indulged in deliberate fraud in order to mislead the law enforcement and legal communities into believing the test was scientifically meritorious and overvaluing its worth in the context of criminal evidence….

Deliberate fraud.  Pretty strong language for a scientific journal.  After reviewing the flawed and deceptive justifications for using nystagmus in DUI investigations, the researchers concluded that the test was essentially without scientific validity.

 
The state’s argument for the field sobriety tests does not rest on proof of merit, but upon qui tacet consentit reasoning that those tests have been so widely accepted they must have been subjected to some kind of review prior to adoption in the many jurisdictions where they are used, that somewhere along the way someone would have spotted the flaws and shortcomings. Considering that the student manual was originally considered to be a confidential state document and was only obtained through an Open Records Act request, silence from the scientific community cannot be considered an endorsement of the program.

DUI BLOG