Posts Tagged ‘Tested’

How Do You Know the Blood They Tested Was Yours?

Friday, May 6th, 2011

Let me tell you about one of my law firm’s cases that ended up in a Los Angeles Times article entitled "DUI Case Botched by Blood Mixup".

One of our attorneys, Lane Scherer, had a young client who had been arrested for drunk driving by the Los Angeles Police Department and had a blood sample drawn from his arm. He swore to us that he was innocent, and we believed him. Problem: the blood alcohol content of the sample was .15% — almost twice the drunk driving limit.

Now what?

We obtained a portion of the sample from the LAPD crime lab and sent it to a private lab that we use for reanalyzing the blood samples of all our DUI clients. The lab reported the blood alcohol level to be .13% — lower, but a long way from being under .08%. As we requested, the lab also tested for preservative and anticoagulent (either fermentation or coagulation can raise the alcohol level in the sample), but everything appeared in order.

Our client still insisted he was not driving under the influence of alcohol. The only other possibility was a faulty chain of custody. In other words, the LAPD lab (the same one that botched the O.J. Simpson case) got the vial of our client’s blood mixed up and tested someone else’s blood.

So we had the sample blood-typed to see if it was that of another arrestee. Result: type O — the same as our client’s. But, then, that’s the most common type of blood.

We decided to try something different, something that, to our knowledge, had not been done before in any DUI case. We had blood taken from our client and, along with a portion of the remaining sample from the LAPD lab, shipped to a laboratory in Oklahoma that specialized in DNA testing.

A month or so later the report came back: the blood tested by LAPD was conclusively not that of our client.

The prosecutor in the case initially refused to accept these results. But after we proved that the comparison blood had come from our client and after LAPD checked the blood themselves, he reluctantly dismissed all criminal charges.

Predictably, in the L.A. Times article LAPD tried to point the finger at someone else:

Police officials said they are investigating how the mix-up occurred and who is responsible, But, they said, they are fairly confident that the lab did not make a mistake.

One possible explanation, they said, was that the blood was mistakenly labeled when it was initially drawn by nurses at LAPD’s jail intake facility in Van Nuys.

As always, the police claim infallibility: "We do not make mistakes.  It was the nurses".

So how could this have happened? The truth is that it probably happens far more commonly than you might think.

When a blood sample is drawn from the suspect in a DUI case rather than using a breath machine, the sample is supposed to be inserted into a vial containing preservative and anticoagulent, then shaken and sealed. Procedures require that a chain of custody be established: the location of the vial of blood must be identifiable at all times so that it does not become contaminated or mixed up with someone else’s vial. This is done by labelling the seal with identifying information, then usually placing the sealed vial in an evidence locker (which should be refrigerated but often is not) until it is transported to the crime laboratory for further storage and refrigeration. At any stage of this chain of custody, of course, things can go wrong with the vial or the records.

It may be a week or so before the vial is finally analyzed. This is commonly done using gas chromatograph instruments, and the vial is one of many analyzed in large batches. A batch is a group of vials, perhaps 40 or more which are analyzed in sequence; this is much faster and more economical than isolating, identifying and separately analyzing one vial after another.

Of course, it is critically important that the sequence of vials tested by the gas chromatograph coincide with the sequence of vials in the records. If the sequence of numbering of the vials is off by one, then the records will show a result from the analysis of another vial. And it won’t be just one person whose blood is falsely reported: every other vial may also be one off — and will all be wrong. And you have 40 people people facing criminal charges based upon false evidence.

"How do I know the blood they tested was mine?"  Simple — if you can get a portion of the sample from the crime lab and have an extra 00 for DNA testing laying around.

Otherwise, I guess you’ll never know…
 

DUI BLOG

2009: Roughly 4000 Drivers Killed in Accidents Tested Positive For Drugs

Saturday, December 4th, 2010

December is National Drunk and Drugged Driving Prevention month. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says that roughly one of every five drivers killed in automobile accidents last year had drugs in their system at the time of the crash, according to recent NHTSA research.

Gil Kerlikowske, the White House Drug Policy Director, says the data is a “good first attempt” to greater understanding of the role drugs play in motor vehicle fatalities. All 50 states set .08 as the legal limit for blood alcohol levels as evidence that a driver is impaired including under North Carolina DWI laws. Researchers have not determined what level of specific drugs in a person’s system lead to impairment for drivers.

The NHTSA says that the new data does not clearly state that drugs were a factor in causing the fatal car accidents. More studies are necessary to determine the level of drugs that show whether a person is driving while impaired, according to the agency.

The NHTSA researchers say the numbers may also underreport the number of drivers who had drugs in their system. The agency says that only about three out of every five drivers killed in a motor vehicle accident were tested for drugs after the crash. Testing of accident victims varies from state to state. In 2009, roughly 33 percent of drivers who were killed and were later tested for drugs, tested positive.

The NHTSA research includes illegal drugs and prescription drugs. Aspirin, nicotine, alcohol and drugs administered during treatment after the accident were excluded from the study. The agency says that different drugs linger in the body for different periods of time. The agency did not determine how long before the crash the drugs were ingested by the drivers who tested positive.

The research says roughly 4000 of the 22,000 drivers killed in auto accidents last year tested positive.

Kerlikowske says as research and awareness of the “significant problem” increases, “there is just no reason we won’t be able to make progress” in the area of drug impairment. Kerlikowske says research and awareness has made strides in reducing driving while impaired related to alcohol.

Source: Associated Press, “Gov’t: Drugs were in 1 in 5 drivers killed in 2009,” 30 Nov 2010

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