SCRAM: What I See...
I have been contacted by a near thirty wearers, one has readily admitted to delinquently obstructing the bracelet---
After reading saran wrap and a trash bag didn't mask a drinking episode, and a read occured on a wearer that worked in an area where alcohol was used to clean circuitry components, obviously it doesn't take much an external contaminent to register. To further explain the sensitivity, the legally accepted partition ratio (parts blood to alcohol) is 2100:1 for a breath test machine, SCRAM is 15,000:1. This ratio is used to establish, as they call it, a reliable estimate of BAC. Since the terms of wearing the bracelet is abstinence, a BAC isn't necessary, and the graph only shows up to .08.
During research, I found that inhaled or dermal exposure to alcohol is metabolized a little different than consumption. That is there is a lack or absence of "first pass" where most consumed alcohol is eliminated, due to type of exposure or type of alcohol. This means the alcohol is directly introduced into the bloodstream, where the greater percentage is carried to the liver to be broke down and elimated, and while I'am convinced EtG is produced in this manner, there is no found research on these types of exposures on either SCRAM or EtG testing. In theory, a machine so sensitive (15,000:1), there may be a possibility a read can occur during the transport and final elimination of vapor or dermal exposure, add the consumption of ripened fruit (can contain up to 4% alcohol) or certain food combinations and "virtuality" becomes more a reality. They claim, "those who have not consumed alcohol do not produce signals that can be interpreted as an alcohol curve." But wait there's more;
PIRE's research showed that "spikey" reads may be from water accumulating in the bracelet, well, alcohol is attracted to water -- that is, it is soluble in water. Water trapped in the bracelet, accumulating in the sensor, ethanol is miscible with water which may explain the retarded diffusion that creates the curve, which adds to my original hypothesis that diffusion is retarded by the alcohol being trapped between the bracelet and skin. Most complaints I have heard of false-positive the reads lasted from 8 to 13 hours, unfortunately the print only reads to .08 which obfuscates the actual high point when proposing allegations against a client. For example, one may have reached a level of .53, then the diffusion started, from .08 to .00 it might resemble a curve, but there is nothing accounting for the period of time not read. A prosecuter can show when the alledged episode started, and blame any lapse in time on continued drinking, showing the end curve as proof of consumption- Maybe this lapse in time accounts for more of the virtual, in virtually no false-positives! Since no corroborating evidence is necessary for conviction, and/or a fictitious plea (the prosecuters favorite weapon) the amount of actual false-positives is unknown.
A peek at what I see:
Case 001: We are in the process of a false reading and are ready to persue all information on this subject. What and how do we obtain any experts in this area to get in contact with? I would appreciate any input as this a very unfortunate way to monitor alcohol related testing. Thank you for any input. We would be interested in hiring any expert to properly communicate on this subject....We have a very good lawyer but this is an interesting case in that my daughter called the scram supervisor and told her she was working as a hair model and she told my daughter to go ahead and get her hair done. The hair show used a product that contained alcohol and it read that she consumed the alcohol as opposed to topical. She has about ten people that will testify at 11 am she was not drinking and that a product was used that contained alcohol. The scram supervisor admits telling my daughter to get hair done. The discrepency is the reading. My daughter will volunteer a lie detector test as well as all of the witnesses who were with her in a professional setting. The reading so far is a low level with a burnout.
During the hearing.......
The doctor testified and explained all of the variables here.The city atty said it was possible our dughter drank for 13 hours a liittle bit at a time.
....Sound like an alcoholic??
After a long battle............
I can finally send this e-mail to you with good news.NOT GUILTY was the verdict after this long haul. The hearing was so amazing! The woman from scram was on the stand for a very long time and she made the most unbelievable statements. First of all she agreed that she really did not understand how to tell any difference between drinking alcohol or the absorbtion of it. Secondly she made the statemaent that there is no training or scientific evidence to train them, other than putting the bracelet on and waiting for the graph to sound an alarm if there is a reading. Lastly she said she remembers talking to our daughter and it "sounds like something i would say" (refering to getting her done). The prosecuter came up to our daughter after the verdict and said"the right decision was made, I could not have slept thinking you might go to jail" She then gave her a hug. What a crock if they think this is B.S. then why do they continue to use it?
Case 002: I was falsely accused of drinking and I expect I probably will be accused again. I was at work all day the day they said I was drinking all day. I took proof of this to my P.O, who told me "dont let it happen again". I have no idea how to not let it happen again, I look at the ingredients on the products I buy for my hair, skin, ect. and have not drank a drop. Isnt there a some way to insist that we are notified in a timely manner so that we may take a BAC to PROVE innocence? I am already developing a big abrasion, and I've only had this on for two months, which I think is a health issue....
Case 007
...Her charges aren't alcohol related, but as part of the program they are required to wear the SCRAM monitor. The ankle monitor she was wearing broke off and they charged her with criminal damage of $1400, which is a felony. She was at work at the time and had numerous witnesses who saw that it broke, that she didn't take it off. My husband, who is an engineer, saw the strap and wasn't too worried about it because in his opinion there was no way they could say it had been tampered with because it broke at the clasp....
Case 003: I have been placed on an Intermediate Punishment Program in _____----., and have had a great deal of respect for Judge Michael Barrase's effort to bring Recovery into the legal arena until recently. I was apprehended and returned to Lackawanna County Prison when my bracelet registered a positive reading for alcohol. I have been clean and sober for 9 mos., and can only attribute this reading to my use of cleaning products. I spent about 30 days in jail before I came to the realization that my P.O. as well as the judge were also victims of the claims from AMS and decided my only chance of getting out would be to admit to drinking even though i had not, as the system had relayed a message to my father that they were not trying to punish me they wanted to help me, but were waiting for me to get honest....
Otherwords, Those protecting a multi-million dollar investment wouldn't lie, nor the person who admits to drinking to opt out of jail.
No telling who lied, for I know and have reasonable doubt. Should their children lie, for millions or liberty, what's worth more???
Thanks to developmental support the National Institute on
Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), there has been
more published research about the WrisTAS device than the
SCRAM Bracelet...Because AMS is privately funded, most of SCRAM’s
research to-date has been unpublished....
After reading saran wrap and a trash bag didn't mask a drinking episode, and a read occured on a wearer that worked in an area where alcohol was used to clean circuitry components, obviously it doesn't take much an external contaminent to register. To further explain the sensitivity, the legally accepted partition ratio (parts blood to alcohol) is 2100:1 for a breath test machine, SCRAM is 15,000:1. This ratio is used to establish, as they call it, a reliable estimate of BAC. Since the terms of wearing the bracelet is abstinence, a BAC isn't necessary, and the graph only shows up to .08.
During research, I found that inhaled or dermal exposure to alcohol is metabolized a little different than consumption. That is there is a lack or absence of "first pass" where most consumed alcohol is eliminated, due to type of exposure or type of alcohol. This means the alcohol is directly introduced into the bloodstream, where the greater percentage is carried to the liver to be broke down and elimated, and while I'am convinced EtG is produced in this manner, there is no found research on these types of exposures on either SCRAM or EtG testing. In theory, a machine so sensitive (15,000:1), there may be a possibility a read can occur during the transport and final elimination of vapor or dermal exposure, add the consumption of ripened fruit (can contain up to 4% alcohol) or certain food combinations and "virtuality" becomes more a reality. They claim, "those who have not consumed alcohol do not produce signals that can be interpreted as an alcohol curve." But wait there's more;
PIRE's research showed that "spikey" reads may be from water accumulating in the bracelet, well, alcohol is attracted to water -- that is, it is soluble in water. Water trapped in the bracelet, accumulating in the sensor, ethanol is miscible with water which may explain the retarded diffusion that creates the curve, which adds to my original hypothesis that diffusion is retarded by the alcohol being trapped between the bracelet and skin. Most complaints I have heard of false-positive the reads lasted from 8 to 13 hours, unfortunately the print only reads to .08 which obfuscates the actual high point when proposing allegations against a client. For example, one may have reached a level of .53, then the diffusion started, from .08 to .00 it might resemble a curve, but there is nothing accounting for the period of time not read. A prosecuter can show when the alledged episode started, and blame any lapse in time on continued drinking, showing the end curve as proof of consumption- Maybe this lapse in time accounts for more of the virtual, in virtually no false-positives! Since no corroborating evidence is necessary for conviction, and/or a fictitious plea (the prosecuters favorite weapon) the amount of actual false-positives is unknown.
A peek at what I see:
Case 001: We are in the process of a false reading and are ready to persue all information on this subject. What and how do we obtain any experts in this area to get in contact with? I would appreciate any input as this a very unfortunate way to monitor alcohol related testing. Thank you for any input. We would be interested in hiring any expert to properly communicate on this subject....We have a very good lawyer but this is an interesting case in that my daughter called the scram supervisor and told her she was working as a hair model and she told my daughter to go ahead and get her hair done. The hair show used a product that contained alcohol and it read that she consumed the alcohol as opposed to topical. She has about ten people that will testify at 11 am she was not drinking and that a product was used that contained alcohol. The scram supervisor admits telling my daughter to get hair done. The discrepency is the reading. My daughter will volunteer a lie detector test as well as all of the witnesses who were with her in a professional setting. The reading so far is a low level with a burnout.
During the hearing.......
The doctor testified and explained all of the variables here.The city atty said it was possible our dughter drank for 13 hours a liittle bit at a time.
....Sound like an alcoholic??
After a long battle............
I can finally send this e-mail to you with good news.NOT GUILTY was the verdict after this long haul. The hearing was so amazing! The woman from scram was on the stand for a very long time and she made the most unbelievable statements. First of all she agreed that she really did not understand how to tell any difference between drinking alcohol or the absorbtion of it. Secondly she made the statemaent that there is no training or scientific evidence to train them, other than putting the bracelet on and waiting for the graph to sound an alarm if there is a reading. Lastly she said she remembers talking to our daughter and it "sounds like something i would say" (refering to getting her done). The prosecuter came up to our daughter after the verdict and said"the right decision was made, I could not have slept thinking you might go to jail" She then gave her a hug. What a crock if they think this is B.S. then why do they continue to use it?
Case 002: I was falsely accused of drinking and I expect I probably will be accused again. I was at work all day the day they said I was drinking all day. I took proof of this to my P.O, who told me "dont let it happen again". I have no idea how to not let it happen again, I look at the ingredients on the products I buy for my hair, skin, ect. and have not drank a drop. Isnt there a some way to insist that we are notified in a timely manner so that we may take a BAC to PROVE innocence? I am already developing a big abrasion, and I've only had this on for two months, which I think is a health issue....
Case 007
...Her charges aren't alcohol related, but as part of the program they are required to wear the SCRAM monitor. The ankle monitor she was wearing broke off and they charged her with criminal damage of $1400, which is a felony. She was at work at the time and had numerous witnesses who saw that it broke, that she didn't take it off. My husband, who is an engineer, saw the strap and wasn't too worried about it because in his opinion there was no way they could say it had been tampered with because it broke at the clasp....
Case 003: I have been placed on an Intermediate Punishment Program in _____----., and have had a great deal of respect for Judge Michael Barrase's effort to bring Recovery into the legal arena until recently. I was apprehended and returned to Lackawanna County Prison when my bracelet registered a positive reading for alcohol. I have been clean and sober for 9 mos., and can only attribute this reading to my use of cleaning products. I spent about 30 days in jail before I came to the realization that my P.O. as well as the judge were also victims of the claims from AMS and decided my only chance of getting out would be to admit to drinking even though i had not, as the system had relayed a message to my father that they were not trying to punish me they wanted to help me, but were waiting for me to get honest....
Otherwords, Those protecting a multi-million dollar investment wouldn't lie, nor the person who admits to drinking to opt out of jail.
No telling who lied, for I know and have reasonable doubt. Should their children lie, for millions or liberty, what's worth more???
Thanks to developmental support the National Institute on
Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), there has been
more published research about the WrisTAS device than the
SCRAM Bracelet...Because AMS is privately funded, most of SCRAM’s
research to-date has been unpublished....
posted by marcellus91872 at 2:26 AM
1 Comments:
My girlfriend has just been hauled off to jail without bond. I have been told she was intoxicated at times and dates when she was in the company of physicians she works for and with me (a medical professional also). I know this to be untrue. I am trying hire an attorney and expert witness. If any one has any helpful resources please contact me at cpcaudill9@yahoo.com
Post a Comment
<< Home