Thursday, November 30, 2006

Virtually No False-Positives.....

A quick google search, EtG false-positives, and the first thing I see," There are virtually no false positive tests (ie when EtG is positive alcohol has been consumed!) However, an important issue is that must be considered is ...". Well, I've heard that before, seems to be part of Jeffrey Hawthorne's (inventor of Scram) testimony, and I've seen it in an article advertising SCRAM:
There are Virtually no false-positives..........
Lets look at the word Virtually-
1)In fact or to all purposes; practically: The city was virtually paralyzed by the transit strike.
2)Almost but not quite; nearly: "Virtually everyone gets a headache now and then" (People).

'Virtual' has a similar meaning to 'quasi-' or 'pseudo-', meaning something that is almost something else, particularly when used in the adverbial form, e.g. "He's virtually [almost] my boyfriend."
Philosophy-
The current definition, that can hardly be distinguished from "potential", originates in medieval Scolastics and the pseudo-Latin "virtualis". Most prominent of these in contemporary philosophy has been Gilles Deleuze, who uses the term virtual to refer to something that every object carries with it, which is neither its reality nor merely what it could have been, but rather what it is imagined to be. "Virtual" is therefore taken to mean a potential state that could become actual. "Virtual" is opposed to "actual".

Synonyms- nearly, not absolutely, not actually, practically,

So, I guess it is safe to say that during testing the were nearly no false-positives!

Now lets look at the subjects tested in AMS's "tamper-proof white-paper", all 10, a seven day study two of which no testing was performed. Ten subjects in 5 days and there were nearly no false-positives. Quote- This low-level reading occurred because the test subject worked in an area where alcohol was used to clean circuitry components. Except for this anomaly,..." Today there are at least 2000 people being tested 7 days a week (up to 48 times a day), I hope they don't have to suffer the consequences of an ANOMALY!
As far as the benefits, it does have one up on the EtG tests, and that is time of alledged comsumption. If your in an area where there are camera's or able to establish a credible alibi, and can possibly identify the source, it may create reasonable doubt.
The benefits of EtG, there would be no chance of suffering the abrasions and scars left from the SCRAM bracelet on a percentage of subjects. And longevity, pitting the two against each other in court was my initial goal! It has been said that at least one doctor is conducting a for-profit company promoting the EtG test, and is looking into SCRAM- {I 'd like to see the expert testimony in that case.}
Reiteration:
I have yet to hear of anyone accused of drinking through EtG test in the legal community, allthough steps are being taken to cut the cost of the tests, which poses a problem. A defendant could very well use this as a defense- and with an expert testimony. It has been also noted that a probationer in the health care community, that has a concurrent probation with the courts, a positive test may be considered a violation of both the probations. Double jeopardy for a crime that may have never been committed.-Marcellus

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

SCRAM: Sufficating the Constitution

While some may claim the Right To Privacy was abolished when one was put on probation, an alternative to jail where there is no privacy, other constitutional rights have been disregarded when ordered to wear such a device.
First and foremost, ''nemo tenetur seipsum accusare,'' that is, ''no man is bound to accuse himself.'' Most clients are in favor of wearing the device, confident they can adhere to the terms and ignorant to the possibility of an erroneous read, until they walk into an office building with freshly cleaned carpets, or cut their lawn and with no delinquent actions- Incriminated themselves. This priveledge was intended to eliminate coercion in interrogation and in testimony, which lawyers are ever so gracious for an opportunity to use ones wording (not meaning) against them and manipulate facts to impute guilt. In North Carolina they have been having problems with independant for-profit companies selling the device to defendants, and Greg Stahl, the AOC's deputy director, raised a possible constitutional issue with SCRAM. "Can an offender be charged money to monitor himself, and monitor himself in a way that he might go to prison if he flunks?" Stahl asked rhetorically. In researching I found this excerpt defining the Fifth Amendment-...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; DUE PROCESS?

Now lets say there is a reading, false or not, a probationer will receive a letter in the mail which states the defendant is entitled to a hearing " to prove why he/she should not be held in contempt of court". In other words, Prove Your Innocents. While Presumption of innocents is not cited explicitly in the Constitution it is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th and 14th amendments.The intent is to put the burden of proof on the prosecution for proving innocents can be near impossible, for instance it's often impossible to establish an alibi if the person is home alone at the time of the crime, which happens all too often with the SCRAM system. A great number of accusation seem to occur when the defendants are sleeping, and with no further investigation, the defendant is forced to reap the consequences or confess to a violation that may or most likely didn't occur in hopes for a lighter sentence. I am conviced that they do not want the burden of proof because that may lead to an undetermined amount of erroneous reads and deem such a lucrative product frivolous. Further investigation does not necessarily mean wasting tax dollars on a police dispatch...the Sixth Amendment give us the...
NOTICE OF ACCUSATION
Which states the constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation entitles the defendant to insist that the indictment apprise him/her of the crime charged with such reasonable certainty that he/she can make their defense and protect themselves after judgment against another prosecution on the same charge. Informing a defendant would warrant nothing more than a phone call and an innocent client would have the time needed for an actual toxicology test, and that would be reasonable certainty that he/she can make their defense. If you are thinking this is a post-conviction offense, it would appear the revocation of parole or probation which has been imposed following sentencing, and prison disciplinary hearings will be determined according to due process and equal protection standards rather than by further expansion of the Sixth Amendment.
Due Process, Right to be Presumed Innocent, self incrimination, 5th, 6th and 14th amendments are just a few of the Constitutional rights to sufficate when "we the people" allow our legal community to become over-zealous denizens of for-profit companies. With no scientific scrutiny they allowed a device so vulnerable it "can detect them (socks) too...", as quoted by Jon Ugval of House Arrest Sevices, to jeapordize the liberty and family's well being of unsuspecting wearers. I have not even explored the fact that in trial there is no evidence, other than the reading, that is the bracelet is not equipped with a device to save the incriminating sample to be observed by the defense. The abuse of process, the convictions secured from reasonable suspicion or The Right To Bodily Integrity. Since my first post there has been two studies not commisioned by AMS, and PIRE's research found two of the 18 test subjects endured minor bruising and these people were probably not under the same circumstances as an actual probationer such as, no drivers liscense, walking or bicycling to the requisite of meetings, counseling, work etcetra. My research has found that 4 out of 10 wearers are subject to incredibly painful abrasions and infections, which in some cases resulted in permanent scars, it is 8 ounces pulling on your skin with every step, every motion, and treatment for the abrasions is null for ointments and cleaners can trigger erroneous reads and the bacteria is trapped in the bracelet, but until there is an actual case of necrosis, concern much like the burden of proof is placed on the client!

-Mike Gephart, corrections unit supervisor for Hennepin County- In some cases, he said, people admit: "Yeah, I did have a couple of beers.But I'm done. Others are in complete denial and say, 'I didn't drink.' "Instead, the latter group blames the device for emitting a false positive,Gephart said. One individual, for example, insisted a hair-care product containing alcohol had somehow triggered a bogus reading. That person was issued a warrant and hauled back to jail. http://lawenforcement.usenetbot.com/archives/2003/10/27/P2.html
ON THE OTHER HAND:
The anklet also is sensitive to any alcohol that comes in contact with the skin. For example, one anklet registered when the man wearing it put on a shirt washed in a detergent that contained alcohol.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/local/12204846.htm
AND GEPHART AGAIN SAME ARTICLE:
Gephart said that like any new technology, there have been "minor" issues with SCRAM. In one case, authorities issued a warrant to put someone back in jail after a positive alcohol reading was triggered.But the warrant was recalled when officials couldn't "absolutely"determine a drinking violation occurred.Without going into detail, Gephart said the substance that triggered the reading is something that could be found on a construction site, as the probationer claimed.

Originally posted: 02/28/2006
REFERENCES:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://lp.findlaw.com/

HOME

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

SCRAM: Illinois Buys It

Their hyping it up in Illinois-

[...]Some critics argue it's another example of Big Brother encroaching on personal liberties, but supporters contend it's the best tool yet for combating alcohol-related crimes and clogged jails and prisons.[...]
A Big Brother approach is an understatement...

[...]The eight-ounce ankle bracelet [...]

Will hobble one with abrasions, bruising, infection (How does one clean the wound?) and leaves permanent scars...

[...]"We still have to work out a lot of details," said Birkett, a lieutenant governor candidate, "but this is going to focus on people who clearly have an alcohol problem and their alcohol use is tied to their crime."
Ironically, one of the state's top DUI defense attorneys, Donald Ramsell, worked with the company on legal issues. He supports it as long as the program is voluntary and isn't abused to punish social drinkers.[...]

And the deciding factor can be how high the EBT result is, erroneous it may be...

[...]"You want to make sure it's accurate and that there's a process in place to appeal a reading if it's in dispute," said Ed Yohnka, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois.[...]
Yeah, proving innocence is "virtually" impossible, in fact, impossible in most scenarios...
[...] 45.2 percent of fatal crashes in the state involved intoxication, compared to 39.6 nationwide.[...]

Completely inflated, fictitious statement, remove intoxication and add "a measurable amount of alcohol in any driver, occupant or pedestrian involved" and we are a little closer to 45%...

"I believe that most people would not mind the slight
inconvenience of being arrested for a low blood-alcohol
level, given the opportunity to prove their innocence …"53
Linda Campion, MADD presenter and founder of the Kathleen A. Campion Foundation