Problems with the Intoxilyzer 8000 and Power Outages

The FDLE website has a section on its website where it sporadically adds “Miscellaneous and Correspondence” on different Intoxilyzer 8000 machines.
Criminal defense attorneys rarely get notice when the machines suffer from serious malfunctions. Instead, the attorneys are instructed by the State Attorney’s Office to sift through the poorly organized FDLE website to find information on each Intoxilyzer. The search often turns up some interesting problems with the Intoxilyzer 8000 machines in Florida.
The documents that show major failures with the instruments are often buried in the miscellaneous correspondence section.
For example, read this miscellaneous correspondence on the Intoxilyzer 8000, Serial Number 80-000792 maintained by the St. Lucie Sheriff’s Office.
This e-mail really shows how creative the Agency inspectors have to be to skirt the rules and keep the instruments online. I cut and paste David Snow’s E-Mail on Intoxilyzer Problems below:
Shanahan, Jake
From: David Snow
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 3:10 PM
To: Shanahan, Jake
Subject: Intoxilyzer Staus [sic]
Jake [Shanahan, FDLE Department Inspector],
I attempted to do inspections yesterday on the 3 instruments. A bad simulator running the interferent was discovered too late. At first I thought it was just a loose hose or loose cap. A power outage occurred at the jail and I ran out of time, as I was due in court. I went back today to re-run inspections. 80-00788 and 80-00792 inspected fine and 80-00794 kept running into ambient and purge fails, resulting in me having to fail the instrument.
A cord came loose from 792 causing it to lose power and NOT save the inspection. I ran out of time to re-inspect it today. I don’t know if I will get time again to get another inspection in before the end of the month, as I am off until Tuesday (April 1st). 792 is a dormant instrument and is never used. Deputy Gordineer (alternative [Agency Inspector]) is on light duty, but I will need to see if he can inspect 792 on Monday. I will upload 788 and 794 on Tuesday.
Any thoughts on the failure in reference to 794? I moved the instrument to try to re-test it, FYI, with same results.
I would like to try to two [sic] trim down to 2 instruments and was wondering how I could put 1 out of service, to be brought back in service if necessary?
I also need more mouth alcohol and interferent solutions for testing.
If I didn’t have short hair, I would be pulling it out right now.
Thanks for any help on this.
Dave [David Snow, Agency Inspector for St Lucie Sheriff’s Office]
A power outage during an inspection is one of the few ways to make sure that all data from a failed inspection is NOT saved. No judge, prosecutor or defense attorney will ever see the data.
Since the agency inspector only gets to re-test once before being required to remove the Intoxilyzer 8000 from service, a convenient power failure can save the day.
If the Intoxilyzer 8000 fails an inspection 10 times in a row and the Agency Inspector pulls the plug each time, then no data would be left except for the 10 unexplained log in records. [A least one FDLE Department Inspector has been fired for teaching Agency Inspectors this little trick for destroying evidence of a failed inspection.]
This e-mail discusses two more mysterious power outages on the Intoxilyzer 8000 with Serial Number 80-000794. The first power outage occurred “at the jail.” The second time the instrument lost power during an inspection occurred the very next day. This time the power outage occurred when the “cord came loose… causing it to lose power.”
A cynical person might think that short hair is not the only thing this Agency Inspector is pulling out.
Read more about freak power outages during agency inspections – Falling Surge Protectors in Hillsborough County.
Read how one FDLE Department Inspector uses her cell phone and RFI to manipulate the Intoxilyzer 8000 instead of pulling the plug.
Read more about using the excuse that “the instrument inspection did not comply due to the fact that a sample was not provided during the allotted time necessary for this test to take place” when the attempted power outage failed.

Continue Reading...

More Crime Lab Problems: Philly Lab Tech Flunk Competency Test

and time and time again we find out that these  simple requests are not being met.

THREE TRACE-evidence technicians have flunked a routine test administered to uphold the Philadelphia Police Department crime lab’s accreditation, police brass announced Tuesday.

Each technician tests hundreds of pieces of evidence a year for traces of blood and semen, so if investigators determine that the methods are problematic, it could throw countless court cases into question, authorities acknowledged.

City officials learned of the test failures “within the last 24 hours” and decided to announce them to assure the public that they are moving swiftly to address them, even though they’re fuzzy on many details, said Mike Garvey, director of the crime lab.

The lab has 12 trace examiners; they’re tested by an outside agency twice a year, six at a time, to ensure their competency. Although just half of the six most recently tested failed, the agency that administers the test hasn’t yet told the city which three flubbed it. They’re expected to do so by early June.

Until then, Garvey said, all six have been removed from their trace-examination duties. Once the three are identified, they will be retrained. Authorities will reexamine every case they handled, Garvey said. All six examiners tested are veterans, and until now none of the lab’s 12 trace technicians has failed a test since at least 2004, Garvey added. The 12 technicians handle about 3,000 cases a year.

“We don’t have all the answers yet,” Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey said. “This is just starting.”

Garvey added: “It’s the right call, if there’s any question [about accuracy].”

Tuesday’s announcement comes about a year after police officials announced another embarrassing flub — miscalibrated Breathalyzer machines — that threw more than 1,100 drunken-driving cases into limbo. The goof prompted the District Attorney’s Office to review thousands of ongoing cases and even retry some.

Tasha Jamerson, spokeswoman for the District Attorney’s Office, said that so many details remain unknown about how or why the examiners flunked the test that she couldn’t comment on how it would impact ongoing court cases. n

Contact Dana DiFilippo at difilid@phillynews.com or 215-854-5934. Read her blog at phillyconfidential.com.

In cases like DUI where the crime lab reports make up the bulk of the evidence against the accused, these kinds of failures threaten many people with false DUI convictions. The problem is rampant and widespread.  I have witnessed numerous cases in Pennsylvania where blood tests have been proven to be scientifically invalid because the science was not there. It was not valid. It was not reliable.

Stay tuned to the happenings in Philly…I have a feeling we have only scratched the surface.

View the original article here

Continue Reading...