SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the take-a-deep-breath-before-reading dept.
These Machines Can Put You in Jail. Don't Trust Them.
A million Americans a year are arrested for drunken driving, and most stops begin the same way: flashing blue lights in the rearview mirror, then a battery of tests that might include standing on one foot or reciting the alphabet.
What matters most, though, happens next. By the side of the road or at the police station, the drivers blow into a miniature science lab that estimates the concentration of alcohol in their blood. If the level is 0.08 or higher, they are all but certain to be convicted of a crime.
But those tests — a bedrock of the criminal justice system — are often unreliable, a New York Times investigation found. The devices, found in virtually every police station in America, generate skewed results with alarming frequency, even though they are marketed as precise to the third decimal place.
Judges in Massachusetts and New Jersey have thrown out more than 30,000 breath tests in the past 12 months alone, largely because of human errors and lax governmental oversight. Across the country, thousands of other tests also have been invalidated in recent years.
The machines are sensitive scientific instruments, and in many cases they haven't been properly calibrated, yielding results that were at times 40 percent too high. Maintaining machines is up to police departments that sometimes have shoddy standards and lack expertise. In some cities, lab officials have used stale or home-brewed chemical solutions that warped results. In Massachusetts, officers used a machine with rats nesting inside.
[...] Technical experts have found serious programming mistakes in the machines' software. States have picked devices that their own experts didn't trust and have disabled safeguards meant to ensure the tests' accuracy.
[...] Yet the tests have become all but unavoidable. Every state punishes drivers who refuse to take one when ordered by a police officer.
I strongly suggest reading the entire article. Breath-taking and sobering is an understatement.
Also at CNET
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @04:55PM (1 child)
It is advantageous to the state that their drug and alcohol tests are inaccurate and generate false positives at an unacceptably high rate. The carceral system needs new victims all the time to keep the flow of government money pouring into the rat hole.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:09PM
That's a good point. The wall should come down to keep our tax payer money flowing into the non tax payer criminal system.
(Score: 4, Informative) by ikanreed on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:06PM (3 children)
*Almost all of the the "DNA tests" they do for crime scenes are not full genome sequencing, but visual spot test electrophoresis, which can distinguish on among about 20-50 people before getting duplicate results from chance.
*Fingerprint experts will often give different analyses to the same finger-prints if the image is rotated a few degrees.
*The central crime lab in my state had a huge scandal because one of their employees was just writing conclusion reports agreeing with whatever the arresting officer said without doing any tests
*The most popular interrogation method(crying when punishments are described is treated as a sign of guilt) is known to have a high false confession rate, and the very person convicted using it turned out to be innocent
*Everything you've ever heard about eyewitness testimony being bad
The great thing is none of those are so bad as to be inadmissible in court, like lie detectors or body language analysis. Just flawed in ways not nearly enough people appreciate.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday November 05 2019, @07:11PM (1 child)
Couple all of the above with Milgram's results (mindless obedience authority), and you've got kangaroos with rubber stamps on their feet loose in the justice system.
One of the worst frameworks left by the founding fathers was to be tried by a jury of one's peers - not that I have a better suggestion, but it's the at the crux of courtroom injustice.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @07:48PM
In most jurisdictions you have the option of a bench trial [wikipedia.org].
Unfortunately, most state and local judges are *elected*, which gives them an incentive to increase the rate at which "criminals" are caged.
In fact, this 2010 documentary [imdb.com] about abuses in the Massachusetts criminal justice system gives a great overview of how corruption works.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @10:00PM
A favorite story of mine is how a buddy of mine accidentally submitted the same fingerprints to a fingerprint expert once during a deposition. The look on his face when I pointed out a few days later that the expert said none of the fingerprints matched, even though the expert had identical (but differently cropped) fingerprint images in the set he examined, was priceless. I really wish I could have seen the expert's face when confronted by that in court, but the prosecutor dismissed the charge for unrelated reasons so that never happened.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:14PM (7 children)
Yeah, and this assumes that the method they use to measure your BAC in the first place is accurate if the thing is properly calibrated, which it really isn't.
Hey, I've got this crazy idea -- maybe instead of testing somebody's breath, let's test their blood to determine something called their "Blood Alcohol Content."
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:26PM
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:29PM
BAC really means "Bank Account Content". The machine is an ATM for the city/state
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday November 05 2019, @07:13PM
We "played" with blow test BAC analyzers at a party once. Takeaway lesson: NEVER EVER blow into one of those things immediately after taking a drink - the evaporating alcohol in your trachea and mouth will destroy your legality.
Or, if you want the Banzai defense: do pop a capsule of grain alcohol between your teeth just before blowing, the reading it produces will indicate that you are clinically dead and preserved.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday November 05 2019, @09:26PM (3 children)
Which states provide you the option of a blood test instead of a breath test?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @10:04PM
Most, but you usually have to pay for it.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 05 2019, @11:01PM
"Not enough" is the answer I would assume.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Wednesday November 06 2019, @02:31AM
Where I live (don't know about other states) the breath test is a screening test - blow positive and you get a blood test (which you don't need to take, but a refusal is deemed an admission of guilt).
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by hwertz on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:15PM (1 child)
Iowa took care of this years ago -- although I'm assuming the lawyers got rid of it over the years. They passed a law saying one could not challenge a breathalyzer based on the police failing to calibrate it!
I'd just like to note -- one of the reasons the limit USED to be 0.12 was because they knew darn well these machines weren't that accurate .. the original limit was high enough the person was DEFINITELY drunk, even accounting for generous margins of error of the machine.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 06 2019, @01:35AM
Citation needed. Not only can you challenge any evidence of any crime in court, any less being a violation of due process, but Iowa has a website specifically designed to assist people who want to challenge their BAC results: https://breathalcohol.iowa.gov/ [iowa.gov] The only thing even close to what you said is that you cannot subsequently challenge a refusal to take a breath or urine test after the two hour spoliation window closes.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:18PM (1 child)
Just do an internet search, use my terms "people fail sobriety tests when sober" or similar.
Each and every one of those little tests appear to be easy, and simple. But, individually, each of those tests has a "trick" to it. That is, the test proves to be mildly challenging for most people, sober or not. Medical conditions, mental conditions, emotional conditions (including the stress of being pulled over) and more affect how well you can perform the test.
The state, in it's beneficience, doesn't declare you to be sober after passing one mildly challenging test, instead, subjecting you to three, five, or maybe even more tests. Individually, you may pass any one of those tests, but collectively, you're going to stumble somewhere.
The cop is looking for an arrest. The tests are judged subjectively by the cop. Your odds of passing whichever collection of tests he throws at you are rather slim.
If you have to submit to a breathalyzer test, then do so. But never consent to a roadside sobriety test. They are complete and utter bullshit. At least the breathalyzer has some science behind it.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:27PM
Since I don't drink, I would ask for a blood test if it is at all possible.
Meanwhile, I can tell you the alphabet forward and backward, and the Hebrew alphabet forward. (don't ask, in 2015 I thought I would try something different than learning another programming language.)
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:25PM (1 child)
Here is a clear example of a breathalyzer not working as expected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhmc4QnY0J0 [youtube.com]
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday November 05 2019, @09:22PM
And an "example" of a roadside sobriety test [youtube.com] not working as expected.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by HiThere on Tuesday November 05 2019, @05:49PM (2 children)
My bathroom scale is precise to a tenth of a pound, but if I weight twice in succession the difference can be over a pound. Well, that's a level of accuracy I can live with in a bathroom scale, but the point is it *IS* precise to a tenth of a pound, it's just not that accurate.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday November 05 2019, @07:17PM
Our bathroom scale has a software routine in it that produces the same reading every time you step on it, until the reading it takes varies by more than something like 1.5 lbs.
Hysteresis FTW, not.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday November 05 2019, @07:50PM
I remember in school four decades ago, my initial confusion about the difference between precision and accuracy.
My daily commute to work is about 21,387,528 miles, 785 feet, 3 and 7/32 inches.
Highly precise -- to the 32nd of an inch!
Ridiculously inaccurate. Implausibly so.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday November 05 2019, @09:39PM (3 children)
Wow, these stories of gross neglect and outright disdain for facts, justice, and public safety remind me eerily of my years as a defense contractor. Over and over, I was pressured to rubber stamp approval of a project so my employer could sell it to the military boys. The military boys wanted something to show as well, and often aligned with management to add further pressure. I protested, of course. Also, I fully realized that if I went along with what they wanted, they sure as hell would not have my back if there were any problems. They would throw me under the bus in a heartbeat, blame the fiasco entirely on me.
And problems were guaranteed. I knew of a whole lot, knew that in the cases where the product was not total vaporware, it would fail to perform adequately. They were very unhappy that I wasn't more cooperative, giving me bad reviews and building the case they felt they needed to justify firing me. The threat was very real, but there was also an element of showy blustering, to try to scare me into being more cooperative. The situation was very much "damned if you do, damned if you don't."
My employer also lied, telling the military that I had approved projects when I had done no such thing. Just like the testers, technicians and scientists in the article. Took a while for me to learn of it, and when I did, they acted like they'd successfully managed a fait accompli, and made it clear that now that I knew, I was expected to go along with it, support the charade they were attempting to maintain, since now my reputation was also apparently on the line. When the charade collapsed, as was guaranteed the instant anyone looked at it funny let alone poked at it, turning their whole effort into a very embarrassing face plant, they were furious with me for not doing more to "make it happen", not rushing in to heroically save the situation, as if I or anyone could, especially when they hadn't even informed me of this terrible plan until it was unfolding. Part of this was this "gun to the head" thinking that by putting extreme pressure upon employees, they can be made to perform miracles. Yes, with my job, and career, on the line, I would magically discover a way to save the situation from utter disaster. Predictably, they then attempted to cover their own behinds by blaming everything on me. I have not worked as a defense contractor since.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 05 2019, @11:06PM (2 children)
Were they ever held accountable for any of that?
Sounds like a very stressful situation; sorry to hear you had to deal with it.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday November 06 2019, @02:49AM (1 child)
Somewhat accountable, yes. The final project I was on was an utter train wreck, so bad that even the military boys couldn't help noticing. Management tried to blame everything on the peons, of which I was one of the most notable. We were all "quitted". But that didn't fool the military, not that time. I don't know much of what happened after I was forced out. But I did learn later that my employer lost the contract anyway, and that the on-site manager, who was a nothing more than a bullshit artist, was no longer employed there.
Strangely, our boss, a real jar head ex-officer who took a drill sergeant approach to motivating people (you know, snarling at us to stop being crybaby quitters and to get to work, do as he had ordered, and get that perpetual motion machine invented and to be quick about it), was promoted to vice president.
I made a number of mistakes as well. I should have wised up to their foolish dishonesty sooner, but even if I had, what could I do about it? Take a page from the drill sergeant method and bark back at them that they better shape up? There was really no use in such a course of action, they were just too corrupt, incompetent, and contemptuous. And it's real hard to risk or walk away from a good paycheck, no matter how awful the job. It got so bad though, that being fired would have been a relief. Or if not that, I should have broken the door to the exit down running away as fast as possible, and the heck with having another job lined up.
But since I kept quiet, I got to see the grand finale. Our boss made a total ass of himself at the last quarterly progress meeting in front of a bunch of customers and other defense contracting companies. He tried to blow smoke up all their asses, putting a fake schedule on the projector, and they stopped him scarcely a minute later to ask him the very embarrassing and pointed question: what was the goal? He replied that figuring that out was the first item on the schedule! I thought we were all going to be fired right then and there. No, not quite. But there was blood in water then, and they tore the boss to pieces. Don't feel sorry for him, he deserved it, convincing himself that everyone was too stupid to realize he was full of it and would let him get away with such grievous insults to their intelligences. When the meeting ended, the boss took me aside to kick me verbally as if I was nothing more than a pet dog who had to take his owner's abuse whenever he wanted to vent.
Anyway, I now think that every engineering program should have a course or two on the crap that pointy haired bosses can pull, with strategies for detecting and dealing with the lying, gaslighting, abuse, bull, unconscionable orders, blackmailing, and manipulation. And one of the lessons should be something I heard a long time ago: "kid, always keep some 'fuck you' money." What's 'fuck you' money? "So you can tell your boss, 'fuck you'". Now the whole nation is paying for not having experience and education in dealing with that kind of boss. It's been a hard lesson, and I hope we emerge mostly intact and wiser.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 09 2019, @02:02PM
You mean every lie "project" you do https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=34553&page=1&cid=918215#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] fails as you did there fuckboy? Of course. Your ENTIRE wasted LIFE is a lie and fail. Just like how you failed to answer in a simple question there welfare sucker fuck you are in that link. Come on now FAKENAME - prove you even have a job or any real skills in computers. Having trouble doing so, fakename? Yes. You are nothing but a fucking lie and a waste of life.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 05 2019, @09:48PM
From the fake news, failing New York Times!
Why is anyone even listening to such huge liars, when there are wonderful tweets and youtube videos that tell it like it is!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlpaEXWe3Zs [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiUDJMwdxBQ [youtube.com]
https://mobile.twitter.com/POTUS [twitter.com]
Everything else is lies. Pure and simple.
Breathalyers are perfect! They give such beautiful results!
Our police are brave and strong and do no wrong!
If they've stopped you, you're obviously guilty. Because you must be a Democrat!
#MAGA
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday November 06 2019, @02:35AM
I'll believe the justice system is serious about integrity and due process when the people who pencil whip lab tests and calibrations start doing real time in significant numbers.
Someone was responsible for servicing the breathalyzer that had rats nesting in it. They couldn't possibly have thought the rats weren't a problem. The people in TFA that skipped calibration of the hand-held field units had to have known that innocent people would at the very least be in for a really bad night as a result. As officers of the court, prosecutors have a duty to be reasonably sure that the evidence they present is genuine.
Finally, when these sorts of problems are found, the courts have an obligation to review any conviction based on the devices back to the point they have actual evidence that the problem didn't exist (hint, they have no evidence that the problem ever didn't exist).