SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I'm-positive-there-are-false-positives dept.
Pro Publica and The New York Times Magazine have each written about field drug testing by U.S. law enforcement agencies. The tests are undertaken with disposable kits containing chemicals. A sample is brought into contact with the chemicals and there may be a colour change, which is assessed by the officer. The essay tells the story of people against whom criminal charges regarding illegal drugs were filed, with the results of these field testing kits as the primary evidence in the prosecutions.
According to the essay, the use of the kits has various pitfalls which can lead to false positive results. For one thing, analytes which are legal to possess can produce the same colour change as illegal substances. For another, poor lighting which may be encountered in the field can distort the officer's perception of colours. Confirmation bias can occur. Also, officers may receive inadequate (or--the submitter supposes--incorrect) training in the interpretation of the colours. A former Houston police chief offered the opinion that
Officers shouldn't collect and test their own evidence, period. I don't care whether that's cocaine, blood, hair.
The essay mentions gas chromatography–mass spectroscopy (GC-MS), an instrumental method which is typically undertaken in a laboratory, as providing more reliable results. The submitter notes that portable GC-MS equipment does exist (1, 2).
Nationwide, 62 percent of forensics labs do not conduct further testing in cases in which a field drug test was used and the defendant made a guilty plea. However, the Houston crime laboratory has been doing such testing. They have found that false positives are commonplace. The district attorney's office for Harris County, Texas, which handles cases from Houston, has been informed about those test results and is undertaking "efforts to overturn wrongful convictions." In three years, about as many such convictions have been overturned in Harris County as in the rest of the United States.
Referenced stories:
(Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday July 26 2016, @05:22PM
That's not how it works. As others point out, you'll need a pile of money. That may be OK for you, but for most even where it's possible, they can ill afford that and will have been effectively punished for nothing. Others simply can't afford it.
Meanwhile, the police have that magic color change test (nice and visual for the court), and you have your good word. The DA has explained that you could be looking at 10 years unless you confess, then you'll be out in a few months. Throw in some well justified distrust of the justice system and there you go.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by number6x on Tuesday July 26 2016, @05:58PM
That is why asset seizure laws are so popular in connection with drug arrests. Thanks to the complete disregard for the 4th and 5th amendments, your assets can be seized and you must cooperate in their seizure (by volunteering passwords and fingerprints).
That way you will not have a pile of money to fight any false positives.
Besides, in America, we put our trust in god. It says so right on that pile of money that you just lost. if you weren't a drug dealing narco-terrorist, god would have protected you from any false positives. So you are obviously not christian enough to pray in the right way, or are some kind of atheist socialist who deserves to be locked up any way.
Don't try to confuse us with all of this false positive chemistry science-y mumbo jumbo. Then, when you want to get early release, join the correct religious group in prison and you can get time shaved off your sentence.