Roadside breath tests not always accurate

[KL3-Something]

You can never tell a cop that they are wrong The arrogant s that is instilled in them and the root of all the problems the rcmp are facing shows very clearly on this forum......... Everyone is stupid and the great all mightly cop HAS all the answers

Never has that been so apparent than after tonight's episode of The Fifth Estate.....

I read what was posted KL... I still call BS.

I have no"disdain " for you KL...But you'll tell me that I'm wrong about that too..

First of all, for the record, I was as disgusted as anyone else about what was on the 5th estate tonight (I saw it a few days ago).

What part is BS? I told you what the requirements are. Which part are you having problems with? You immediately made reference to having never been offered a second breath test.

I have NEVER been informed of my right to a second test on another ASD by any cop EVER...

The wording of your post leads me to believe that you have been in that situation on more than one occasion and blown either a fail or a warn. You also have said in the past that you refused to take the RDP and that told me that you didn't (don't) have a driver's licence (you may have since given in, taken the RDP and have your licence). That also tells me that you got to that point by getting a few 24hr suspensions or impaireds in your time (besides the drug one you have mentioned in the past). So unless you've had "a few" IRP's in the last year I have to presume that the instances where you were given roadside tests but no offer of a second test were pre-IRP and as such were 24hr suspensions/impaireds. There is no requirement to offer a second test for 24hr suspensions or impaireds. Never has been.

So again, what part is BS?

[KL3-Something]

Not sure if I agree... we used to have a standard card, we read it

I have NEVER been informed of my right to a second test on another ASD by any cop EVER...

And further I wasn't read anything...I made a suggestion to try again and the officer told me I didn't want to do that as I would have to go downtown...I wasn't being charged criminally. Just a 90 day suspension. I had no idea of the impact that was about to happen until days later when I decided to look at the paperwork. Just a 90 day suspension my hiney... And further to my further.. I wasn't even in my car...I was walking down the sidewalk calling for a ride after moving my car 50 feet into a parking lot to avoid a parking ticket...yup yup I am a *bleep*...and the crazy part is if it didn't cost so much I would have no problem putting the interlocking in my car as I don't drink and drive but after two beers I thought I could move my car 50 feet...yup I am a bad bad person

___________________________________________________________

Have to like the two beers. I have always had trouble with the two beer defense, do you weight 100lbs??

Oh, you forgot the six shooters as well.

Maybe you should have asked for the second opportunity to blow as possibly you had mouth alcohol.

Ya. "I only had two beers"......Take them back then after the blow a couple of 160's: "I can't believe it. Well maybe I had three but that was it. I just can't believe I blew that high.".

[Ken7]

Not sure if I agree... we used to have a standard card, we read it

I have NEVER been informed of my right to a second test on another ASD by any cop EVER...

And further I wasn't read anything...I made a suggestion to try again and the officer told me I didn't want to do that as I would have to go downtown...I wasn't being charged criminally. Just a 90 day suspension. I had no idea of the impact that was about to happen until days later when I decided to look at the paperwork. Just a 90 day suspension my hiney... And further to my further.. I wasn't even in my car...I was walking down the sidewalk calling for a ride after moving my car 50 feet into a parking lot to avoid a parking ticket...yup yup I am a *bleep*...and the crazy part is if it didn't cost so much I would have no problem putting the interlocking in my car as I don't drink and drive but after two beers I thought I could move my car 50 feet...yup I am a bad bad person

___________________________________________________________

Have to like the two beers. I have always had trouble with the two beer defense, do you weight 100lbs??

Oh, you forgot the six shooters as well.

Maybe you should have asked for the second opportunity to blow as possibly you had mouth alcohol.

Ya. "I only had two beers"......Take them back then after the blow a couple of 160's: "I can't believe it. Well maybe I had three but that was it. I just can't believe I blew that high.".

_____________________________________________________________


No crap, easily 80% of my impaireds were two drinks. They just never said how big they were!!

[d_bengert]

Not sure if I agree... we used to have a standard card, we read it

I have NEVER been informed of my right to a second test on another ASD by any cop EVER...

And further I wasn't read anything...I made a suggestion to try again and the officer told me I didn't want to do that as I would have to go downtown...I wasn't being charged criminally. Just a 90 day suspension. I had no idea of the impact that was about to happen until days later when I decided to look at the paperwork. Just a 90 day suspension my hiney... And further to my further.. I wasn't even in my car...I was walking down the sidewalk calling for a ride after moving my car 50 feet into a parking lot to avoid a parking ticket...yup yup I am a *bleep*...and the crazy part is if it didn't cost so much I would have no problem putting the interlocking in my car as I don't drink and drive but after two beers I thought I could move my car 50 feet...yup I am a bad bad person

___________________________________________________________

Have to like the two beers. I have always had trouble with the two beer defense, do you weight 100lbs??

Oh, you forgot the six shooters as well.

Maybe you should have asked for the second opportunity to blow as possibly you had mouth alcohol.

Ya. "I only had two beers"......Take them back then after the blow a couple of 160's: "I can't believe it. Well maybe I had three but that was it. I just can't believe I blew that high.".

_____________________________________________________________


No crap, easily 80% of my impaireds were two drinks. They just never said how big they were!!

While I must giggle at the two beers I find it a little worrisome that everybody went straight to guilty...Apak68 did admit to doing something wrong... But what about the rest of the story...he must be lying about that too...we should hang him...to be honest I've had to blow twice in previous years and both times was never read the demand...see I know about that little card and because I didn't have alcohol in my system I shrugged it off...what if he's not lying???

[KL3-Something]

The ASD demand is different. It doesn't have to be "read" to you.

[fvkasm2x]

Not sure if I agree... we used to have a standard card, we read it

I have NEVER been informed of my right to a second test on another ASD by any cop EVER...

How many times have you had to blow?????

[zzontar]

Many people don't know this, and if the cop doesn't tell them like he/she should, this strips the person being tested of their right.

It's a requirement that they get told that. That fact actually forms a part of the prohibition that is read to them. If they aren't read the prohibition notice in it's entirety, including their right to a second breath test the IRP will be pulled upon appeal.

Sorry KL, but you're wrong on this one.

Do tell.

Sorry, it may be a requirement, what I meant is that it doesn't mean the officer will actually convey the information.

[KL3-Something]

Many people don't know this, and if the cop doesn't tell them like he/she should, this strips the person being tested of their right.

It's a requirement that they get told that. That fact actually forms a part of the prohibition that is read to them. If they aren't read the prohibition notice in it's entirety, including their right to a second breath test the IRP will be pulled upon appeal.

Sorry KL, but you're wrong on this one.

Do tell.

Sorry, it may be a requirement, what I meant is that it doesn't mean the officer will actually convey the information.

I have no doubt some cut corners. People cut corners in every profession. When they do it in mine it ticks me off because it makes us all look bad because, I'm not sure if you noticed, but the paint brush tends to be pretty wide. And I clearly said that if a cop cuts that particular corner then the driver has (had) clear grounds to have the IRP revoked.

[zzontar]

Unfortunately, it ends up being the cops word against the person they test. I do know what you mean about the wide brush and it must be frustrating, but cutting corners or improper procedure by a cop usually results in fairly severe implications, thus having a deeper effect.

[goatboy]

You can never tell a cop that they are wrong The arrogant s that is instilled in them and the root of all the problems the rcmp are facing shows very clearly on this forum......... Everyone is stupid and the great all mightly cop HAS all the answers

For the umpteenth time, I'm not a cop.

[goatboy]

Right, yeah, you only know more about criminal law than personal injury lawyers right? My point still stands. You think you know more than "some" lawyers. So please enlighten us. I want to hear what you know about this subject since you're such a self professed expert.

OK, that's five times you've completely misquoted me, I've never said I'm an expert or that I knew more criminal law than a personal injury lawyer, just "some lawyers" and I also didn't say I was an "expert", but what would you like to know?

[Ford4x4Truck]

Right, yeah, you only know more about criminal law than personal injury lawyers right? My point still stands. You think you know more than "some" lawyers. So please enlighten us. I want to hear what you know about this subject since you're such a self professed expert.

OK, that's five times you've completely misquoted me, I've never said I'm an expert or that I knew more criminal law than a personal injury lawyer, just "some lawyers" and I also didn't say I was an "expert", but what would you like to know?

Fine, let me break it down into the simplest terms so that you'll stop whining like a baby about me supposedly misquoting you. You said you know more about criminal law than "some lawyers". See? I even added the quotation marks that you put around the words some and lawyers. Happy? Good. Now please enlighten us since you think you know so much.

[twobits]

That is good information to know.....recording the unit number. Do you not then think that as the date of being "dropped" is unknown, and the unit remained in service, that all fines levied by the results of that unit should be reversed automatically back to it's last verifiable date?
This also opens up more questions about the machines veracity. If checked every 28 days, how many are found at that check to require calibration and when exactly in the prior 28 days did it go out of calibration? I looking for your first line knowledge as I do not know the failure/recalibration rate. Are the actual breathalizer machines (the ones for criminal charges) not calibrated prior to the taking of each breath sample? Again, I don't know and am asking.

KL3......I am hoping you just missed this post as I am interested in the answers to the questions I posed. If you choose not to respond about the calibrating it would appear that you also see a potential problem with the testing/calibration schedule and do not wish to say so in a public forum.

[goatboy]

Fine, let me break it down into the simplest terms so that you'll stop whining like a baby about me supposedly misquoting you. You said you know more about criminal law than "some lawyers". See? I even added the quotation marks that you put around the words some and lawyers. Happy? Good. Now please enlighten us since you think you know so much.

I'm done with your trolling and am not going to waste any more of my time on you. Ciao

[KL3-Something]

That is good information to know.....recording the unit number. Do you not then think that as the date of being "dropped" is unknown, and the unit remained in service, that all fines levied by the results of that unit should be reversed automatically back to it's last verifiable date?
This also opens up more questions about the machines veracity. If checked every 28 days, how many are found at that check to require calibration and when exactly in the prior 28 days did it go out of calibration? I looking for your first line knowledge as I do not know the failure/recalibration rate. Are the actual breathalizer machines (the ones for criminal charges) not calibrated prior to the taking of each breath sample? Again, I don't know and am asking.

KL3......I am hoping you just missed this post as I am interested in the answers to the questions I posed. If you choose not to respond about the calibrating it would appear that you also see a potential problem with the testing/calibration schedule and do not wish to say so in a public forum.

I saw it. Then got caught up in another direction.

I'm not going to say with any certainty that ALL cases should be automatically pulled IF the device was dropped or otherwise damaged. I really don't know what the issue with that particular instrument was and as such I'm not going to speculate on what needs to happen. But I do know that in any instance where that instrument was used and there was a second test on a separate unit that confirmed the same results then the short answer would be no, it doesn't need to be revoked. Any cases where the instrument was used since the last calibration check and was found to be in working order should be looked at.

Every instrument goes away for annual maintenance and testing once per year to the manufacturer. At that point any wearable or depletable components are tested and, if necessary, replaced. I have never personally found an instrument, unless it was damaged in some way, depleted to a point within that one year period that it needed to be taken out of service. And in any event, if any of the internal components do begin to deplete or wear out the error in the reading is actually in favor of the driver. This is what leads me to believe that the issue with the ONE instance in Port Moody (if they use the same instruments as the RCMP) was one of the instrument suffering come sort of damage like being dropped.

I have never seen any issue with the 28 day calibration check period which is actually MORE frequent than what the manufacturer recommends.