It’s rather disconcerting to find out that the error rates in blood alcohol testing not only are flawed, but twice as bad as originally thought. In DUI trials, there is a presumption of guilt, so anytime you have a situation where supposedly “objective”, “impartial” and “irrefutable” evidence shows a systemic error that could lead to false convictions, things need to be disclosed quickly.
The number of flawed blood alcohol tests has doubled since a Colorado Springs Police Crime Lab internal audit last year discovered that some results were inflated, authorities said last week.
Results in 167 DUI cases have been called into question, up from the initial 82 that were disclosed in December, according to 4th Judicial District Senior Deputy District Attorney Frederick Stein.
Stein could not say yet what the impact of the erroneous tests would be on the criminal cases involved, but added that the DA’s office hopes have a report compiling those outcomes within the next two weeks.
On Dec. 11, the police department reported that a routine audit had discovered the errors and began both an internal and external investigation into how reported test results came in higher than the actual level.
At the time, the department started re-testing about 1,000 blood alcohol test results taken since January 2009.
Meanwhile, prosecutors contacted individuals in the cases that were based upon the incorrect test results. The District Attorney’s office also fielded about 140 phone calls in December on a hot line set up for people who wanted to know if theirs was among the affected cases. Authorities have not released the names of the defendants in those cases.
The Colorado Bureau of Investigations is conducting the external investigation while the police department conducts its own internal review. Both of those investigations are ongoing, police spokesman Lt. David Whitlock said Friday.
“I can’t say anything definitive about the underlying cause,” Whitlock said. “What has occurred is that we’ve narrowed it down to the point where we believe it is likely a human error. We believe very strongly that it’s not an equipment failure or something inherent in the lab itself.”
He would not say whether investigators believe the errors were made by an individual or several people.
In January, the police department also disclosed that a refrigerator that held DNA evidence had malfunctioned over a four-day period in December. Police, however, said experts did not believe the 235 samples of blood, semen and urine had been rendered unusable by the accident.
One Colorado Springs lawyer who specializes in DUI cases said the department needs to let the public know what caused the blood alcohol errors to happen in the first place.
“If you identify the problem then you should be able to fix it,” said Timothy Bussey, a former prosecutor. “But if you can’t, then that’s a problem.”
Bussey filed a Colorado Open Records Act requesting detailed information on the lab errors. In response, the department provided him with some records, but not most of what he requested. He has filed an appeal.
He did obtain one document, however, that gives a clue as to what investigators believe might be the source of the problem: a discrepancy in the concentration of the chemical n-Propanol, aclear, polar water-soluble solvent
with a very mild odor.According to a Dec. 9 memo from Crime Lab Supervisor Ian Fitch, evidence suggested that in the flawed batches, less n-Propanol was added to the unknown blood samples than to those being used as a standard and control.
Whitlock could not estimate how long the internal investigation will take, but said the department is eager to share what it finds out.
“We know this is something that is a concern to the public and involves our credibility,” he said. “We’re eager to tell them how we’ll fix it.”
Article from the Colorado Gazette.
I was contacted by a journalist out of Colorado Springs, a John Ensslin, who had obtained copies of internal memos from Colorado Springs Police crime lab. Mr. Ensslin wanted some help translating the content of the memo into plain English. I spoke with him telephonically, and then proof read his followup article here.
First off, a tip of the hat to local lawyer Tim Bussey for thinking like a reporter and filing a Colorado Open Records Act request.
While the police department did not give Bussey everything he wanted, they did deliver a Dec. 9 memo from Crime Lab Supervisor Ian Fitch, who wrote the following:
“A root cause analysis investigation, which included input from Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Agent Tim McKibben, strongly suggested that the high blood alcohol content values reported in the previously affected cases resulted from a discrepancy between the concentration of internal standard, n-Propanol, added to the standard curve components (standards) and purchased controls (controls), and that added to the unknown blood samples being tested. Evidence suggests that in batches affected by the nonconformance in question, less n-Propanol was added to the unknown blood samples than to the standards/controls. This would explain the inaccurate high ethanol values reported, since the amount is calculated relative to the n-Propanol.
Regardless of exactly how the lab managed to cause an inflation of reported blood alcohol results, it demonstrates an all to common problem with forensic scientists now days. Many of them have a serious lack of understanding of basic chemistry concepts. They can be taught how to perform a series of steps, like following recipe. When they have to understand and troubleshoot the steps of the process, many just simply don’t understand. They can’t troubleshoot a faulty instrument. They can’t mix reagents properly. Blame on the explosive popularity of “forensic science” degree programs, many arrive to work lacking the minimum understanding of chemistry needed to be a good forensic scientist.
It’s amazing that defense attorneys, more and more, have to resort to public information requests under the Freedom of Information Act, to get potentially exculpatory information out of crime labs. So much to “independent” and “unbiased”.
No related posts.
