Does Marijuana Affect Driving Ability?

May 8th, 2009

It is against the law to drive while under the influence of marijuana. It has always been assumed that cannabis, like alcohol, impairs the perception, coordination, reflexes and judgment necessary for the safe operation of a motor vehicle. And, of course, there have been governmental studies addressing the question: Does marijuana impair driving?

Interestingly, however, the findings do not necessarily support popular opinion….

On the one hand, the California Department of Justice has found that marijuana undoubtedly impairs psychomotor abilities that are functionally related to driving and that driving skills may be impaired, particularly at high-dose levels or among inexperienced users. “Marijuana and Alcohol: A Driver Performance Study”, California Office of Traffic Safety Project No. 087902 (Sept. 1986).

Contradicting these conclusions, however, are two federal studies. The U.S. Department of Transportation conducted research with a fully interactive simulator on the effects of alcohol and marijuana, alone and in combination, on driver-controlled behavior and performance. Although alcohol was found consistently and significantly to cause impairment, marijuana had only an occasional effect. Also, there was little evidence of interaction between alcohol and marijuana. Accidents and speeding tickets reliably increased with alcohol, but no marijuana or combined alcohol-marijuana effects were noted. “The Effects of Alcohol on Driver-Controlled Behavior in a Driving Simulator, Phase I”, DOT-HS-806-414.

A more recent report entitled “Marijuana and Actual Performance”, DOT-HS-808-078, noted that “THC is not a profoundly impairing drug….It apparently affects controlled information processing in a variety of laboratory tests, but not to the extent which is beyond the individual’s ability to control when he is motivated and permitted to do so in driving”. The study concluded that:

An important practical objective of this study was to determine whether degrees of driving impairment can be actually predicted from either measured concentration of THC in plasma or performance measured in potential roadside “sobriety” tests of tracking ability or hand and posture stability. The results, like many reported before, indicated that none of these measures accurately predicts changes in actual performance under the influence of THC…

The researchers found that it “appears not possible to conclude anything about a driver’s impairment on the basis of his/her plasma concentrations of THC and THC-COOH determined in a single sample”.

Note: “THC” stands for Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, which is the intoxicating ingredient in marijuana. THC is fairly quickly converted by the body into inert metabolites, which can stay in the body for hours or even days. It is these metabolites that police blood tests in DUI arrests detect and measure. In other words, (1) marijuana may not impair driving ability at all, and (2) the blood “evidence” only measures an inactive substance which may have been there for days.

 

For more information, visit our website www.duilawdefense.com or www.305dui.com

Breath-Test Ruling Jeopardizes Thousands of State DWI Cases

May 8th, 2009

 

Minneapolis, MN.  May 1 –Minnesota may be forced to drop thousands of driving-while-impaired cases and change the way it prosecutes others in the wake of a state Supreme Court ruling Thursday, prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed.

The state’s highest court ruled that defendants in drunken-driving cases have the right to make prosecutors turn over the computer “source code” that runs the Intoxilyzer breath-testing device to determine whether the device’s results are reliable.

But there’s a problem: Prosecutors can’t turn over the code because they don’t have it.

The Kentucky company that makes the Intoxilyzer says the code is a trade secret and has refused to release it, thus complicating DWI prosecutions…

The Intoxilyzer 5000EN is the standard device used by Minnesota police to determine if a driver is impaired. The state bought 260 of the machines from the manufacturer, CMI of Kentucky, in 1997, and state law presumes the devices’ results to be reliable.

The device is used with nearly eight of every 10 suspected drunken drivers who are tested in Minnesota.

But defense attorneys have argued that if they can’t examine the source code, the computer program that runs the machine, they have no way to tell if the Intoxilyzer is reliable. District judges across Minnesota have handled defense requests for the source code with a patchwork of rulings: Some say a defendant has a right to examine it; others say it isn’t relevant…

The Supreme Court said (defendant Brunner’s evidence) “show that an analysis of the source code may reveal deficiencies that could challenge the reliability of the Intoxilyzer and, in turn, would relate to Brunner’s guilt or innocence.”

 

For more information, visit our website www.duilawdefense.com

Obama Chooses MADD Official to Lead Safety Agency

April 16th, 2009

Washington, DC.  April 8 — President Barack Obama has chosen a top official with Mothers Against Drunk Driving to lead a Transportation agency that oversees safety and fuel efficiency requirements for automakers.

Chuck Hurley was nominated Wednesday to become administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Hurley, a longtime safety advocate, has served as MADD’s chief executive officer since 2005 and worked for the National Safety Council and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

At MADD, Hurley urged states to adopt tougher drunken driving laws and require first-time offenders to use ignition interlock devices on their cars. The devices require drivers to blow into an instrument that measures alcohol and prevent a vehicle from starting if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration exceeds a certain level…

The organization has received funding from several auto companies, including General Motors Corp., Toyota Motor Corp., Ford Motor Co. and others. The General Motors Foundation provided MADD and MADD-related programs with $133,000 in grants in 2007, according to financial records filed with the IRS.

For more information about DUI, please visit our website at www.duilawdefense.com.

NFL’s Donte’ Stallworth bonds out in DUI manslaughter charge

April 3rd, 2009

jlebovich@MiamiHerald.com

Holding his mother’s hand, Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte’ Stallworth walked out of a Miami-Dade County jail after noon Thursday after posting bond on a charge of DUI manslaughter.

”I just want to extend my condolences to the Reyes family. My prayers are with them,” Stallworth told reporters and a gaggle of cameras waiting outside the jail. “I have full confidence and faith in the legal process.”

The pro football player was then whisked away in a silver Lexus.

Earlier in the morning, Stallworth surrendered to authorities and made a brief appearance in front of Miami-Dade Judge Dennis Murphy before being led away in handcuffs for booking at the jail.

Dressed in a black suit and with his hair pulled back, Stallworth arrived at the courthouse early Thursday morning for a brief hearing related to the terms of his pretrial release.

He will be allowed to live in Florida and Ohio. But he must tell the court before traveling between the two places and must seek permission to travel elsewhere.

He also cannot drive and will have a curfew: midnight to 6 a.m.

An arraignment is set for April 23.

Blood tests revealed Stallworth had a blood alcohol level of .126 after the March 14 crash that killed Mario Reyes, 59.

His bond is $200,000 on the charge, a felony that carries a minimum of four years to a maximum of 15 years in prison.

”We are going to vigorously defend these accusations in a court of law,” Stallworth’s attorney, Christopher Lyons, said at a brief press conference in the courtroom hallway, standing next to Stallworth’s mother, Donna.

”Football is the last thing on his mind right now,” Lyons said. “His focus is on his family and the Reyes family.”

Miami Beach police said that prior to the crash, Stallworth had been drinking at club Liv at the Fontainebleau in Miami Beach before leaving to go to a home in Miami, where he arrived about 6:15 a.m.

He was returning to Miami Beach about an hour later when he struck Reyes, who was crossing the MacArthur Causeway.

The arrest warrant said Stallworth was standing outside his car when officers arrived. According to police, Stallworth admitted he had been driving the car and said, “I hit the man lying in the road.”

Stallworth later told police at the Miami Beach police station that ”he had time to honk his horn and flash his headlights” to warn Reyes, who was not in a crosswalk.

The Browns have released a statement saying they were ”disappointed” by Stallworth’s actions and that the league commissioner was reviewing the situation.

He also will be subject to random drug and alcohol testing through the National Football League’s program for substance abuse.

 

Cops Bust Stool Fool

April 2nd, 2009

Ohio man arrested for drunk driving on a homemade vehicle

MARCH 31–In a law enforcement first, Ohio cops this month arrested a man for drunk driving on a motorized bar stool. That’s right, a motorized bar stool, which can be seen below in a police evidence photo. According to cops, Kile Wygle, 28, crashed his bar stool near his Newark home earlier this month and called 911 due to his injuries. When an officer arrived and asked Wygle what happened, he answered, “I wrecked my bar stool.” According to a Newark Police Division report, a copy of which you’ll find here, Wygle’s homemade ride is powered by a Briggs & Stratton lawnmower engine. Wygle noted that the bar stool could hit nearly 40 miles per hour, but that he was only going 20 when he wiped out late in the afternoon on March 4 (a witness told police that he spotted someone driving a “strange motorized machine” before the crash). A plastered Wygle, who failed a series of field sobriety tests, was charged with DUI and driving with a suspended license, both misdemeanors. His bar stool was not impounded

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0331091stool1.html?link=rssfeed

PC security forces face April 1 showdown with Conficker worm

April 1st, 2009

SEATTLE — In the brief, tumultuous history of cybercrime, there has never been anything quite like the Conficker worm.

In the past few months, Conficker’s creators have infected at least 3 million Windows PCs worldwide with malicious software, and perhaps as many as 12 million. At this moment, the bad guys are locked in a high-stakes showdown with a posse of security groups led by Microsoft.

Conficker’s controllers have set a date for what amounts to a cyber-shootout at the OK Corral. Next Wednesday — April Fools’ Day — millions of infected PCs, called bots, will begin reporting for further instructions, presumably to begin spreading spam, stealing data or carrying out online scams. And there appears to be little the good guys can do to cut off such communications.

“We have not yet begun to feel the real impact of Conficker,” says Paul Henry, researcher at security firm Lumension. “We may soon be at the whim of those in control of what has emerged as a formidable army of infected machines.”

Vintage worm

Conficker requires no action on the part of the PC user to spread. It’s a throwback to self-replicating worms that scanned the Internet for PCs displaying known — and unpatched — Windows security holes.

Such worms largely disappeared after 2004, as Microsoft (MSFT) improved its process for identifying new holes and quickly issuing patches. But last September, Chinese hackers began selling a $37.80 program for tapping into a newly discovered Windows hole on some 800 million machines worldwide, according to SRI International, a non-profit research firm.

Microsoft took notice, and on Oct. 23, issued a rare emergency patch. Most home PC users in North America got patched quickly, via Windows Auto update. But many corporate and government users were lackadaisical about patching. In China and other nations where pirated copies of Windows are widely used, patches simply weren’t available. “Once the patch was out, no one paid attention,” says Don Jackson, senior researcher at SecureWorks. “They underestimated the risk.”

Precursors of Conficker began spreading on a limited basis, mostly in Asia. In early January, a full-featured version began seeking out unpatched PCs across the globe. The worm slithered onto any shared hard drives; it searched out nearby servers and issued hundreds of combinations of user IDs and passwords to break in; it copied itself onto any device plugged into a USB port, such as thumb drives, music players or digital cameras. When that infected device later got inserted into another work station, that machine became infected.

Conficker also took extraordinary measures to prevent each new bot from being disinfected by Microsoft or antivirus programs, or usurped by a rival botnet group. SRI found, for instance, that Conficker’s encryption algorithm came from MIT’s Ron Rivest, copied from a recently published research paper.

On Feb. 12, Microsoft put up a $250,000 bounty for information leading to the capture of Conficker’s creators. The software giant also formed an alliance of security groups, dubbed the Conficker Cabal, to battle the worm.

The Cabal focused on disrupting what was perhaps Conficker’s most unnerving feature. Eight times a day, each bot tried to connect with a list of 250 randomly generated Web addresses — each a potential rendezvous point to receive further instructions. Each day, this list of 250 rendezvous points changed.

To cut this off, the Cabal identified the Web addresses scheduled to turn up on the daily lists, and began registering any that weren’t already registered by someone else. The goal: to “pre-empt registration of those domains for potential criminal use,” says Christopher Budd, of Microsoft’s security response team.

Upgrade slips through

Yet, on March 6 and on March 17, the bad guys somehow slipped a malicious software upgrade to millions of infected PCs. The upgrade began organizing the bots into a vast peer-to-peer, or P2P, network, says SRI program manager Phillip Porras. P2P networks are powerful and flexible, because each PC can function as a command server. They’re commonly used to share videos and music and play complex online games.

The upgrade also included instructions for each bot to begin a daily routine on April 1 of checking in at 500 rendezvous points, randomly selected from a pool of 50,000 domain names. This trick will make it more difficult for the Cabal to preregister addresses, says Porras.

Joe Stewart, a senior researcher at SecureWorks, notes that the infected PCs are already capable of receiving directives from the controllers via the P2P network, “so the 50,000 domains aren’t really needed. They could even be a practical joke on the part of the authors.”

Botnets have emerged as the cybercrime world’s tool of choice to carry out scams. Josu Franco, Panda Security’s director of business development, surmises that Conficker’s controllers may be moving methodically to corner the market on botnets for hire. “This is free inventory for them,” says Franco.

The good guys’ defense boils down to vigilance. While the Cabal may not be able to stop the controllers from issuing directives, it remains poised to disrupt any criminal activity attempted by Conficker bots.

“There may be a second phase of the threat at some point in time,” acknowledges Microsoft’s Budd. “However, we believe, given the tremendous amount of attention this worm has received, industry and law enforcement efforts will be a deterrent to a large second wave of attacks.”

 

 

Ignition Interlocks

February 17th, 2009

As most of you know, MADD has focused on ignition interlock devices (IIDs) as the answer to the drunk driving problem in America.  The organization has even widely trumpted the device as the way to “literally wipe out drunk driving in the United States”.   

  
Greenwood, MS.  Jan. 25 Mothers Against Drunk Driving has done much over the years to reduce the incidence of drunk driving and the terrible consequences that can come from it…

The group, though, has hit somewhat of a plateau. For at least a decade, the numbers have hardly budged. Somewhere around 13,000 people — give or take a few hundred — die every year in an alcohol-related crash in the United States.

When a well-intended advocacy group hits a wall, the danger is that it will go overboard with heavy-handed proposals. That is the case with MADD’s latest push to get judges to order all convicted DUI offenders, even first-timers, to outfit their cars with ignition interlock devices.

The devices aren’t foolproof, however. Despite the efforts of engineers to outwit the ways that a drunk driver might try to circumvent one, MADD’s own statistics put the devices’ effectiveness at 64 percent…

Yet, that seems to be MAAD’s big push this year. Only eight states mandate or allow judges to order ignition interlock devices for a first offender. MADD wants it be an option in every state. The advocacy group has gotten bills to that effect filed in legislatures all across the country, including Mississippi.

As dangerous as drunk driving can be, this remedy still rings of being overblown. It adds another layer of punishment to a crime that the courts are required to take seriously, thanks to mandatory minimum sentences that have been instituted over the years.

Mississippi, like most of the country, already has stern DUI laws on the books that are designed to dissuade those who get caught one time from repeating their mistake…

If, after serving that penalty, a driver gets a second DUI, he either is incapable of learning from his mistakes or he has a drinking problem. Either way, employing an ignition interlock device then becomes a reasonable response to protect the public from what appears to be a persistent threat to its safety.

MADD, though, sounds as if it wants to treat all DUI offenders as if they are repeat abusers. In fact, that’s part of its argument for the interlock ignition proposal. Citing a 13-year-old research study, it claims that on average a person will drive drunk 87 times before he is caught and convicted the first time.

Recent Celebrity DUI Arrests Include Charles Barkley and Sam Shepherd

January 23rd, 2009

Recent Celebrity DUI Arrests Include Charles Barkley and Sam Shepherd

The year 2009 has just began, and already, there are already a couple of celebrity DUI arrests in the police record books. On New Year’s Eve, television commentator and former basketball star Charles Barkley was arrested in Arizona on suspicion of drunk driving after he ran a stop sign. He underwent field sobriety tests at the scene, but refused to take a breath test. Barkley was given a blood test at the police station and was cited for driving while being impaired.

On Saturday, Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright and movie star Sam Shephard was arrested for allegedly drunk driving and speeding in Illinois after leaving a bar. His blood-alcohol level was reportedly two times the legal limit. Shephard was released Sunday after posting bond.

Last Friday, television star Heather Locklear’s DUI case was dismissed after she entered a no-contest plea to a reckless driving misdemeanor charge. Locklear had been arrested and charged last September with misdemeanor driving under the influence of prescription drugs. Now, she must undergo probation for 3 years, take part in a 12-hour drug education program, and pay a $700 fine.

Barkley ‘disappointed’ after DUI arrest, The Boston Channel, January 5, 2009

Sam Shephard Arrested for DUI, Boston Herald, January 5, 2009

Locklear DUI case dismissed after plea deal, MSNBC, January 2, 2009

 

Ice Cream Causes Positive Alcohol Test

January 23rd, 2009

Ice Cream Causes Positive Alcohol Test 

Frankston, Australia.  Jan. 20 – An Australian man challenged to prove his claim that ice cream gave him a blood alcohol reading demonstrated his defense in court.

The man, whose name was not given, had asked Frankston Magistrates’ Court to remove the breath testing alcohol interlock device from his car, the (Melbourne, Australia) Daily Sun reported Tuesday.

Prosecutors inquired why the machine had registered a “fail,” which prevents the car from starting, despite the man’s claims that he had not been drinking.

The man claimed the alcohol reading was the result of eating a Bubble O’ Bill ice cream treat and Magistrate Rod Crisp ordered a test to be performed to back up the claim. Police recorded the man’s blood alcohol content as 0.00 and performed the test a second time after he took a few bites of Bubble O’ Bill, yielding a 0.018 reading.

Crisp granted the man’s request to remove the breath testing device from his car.

Experts said consuming some foods or drinks before breath tests can cause a false positive reading. It is recommended that that test subjects wait at least 15 minutes in between eating and blowing into the machine.

Why Do Police Refuse to Use Videotapes?

November 12th, 2008
Some police agencies around the country use videotapes as part of their drunk driving cases. Most, however, do not…despite their low cost, ease of use and invaluable utility. A picture is worth a thousand words about driving patterns, physical symptoms of impairment, slureed speech, etc…

Why don’t they use them?  And why, when they do, do they so often get lost or erased? 

Local Attorney Says All D.U.I. Arrests Should Be Videotaped

KUTV News, Utah.  Oct. 23  - Many Utah police departments videotape suspected drunk drivers.  The Highway Patrol has most of the dashboard cameras in Utah.  Attorney Jason Schatz wants to see more videotaping for the sake of his clients.

 “It’s only fair to those people if the technology is available”, he says.  Schatz defends suspected drunk drivers and says often, police video is valuable evidence in court, challenging officers’ written reports.  

 “You look at the police report and you’d think this person was falling down drunk, then you see the tape and you say ‘Wait a minute, that doesn’t look the way it was described on paper”. 

Schatz says he wants Utah to adopt mandatory videotaping like the State of South Carolina.  He hopes to find a local lawmaker who will take the issue to Capitol Hill.

Schatz has compiled videotapes shot during sobriety test of several clients.  Some of the tapes conflict with what the officer wrote down in the report.  Often Schatz says, cases are dropped when the jury or the prosecutor see the tape.
 
Sim Gill, chief prosecutor for Salt Lake City disagrees, saying videotape “does not make or break d.u.i. cases”.  Gil says he’s not opposed to mandatory taping of d.u.i. stops, but says he’d rather see state monies spent on what he considers “more pressing needs” like funding the domestic violence shelters, and providing medical help for mentally ill people who are in prison.
 
For more information, visit our website or call MIami DUI Attorney Jonathan Blecher.