Submitted by Cedric Hughes on Wed, 11/15/2006 - 10:59
It is a crime to operate a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol or a drug. Proving impairment by alcohol or a drug requires evidence that the courts will accept. Police have authority to test for alcohol impairment. The legal limit is a maximum blood alcohol concentration of .08%.
For drug-impaired driving investigations, however, there is no authority in the law for police to demand blood testing. Only if a driver voluntarily participates in these tests is this evidence allowed in court. The problem is made more difficult by the fact that with many drugs, there is no scientific agreement on the drug concentration level in the body that causes impairment and makes driving hazardous.
New laws are expected to soon be in place that will address some of the problems of proving drug impaired driving. Background studies recommend changes that will authorize police to demand:
1. Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST), where there is reasonable suspicion that a driver is under the influence of non-medicinal drugs. SFSTs are divided-attention tests conducted at the roadside that evaluate the subject's ability to multitask.
2. Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) evaluations, administered at the police station, where there is reasonable belief that a drug-impaired driving offence was committed. This includes a situation where the driver fails the SFST.
3. A sample of a bodily substance (blood, urine or oral fluid), should the DRE officer identify that impairment is caused by a specific family of drugs.
A driver’s refusal or failure to comply with any of these demands would be a criminal offence, punishable by the same penalties as refusing a demand for a breath test for alcohol. A minimum fine would apply for a first offence.
DRE evaluations were first developed by the Los Angeles Police Department and standardized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the United States in the early 1980s. They are used in most of the US, Australia, New Zealand and some European countries and their reliability is documented in studies by John Hopkins University, which determined that DRE-trained officers were over 90% accurate in determining impairment and the type of drug that caused impairment.
Canada began using DRE evaluations in 1995. Police in BC, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia use them currently, but only on a voluntary participation basis.
DRE tests include eye examination to measure pupil size, vertical and horizontal movement, and convergence of the eyes, all of which will fluctuate depending on the degree of impairment and the drug causing it; an ingestion examination to determine if there is any drug residue left in either the nasal or throat passage; coordination, divided attention and concentration skills tests; and
vital signs tests including pulse, blood pressure, muscle tone, and a search for injection sites.
The tests also include an interview to obtain either admission of drug ingestion or other information that may assist in evaluating the suspect. In the long run, we can expect that the process will be videotaped.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
