Closed Source -> Charges Dismissed?

Snorpus writes "According to the Tampa Tribune, judges in the central Florida county of Seminole are dismissing DUI charges when the defendant asks for information on how the breath test works. Apparently the manufacture of the device is unwilling to release the code to the state, and all four judges in the county have been dismissing DUI cases when the state cannot provide the requested information. Could this apply to other situations where technical means (radar guns, video surveillance, wire-tapping, etc.) are used to gather evidence? " I'd not plan on this as a legal defense, but the question it raises - of public access to information - is an important one.

Comments

Voting machines?

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

It seems to me that one place this could really matter would be if a precedent were set that affected all the electronic voting machines cropping up in recent elections (with not such a great reputation so far, IME).

Pulic Right to how it works

[redstar427]

Does the Pulic have the right to how these devices work, or just the procedures on how they are used?

Re:Pulic Right to how it works

[polysylabic psudonym]

The public has the right to know if the device works, and how well. Without knowing how it works how can a citizen know if the charges against them are valid?

Red light cameras

[swb]

I think where this is more interesting are things like "managed" red light cameras. In Minneapolis, we're getting them soon, and the system is actually run by a third party. They review photos and send the incriminating ones to the police, who then review the photos and decide whether to issue a moving violation.

What I want to know is, who owns the pictures? Sure, the cops own the ones that they get from the company, but what about the others? Are they private property or is everything produced by the cameras public property?

Let's say I'm accused of some crime and my defense is I wasn't there, I was driving around. And I drove through a bunch of red light cameras (without necessarily running a red light). Can I get access to the photos?

Re:easy solution

[oniony]

Hmm, you sound like a well-balanced, liberal kind of chap.

So the possibility that someone may have a genuine concern over the reliability and accuracy of a police enforcement device doesn't enter into your world-view of human rights then?

Best not put too much vinegar on your chips tonight.

As a matter of fact, do not trust these things.

[WindBourne]

I used to work in a medical lab (first degree was in Microbio/Genetic Engineering). Many times, equipment is not calibrated correctly, or even the test underwent "sink testing". In addition, I have seen mistakes made on the code for doing calculations that resulted in wrong answers going on the door (and that was at a major lab). I am not wild about drunks being on the road, but I hate more seeing inocents being railroaded.

Re:Slip of the mind..

[the_xaqster]

Just a cautionary tale..

Years ago in my old home town, the 30 limit on a particular piece of road was moved 200m down the road, away from town. This was previously a 60 limit, a nice big wide road, with no houses or turn-offs on it. This was done at about lunchtime. That evening, the police stopped everyone speeding (doing the old 60 limit) down this section of road. All were asked if they had seen the new speedlimit signs. Most said no. All were let off the speeding charge with a warning. 2 weeks later, everybody who had said that they did not see the new signs was summoned to court for driving without due care and attention (if they did not see the new signs, they could not have been paying attention, right?). Bigger fine, more points!

Moral of this story? Keep a lookout at road signs, even if you have driven the same route for years!

Experienced something similar with UK speed camera

[pandrijeczko]

My other half was captured by a speed camera allegedly doing 38mph in a 30mph zone. She's never been sure if she was actually speeding but, when she was sent the photograph taken by the camera, the time the photo was supposedly taken was half-an-hour too early. (Fortunately, she was coming home from a doctor's appointment at the time so knew almost the exact time she passed the camera.)

When we raised the question of the calibration of the camera, we were fobbed off with a letter from the police about all cameras being synched to an "atomic clock" and there being no possibility of an inaccuracy.

I then asked for technical information regarding the synching method used but was refused.

I then wrote a final letter stating that we would fight this in a courtroom and would expect proof that the camera was accurate to be demonstrated in front of the judge. I also demanded that prior to the court case, I would require technical information on camera timings so as to prepare a defence case.

The upshot of this was that the case was ultimately dropped.

Re:Sounds like a huge open-source business opportu

[mwvdlee]

I went to a technical school where we were all required to do an electronics graduation project.
One group wanted to make an alcohol tester, they asked around with the police but couldn't get any information so they wound up having to invent the thing themselves (sounds a lot harder than it actually was, basic components are available).

In the end they had built in a few weeks time a machine which was much cheaper and notably more accurate than the device the police uses.

Now "cheaper" can be easily explained by the quality of the casing, being hygenic and such but "accurate"... this had me seriously doubt the quality of the devices the police use.

p.s. They apparently had a great time testing the machine!

Interesting problem..

[bmajik]

if there's one thing i despise more than drunk drivers, it's cops and judges just saying you're guilty because they can, with no technical accountability.

I recently defended myself in a moving violation case. I sat through the 6 prior cases where people admitted they were guilty but were basically just sad about getting a ticket (the usual crying-on-the-stand trick). One case even had its fine reduced! The girl skidded off the road and ran over a street sign!

Then my case came. When i cross examined the officer i caught him in several logical fallacies and he could not say exactly how i was guilty of violating the statute, as written.

But, none of that really matters. The judge decides what he wants to, and thats that.

I was pulled over, by the way, because last winter, when i pulled away from a stop light, my tires started spinning on my all-wheel-drive-with-snow-tires 130hp winter car. Instead of doing something dramatic like slamming on the brakes or abruptly lifting off, i just rode out the wheelspin, keeping the car in my lane and straight ahead, etc.

Cops dont "like" wheelspin, so i got a ticket. Specifically, my ticket was for "driving too fast for conditions". The other people that were convicted of this offense ran off the road, skidded through intersections, etc. One almost t-boned an officer.

I was particuarly amused with myself when i asked if i was violating the law the second the light turned green, given that my instantanous speed was zero but my tires were spinning. When i was stopped, was i driving too fast for conditions ? :)

Nevermind that last weekend i was teaching _other_ people how to drive safely at a racetrack. Nope, i'm a public driving menace, apparently. So says one agitated officer, and one judge.

Re:OTOH

[Shakrai]

I would rather send a person to jail than have someone who was drunk, get off on a technicality then kill your sister/mother/father/brother/best friend 2 weeks later because they are drunk.

You'd rather send an innocent person to jail then risk letting someone drive drunk? That's a bit of a slippery slope there. We have burdens of proof and innocent until proven guilty for a reason.

Besides which, the whole issue of DWIs is another issue (like terrorism or the war on drugs) that is being used to take away our rights. The minute I start a car in most states I give up my right to protection from unreasonable search and seizure (implied consent laws). And as horrible as drunk driving can be perhaps you ought to take a look at the NMA DWI page and learn some of the myths and facts about DWIs and the 0.08 laws in particular.

And before some AC goes pointing out how I'd feel differently if I lost a loved one to a drunk driver let me say that my sister was run over on the sidewalk by a drunk driver. She spent three months in the hospital and it took a year before she could walk again. He had a BAC of 0.18. The cops didn't catch him because they were too busy sitting outside of the local bar waiting for some poor bastard who was a hair over 0.08 instead of patrolling around looking for people who were actually driving badly, such as this fool who was on his way to the convenience store to buy another 12 pack.