MN Supreme Court Backs Reasoned Requests For Breathalyzer Source Code

viralMeme writes with news that the Minnesota Supreme Court has upheld the right of drunk-driving defendants to request the source code for the breathalyzer machines used as evidence against them, but only when the defendant provides sufficient arguments to suggest that a review of the code may have an impact on the case. In short: no fishing expeditions. The ruling involves two such requests (PDF), one of which we've been covering for some time. In that case, the defendant, Dale Underdahl simply argued that to challenge the validity of the charges, he had to "go after the testing method itself." The Supreme Court says this was not sufficient. Meanwhile, the other defendant, Timothy Brunner, "submitted a memorandum and nine exhibits to support his request for the source code," which included testimony from a computer science professor about the usefulness of source code in finding voting machine defects, and a report about a similar case in New Jersey where defects were found in the breathalyzer's source code. This was enough for the Supreme Court to acknowledge that an examination of the code could "relate to Brunner's guilt or innocence."

Comments

Re:Hm.

[spun]

Wait, wait, wait. You're saying embedded code often stinks? Don't we use embedded code in voting machines? My God, has anyone checked them? This sounds like it could be a real problem, I think we need to notify the authorities.

Re:That's how science works

[sakdoctor]

I'd go a step further, and refuse any breathalyser that doesn't run linux.

Re:Fishing expeditions

[JustNiz]

I think the problem here is that the guy caught drunk-driving didn't pass the bar. He stopped and went in.

Re:These guys are no heroes

[mccalli]

Wouldn't YOU be pissed if you knew you weren't drunk

Paging Rene Descarte - Monsieur, we need you urgently....

Cheers,
Ian