MignonneRollo379
De Communautique.
In the course of a dui investigation, police will usually administer a series of so-called "field sobriety tests" (FSTs). This could contain a battery of 3 to 5 tests, frequently selected by the officer; these can include walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand, horizontal gaze nystagmus, fingers-to-thumb, finger-to-nose, Rhomberg (modified position of attention), alphabet recitation, or hand-pat. In an increasing number of police agencies in DUI Lawyer Orange County, California and across the nation, a "standardized" battery of three tests is going to be given - walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand and nystagmus - plus they should be scored objectively in place of using an officer's subjective opinion.
How valid are these FSTs? Not so, in accordance with DUI Lawyer Orange County CA Taylor, a former prosecutor and the author of the leading legal textbook "Drunk Driving Defense, 6th edition". The tests are basically "designed for failure". In 1991, Taylor reports, Dr . Spurgeon Cole of Clemson University conducted a study on the accuracy of field sobriety tests. His staff videotaped 21 individuals performing 6 common field sobriety tests, then showed the tapes to 14 police and asked them to decide whether the suspects had "had a great deal to drink to operate a vehicle. " Unknown to the officers, the blood-alcohol concentration of every of the 21 subjects was. 00%. The outcomes: 46% of that time period the officers gave their opinion that the subject was too inebriated to operate a vehicle. Quite simply, the FSTs were barely more accurate at predicting intoxication than flipping a coin. Cole and Nowaczyk, "Field Sobriety Tests: Are They Created for Failure? ", 79 Perceptual and Motor Skills 99 (1994).
Think about the newest, improved "standardized" DUI tests? Research funded by the National Highway Traffic Administration determined that the three most effective field sobriety tests were walk-and-turn, one-leg stand, and horizontal gaze nystagmus. Yet, even using these supposedly more accurate -- and objectively scored -- tests, the researchers found that 47% of the subjects who would have already been arrested based upon test performance actually had blood-alcohol concentrations of less than the legal limit. In other words, nearly half all persons "failing" the tests were not legally under the influence of alcohol!
According to the Orange County DUI Attorneylawyers in Mr. Taylor's Southern California attorney, the fact that these tests are largely unfamiliar to most people, and that they are given under extremely unfortunate circumstances, make sure they are more difficult for individuals to do. Merely two miscues in performance can result in an individual being classified as "impaired" due to alcohol consumption once the problem may actually function as consequence of unfamiliarity with the test.
