Go to navigation Go to content
 From an emotional standpoint, a case where someone is accused driving under the influence and killing another person is one of the toughest.  With the victim, you usually have someone who did not deserve to die.  They are often young, in the prime of their lives.  They are usually also close to the driver.  The victim is often a spouse, girlfriend, boyfriend, or sibling of the accused.  Unfortunately, that person is not available to express forgiveness to the driver.
 
As for the driver, you often have a person who has never been in trouble in his life.  He may be college educated, have a great job, and a loving family.  But for this horrible incident he would have continued to be an upstanding citizen.
 
Recently, a San Jose woman pled guilty to gross vehicular manslaughter after hitting and killing a 79 year old grandmother.  She is waiting to be sentenced by a Santa Clara County judge.  Her maximum possible sentence is 12 years in the state prison.  In fact, the judge is precluded from granting this woman probation unless he finds “unusual circumstances” where the interests of justice require it.  According to statements, the family of the victim has forgiven the defendant, and believes that the victim would forgive her as well.  Unfortunately, California DUI sentencing law provides somewhat less opportunity for the Court to forgive her. 

As a former prosecutor, I can tell you that, regardless of the outcome, nobody wins in these cases.  Regardless of what side you are on there is nothing but tragedy in these cases.  An innocent victim loses her life, and a contrite survivor is cast into the hell of the California prison system.  

11/17/2008
Bob Battle- Richmond Area
Comments (0)

In 2005 Virginia Department of Forensic Science (DFS) revealed in a grant request that its evidentiary breath test devices, Intoxilyzer 5000 (68), were “dated, unstable and unreliable.”  DFS went on to say that, “Funding of this request will allow the agency to replace instruments that are 9-10 years old and for which replacement parts are not available.”  West Virginia had begun replacing its dated, unstable, unreliable Intoxilyzers with emergency funding in 2004.

 FOIA requests of internal DFS documents revealed serious problems with Virginia’s Intoxilyzers,

 

The IR source that is currently being sold is having problems with sensitivity and transitioning between motors…The motors are another issue, the current motor will be discontinued as of January 1, 2006.  The “replacement motors” are in short supply…CMI doesn’t want to continue to support the 5000 line since they have 2 generations of instruments produced since that time.

 

 Through FOIA, Harrisonburg Virginia DUI Attorney Bob Keefer found that DFS was using 90 cent cassette player motors instead of the $80.00 to $100.00 motors designated by the manufacturer.  These motors are critical to the accuracy of the testing as erratic motor speeds will cause instability in the electronic signals, which can affect the timing of the device.   

 

Keefer’s research revealed, as might be expected with substandard parts, that the devices were suffering electronic problems.  Electronic problems cause many different issues to occur, depending upon where in the operational sequence the problem occurs.  For example, the calibration can fall out of tolerance.  When this happens test results cannot be considered to be accurate within a reasonable degree of scientific certainty.

 

Despite these problems DFS has always claimed that the Intoxilyzer could not be wrong because it would not let itself make a mistake.  According to DFS these machines have never made a mistake.

 

Despite the problems and the FOIA documents, DFS still claims publically that the now 12 year old machines are not showing any signs of ageing.  DFS, of course, maintains that Virginia does not have to replace the Intoxilyzers.

 

On April 23, 2008, DFS signed a contract to replace the Intoxilyzers with Intoximeters EC/IR II.  The EC/IR II was the cheapest machine considered.   It is about half the price of Intoxilyzer’s 8000.

 

According to DFS, out of 50 states the EC/IR II is used in only four states besides Virginia: West Virginia, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Tennessee.   

 

The EC/IR II was intended to use two analytical methods: EC (electrochemical or fuel cell) and IR (infrared technology).  The plan was that the EC/IR II would insure reliability by checking the fuel cell results against the infrared results.  Agreement between such different analytical methods would insure reliability.  Unfortunately, Intoximeter was unable to coordinate the different analytical methods. For that reason, the device only uses the fuel cell to measure alcohol and determine blood alcohol content.

 

Time will tell whether DFS made a good decision to replace its never wrong Intoxilyzers with the EC/IR II.

 

Bob Keefer practices DUI defense in Harrisonburg, Virginia; Rockingham County, Virginia; Staunton, Virgina; Augusta County, Virginia; Woodstock, Virginia; Shenandoah County, Virginia; Waynesboro, Virginia and other parts of the Shenandoah Valley.  www.BobKeeferLaw.com  



Category: Keyword Search: Harrisonburg Virginia DUI Lawyer

11/17/2008
Bob Battle- Richmond Area
Comments (0)

The Harris County Sheriff's Department had to know that conducting surveillance on Plaintiffs in a civil rights violation suit was wrong.

The Ibarra brothers, a local business owner and a Judge sued Harris County.

Business Owner Loyd Henderson was a plaintiff; his security camera showed Henderson being shoved to the floor and cuffed without warning by a Harris County Sheriff's Deputy.

Henderson had called the Sheriff's Departmetn for help after a robbery.

Municipal Judge April Walker was also a Plaintiff in that suit; Judge Walker was arrested after calling the Sheriff's Office for help.

The Deputy that was called to help calm a neighborhood dispute threw Judge Walker to the ground and handcuffed her.

Judge Walker was charged with impersonating a public officer and assault on a police officer.

The Ibarro Brothers, as mentioned in an earlier blog, were arrested while videotaping the arrest of a neighbor.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1V74ZjZ74o



Category: Keyword Search: Harrisonburg Virginia DUI Lawyer