DUI
Breathalyzer Code Found to Be Poorly Written
Source code determines blood alcohol content in DWI cases.
For a number of years DWI defense lawyers have questioned the reliability and accuracy of breathalyzers. At issue was the source code used to determine BAC during an investigation into driving while intoxicated. Given the constitutional right of a defendant to challenge accusations of guilt and the fact that breath test results are often the sole basis for determining guilt, access to the code is considered judicially prudent. Several state courts, including Florida, Minnesota and New Jersey, have agreed, and mandated reviews of the source code. Manufacturers, despite fines and court orders, have resisted making the software available.
A landmark case involving New Jersey DWI criminal lawyer Evan Levow has lead to a court ordered audit of the source code for the Alcotest 7110 MKIII-C manufactured by Draeger. In two separate studies, one commissioned by Draeger and another by the defendant, both found that the code does not meet industry standards for software design and that it contains ‘bugs’. The test requested by the manufacturer found no malware but noted excessively complex and poor maintained code. It also located at least one reproducible bug. The test requested by the defendant found 24 major defects, including one that disables safeguard features intended to detect and prevent invalid or corrupt instructions. Concern was raised by the researchers over the discovery that the decimal precision is not consistent throughout the code. The code was found to return arbitrary default values when the test failed and to ignore errors. That increases the potential for inaccurate results and a false arrest for drunk driving.
It is the potential legal, social and financial impact of a conviction for DWI based on the results of a breathalyzer that demand independent verification of the machine’s accuracy and its ability to successfully complete its intended critical task.
The risks are huge for Draeger too as an agreement between the company and the state of New Jersey stipulates the return of nearly $7 million if the state Supreme Court deems the breathalyzers unreliable.
Have you been charged with DWI in NJ?
Filed in Court Rulings | New Jersey DUI | Permalink | Comments (2)
As I am a single parent, trying to save my home, and had a construction business to start. Without a Drivers license- no work, no money, and on foodstamps, and other public aid now. The investors I had lined up are no longer...And this is the "liberty" my late husband served and faught for in the Military for nine and a half years? WHO'S LIBERTY?... This doesn't look like the Liberty I remember bragging about, standing next to my Late Husband.
As I am a single parent, trying to save my home, and had a construction business to start. Without a Drivers license- no work, no money, and on foodstamps, and other public aid now. The investors I had lined up are no longer...And this is the "liberty" my late husband served and fought for in the Military for nine and a half years? WHO'S LIBERTY?... This doesn't look like the Liberty I remember bragging about, standing next to my Late Husband.