Legal nightmare for man as drug driving test returns incorrectly positive

[Chip (OP)]

source: http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/legal-nightmare-for-man-as-drug-driving-test-returns-positive-for-drug-hes-never-used-20151111-gkww9b.html#ixzz3rfJi4Oss

Legal nightmare for man as drug driving test returns positive for drug he's never used

When Steve Hunt was pulled over for a routine roadside drug test on his way home from work, he thought everything would be fine.
He was wrong.

Steve Hunt: I have no trust whatsoever in the police any more.

That one test triggered a nightmare scenario in which he was repeatedly misdiagnosed as having methamphetamine - a drug he has never touched - in his system by police and NSW Health tests.

The case triggered NSW Health to begin double-testing samples, but that was too late for Mr Hunt, who was forced to pull $5000 out of his home loan to fight for his innocence. Losing his licence would mean he couldn't work.

The state government is planning a massive roll-out of the same drug-driving tests that misdiagnosed Mr Hunt, with 100,000 NSW drivers expected to be tested - and it's not to identify those under the influence of drugs (a different offence) but simply whether they have the "presence" of drugs in their systems.

Police admit there is no lower limit used for the amount of drugs detected.
 
"The first moment I realised something was wrong was when the policeman came back to me and said 'I think we are going to have a problem here'," Mr Hunt said.

The test had detected methamphetamine in his saliva. He was arrested and taken to a portable testing station, where a second test was negative. A further sample was sent to NSW Health pathology. Two weeks later he got the result: positive.

"I had been sitting there going to my wife 'no, no, no, this won't come back positive'," he said. "I have never taken drugs in my life."
Mr Hunt's lawyers demanded the sample be retested. The same NSW Health lab, testing the same sample, got a negative result. A further test was also negative, and in court police did not present evidence, and the case was dismissed.

"I have no trust whatsoever in the police any more," Mr Hunt said. "If it can go wrong once, it can go wrong again, and I don't want to lose another five grand."

Fairfax Media has also spoken to a woman, who did not want to be named, who had marijuana detected despite never having used the drug. She also had a positive, then negative, then positive result, but was never told she could get it retested.

Greens MP and justice spokesman David Shoebridge said the roadside drug testing was a "lottery".

"The problem is the police are testing for tiny trace elements of drugs and this makes the results inherently unreliable," Mr Shoebridge said. "Steve was just minding his own business … and he had his life turned upside down by a plainly stupid law. It's awful what has happened to him, how much it has cost, and we know he is not alone."

Mr Shoebridge said it was extremely difficult to get legal costs back from the government, but he had written to the Police Minister to suggest Mr Hunt be given an ex-gratia payment.
 
"It's time to scrap the failed roadside testing regime and put in place a rational program that tests for impairment, and tests for every drug, not just a handful of illegal drugs," Mr Shoebridge said.

NSW Police maintain the tests are an important deterrence tool in preventing road accidents caused by impaired drivers, which are implicated in 14 per cent of road fatalities.

One in 10 tests this year returned a positive result, compared with one in 300 alcohol tests.

Sharon Neville, the acting director of the NSW Health Forensic and Analytical Science Service (FASS), said that since roadside drug testing was introduced in 2007 it had tested more than 14,000 samples, and Mr Hunt's case was the only error it was aware of.

"The initial incorrect result reported by FASS was due to a manual handling error," she said. "Additional measures and quality control steps were implemented as a result of this case, with all samples now being analysed twice before reporting. These steps ensure tighter controls on manual handling and all other parts of the process."

She said the screening tests conducted by NSW Police had different sensitivities to the "comprehensive" testing equipment used by FASS.

[Griffin]

That is awful, The state should pay him his $5,000 back and then give him another $15,000 for the amount of stress it caused him. I unfortunately know exactly what he went through. Although there was methadone in my system there are numerous studies that show it doesn't effect your driving. It has cost me so much time and money and caused me so much stress I can't even begin to explain. Being taking of 280 mg of methadone c/t in a jail cell for 30 days with only tylenol is the only way I can begin to explain how awful it has been for me.

I will never understand the reasoning behind robbing and throwing your own citizens in cages for victimless crimes. There can be an argument made that my crime was not victimless because I could of wrecked and killed someone. However I didn't and I wasn't intoxicated at all by any means of the word.

Not everyone has the money for a lawyer and are stuck paying $10,000+ to stay out of prison like me. They say this is the first time they have had an issue. This is probably the first time they had someone who had the money to defend himself and get the test retested multiple times. There are probably 100s of innocent victims from this barbaric thieving scam.

This just goes to show you that the whole world is beginning to follow america's mass incarceration plan. They see how much money they are making off of the drug war and by robbing and caging everyone. This just continues to spread the wealth gap and adds to the burden of being poor. I can't even get a job at walmart or be a manager at a fast food place because I have 3 misdemeanors from all this crap. They aren't even violent or theft charges.

Okay ill stop ranting and complaining about my problems. Hopefully things change.

[Sand and Water]

Only aware of ONE error in over 14,000 tests?? Math folks out there--what are those odds/probabilities??
Whoa baby, either somebody's lying of that's a helluva "state of the art" system. And re-testing at the SAME place? Uh ok, *thats* beyond reliable, now get in line to pony up folks.

[theSWPK]

I'm NSW they pull you over and drug test you on the spot?

[Chip (OP)]

indeed ... scary.

they do an initial swab, then go for another sample also if the first one is +ve.

if you were in an accident then you get mandatory blood tests, too.

[Z]

It is much more common then we think.

A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify false-positive UDSs associated with all clinic formulary medications, as well as common nonprescription medications. The references of each report describing a medication whose use was associated with false-positive UDS results were also reviewed. If a class effect was suspected, additional agents in the category were searched. A total of 25 reports of false-positive UDS results were identified. Categories of medications included antihistamines, antidepressants, antibiotics, analgesics, antipsychotics, and nonprescription agents. Reports of false-positive results were found for the following formulary and nonprescription medications brompheniramine, bupropion, chlorpromazine, clomipramine, dextromethorphan, diphenhydramine, doxylamine, ibuprofen, naproxen, promethazine, quetiapine, quinolones (ofloxacin and gatifloxacin), ranitidine, sertraline, thioridazine, trazodone, venlafaxine, verapamil, and a nonprescription nasal inhaler. False-positive results for amphetamine and methamphetamine were the most commonly reported. False-positive results for methadone, opioids, phencyclidine, barbiturates, cannabinoids, and benzodiazepines were also reported in patients taking commonly used medications. The most commonly used tests to screen urine for drugs of abuse are immunoassays, even though false-positive results for drugs of abuse have been reported with a number of these rapid-screening products. Results from such tests should be confirmed using additional analytical methods, including gas chromatography–mass spectrometry.

Conclusion. A number of routinely prescribed medications have been associated with triggering false-positive UDS results. Verification of the test results with a different screening test or additional analytical tests should be performed to avoid adverse consequences for the patients.

[Chip (OP)]

our roadside tests *currently* only check for pot, meth and MDMA.

if you test hot then you suffer the fate that of a midrange DUI, can't drive for 24 hours and then end up in court.

the glaring fault in the system is the absence of impairment testing.

it's a mess from my perspective.

[Sand and Water]

Just as an aside, what happens to the swab data? In the US, it's routinely put in the ID systems like FBI etc etc (although there's only been an arrest, NOT a conviction).

[jdub]

So they are just testing random drivers? Do you guys have the equivalent of our 4th amendment ie they need probable cause to test/search/etc.

[smfadmin]

S&W: no idea.

jdub: we are fucked - they setup roadside tests anywhere, any time.

because i use pot and meth infrequently, most of the time, i am cool ... but one of these days, my luck may run out.

the thing is, a little bit of meth. sharpens the senses so i'd like to argue that in court if or when the time comes.

[Wildcat]

That is awful, The state should pay him his $5,000 back and then give him another $15,000 for the amount of stress it caused him. I unfortunately know exactly what he went through. Although there was methadone in my system there are numerous studies that show it doesn't effect your driving. It has cost me so much time and money and caused me so much stress I can't even begin to explain. Being taking of 280 mg of methadone c/t in a jail cell for 30 days with only tylenol is the only way I can begin to explain how awful it has been for me.

I will never understand the reasoning behind robbing and throwing your own citizens in cages for victimless crimes. There can be an argument made that my crime was not victimless because I could of wrecked and killed someone. However I didn't and I wasn't intoxicated at all by any means of the word.

Not everyone has the money for a lawyer and are stuck paying $10,000+ to stay out of prison like me. They say this is the first time they have had an issue. This is probably the first time they had someone who had the money to defend himself and get the test retested multiple times. There are probably 100s of innocent victims from this barbaric thieving scam.

This just goes to show you that the whole world is beginning to follow america's mass incarceration plan. They see how much money they are making off of the drug war and by robbing and caging everyone. This just continues to spread the wealth gap and adds to the burden of being poor. I can't even get a job at walmart or be a manager at a fast food place because I have 3 misdemeanors from all this crap. They aren't even violent or theft charges.

Okay ill stop ranting and complaining about my problems. Hopefully things change.

Griffin-
I feel your outrage-I am totally disabled s/p trauma, one day I rec'd a letter from the DMV requesting my treating doctor to fill out an enclosed form asking if I was rx'd any controlled meds, and for what condition, if any, are they being prescribed for, and to state in his opinion, whether or not he deemed me "safe" to operate a motor vehicle and a "return within 10 business days from the date of this notice" or your license will be placed on suspension. (!!) I wondered how the hell they happened to even send it, but I guess it is because I have a registered handicap parking placard.  Ever since, I get a little paranoid, that if I get stopped-I don't know what would come up in their computer if they run my dl-and decide to request a roadside side sobriety test-which I would fail, due to permanent injuries that affect my balance anyways-I would definitely pass the thing that you blow into, though(I forget what they call it)or would they decide to fuck with me and demand a blood test, can they even do that-I would think not unless I caused an accident!

That Mr. Hunt should get his money back, PLUS-what do they mean it is difficult to return/recoup it-bullsht!!! or HOLY SHITFUCK as Dizzle once said, lol.

[theSWPK]

S&W: no idea.

jdub: we are fucked - they setup roadside tests anywhere, any time.

because i use pot and meth infrequently, most of the time, i am cool ... but one of these days, my luck may run out.

the thing is, a little bit of meth. sharpens the senses so i'd like to argue that in court if or when the time comes.

The problem with the meth is that people who use stimulants tend to stay up 2 or 3 or more days. Lack of sleep severely impairs your ability to function. So I wouldn't try to bring that up in court.

[Chip (OP)]

S&W: no idea.

jdub: we are fucked - they setup roadside tests anywhere, any time.

because i use pot and meth infrequently, most of the time, i am cool ... but one of these days, my luck may run out.

the thing is, a little bit of meth. sharpens the senses so i'd like to argue that in court if or when the time comes.

The problem with the meth is that people who use stimulants tend to stay up 2 or 3 or more days. Lack of sleep severely impairs your ability to function. So I wouldn't try to bring that up in court.

i would simply, honestly plead my case. we know people who have tried to stay up indefinitely and died on the road after falling asleep. it is a problem and i am acutely aware of it and would prefer to see impairment testing instead.

and then there's my favorite - tolerance: 1 pt. of meth. may do nada to some people whilst others may even throw up on that. it's not a level playing field, that's my argument.

[Griffin]

I dont know how it goes down under but my legal advice chipper is do NOT tell the truth none of it. Telling the truth is never a good idea here. Not to the police and most definitely the courts. There is no reason you should ever tell the truth because that will more likely than not result in prison time.

[Chip (OP)]

if I KNOW that I am not impaired, caught and courted then I will speak the truth ... sink or swim, that's me.

truth, to me, is something I fight for.

if I was impaired then I can only apologize for my poor judgement.

I hear you and I can lie like the best of them but prefer not to.

thanks for looking out, tho'.

our justice system is pretty good as far as I have experienced. I have never lost a court case yet.