McgeeCovert551
From GunGame5 Documentation
In the course of a drunk driving investigation, police officers will most likely administer some so-called "field sobriety tests" (FSTs). This might consist of a battery of three to five tests, often selected by the officer; these can sometimes 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 quantity of law enforcement agencies in DUI Lawyer Orange County, California and across the nation, a "standardized" battery of three tests will be given - walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand and nystagmus - and they must be scored objectively instead of utilizing an officer's subjective opinion.
How valid are these FSTs? Not to, according to DUI Lawyer Orange County CA Taylor, a former prosecutor and the composer of the best 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 report 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 drive. " Unknown to the officers, the blood-alcohol concentration of each of the 21 subjects was. 00%. The results: 46% of times the officers gave their opinion that the subject was too inebriated to operate a vehicle. In other words, 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).
How about the new, improved "standardized" DUI tests? Research funded by the National Highway Traffic Administration determined that the three best 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 unearthed that 47% of the subjects who have now been arrested based on test performance actually had blood-alcohol concentrations of less than the legal limit. Quite simply, almost half all persons "failing" the tests were not legally under the influence of alcohol!
Based on the Orange County DUI Attorneysolicitors in Mr. Taylor's Southern California law firm, the fact that these tests are largely unfamiliar to many people, and they are given under acutely adverse conditions, make them more difficult for people to perform. As few as two miscues in performance can result in someone being classified as "impaired" as a result of alcohol consumption once the problem could possibly be the results of unfamiliarity with the test.
