SevillaWang458
From GunGame5 Documentation
For the duration of a drunk driving investigation, police officers will often administer some so-called "field sobriety tests" (FSTs). This may consist of a battery of three to five tests, often selected by the officer; these may 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 amount of law enforcement agencies in DUI Lawyer Orange County, California and across the nation, a "standardized" battery of three tests will soon be given - walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand and nystagmus - and so they must be scored objectively instead of using an officer's subjective opinion.
How valid are these FSTs? Not so, based on DUI Lawyer Orange County CA Taylor, a former prosecutor and the author of the best legal textbook "Drunk Driving Defense, 6th edition". The tests are basically "designed for failure". In 1991, Taylor reports, Doctor 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 too much to drink to drive. " Unknown to the officers, the blood-alcohol concentration of each and every of the 21 subjects was. 00%. The results: 46% of that time period the officers gave their opinion that the subject was too inebriated to drive. Quite simply, the FSTs were scarcely 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 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 unearthed that 47% of the subjects who would have now been arrested based on test performance actually had blood-alcohol concentrations of less than the legal limit. Quite simply, nearly half of all persons "failing" the tests are not legally under the influence of alcohol!
Based on the Orange County DUI Attorneylawyers in Mr. Taylor's Southern California lawyer, the fact that these tests are largely unfamiliar to many people, and they get under acutely desperate situations, make them harder for people to execute. As few as two miscues in performance can lead to an individual being classified as "impaired" as a result of alcohol consumption once the problem might actually function as results of unfamiliarity with the test.
