Roadside Drug Testing....

[Fry-d-]

They even had a few minutes of this saga on the 7 news in Perth. I think Mr De Jong is more than entitled to an apology for this, his family has obviously been through the media ringer this week.

2 out of the first 3 incorrect, that won't be impressing anybody. Even people who support the tests must be thinking something more accurate needs to be used, if the imposition put on Mr De Jong is anything to go by.

We can at least be thankful we're not in the UK I suppose.

 

[hoptis]

Summary of this morning's news reports.

Driver tests for drugs will continue
By Selma Milovanovic, Andrea Petrie
Kenneth Nguyen
December 23, 2004

The Premier insists a roadside drugs pilot is working although two positive tests are overruled in the lab.

Police will continue random roadside drug tests despite the first driver who initially tested positive being cleared.

Ballarat delivery driver John De Jong, 39, was identified as the first person in the world to return what police originally said was a positive reading for methamphetamine in a roadside saliva test. He tested positive for cannabis in a later, more sophisticated test in a police bus. But police and independent laboratory tests of a saliva sample taken from Mr De Jong returned negative results yesterday.

Premier Steve Bracks said the laboratory result showed the 12-month pilot program was working.

"We have a fail-safe system which means that, before charges are laid, there will be a conclusive laboratory test," he said. "We're confident that this is the best system possible for checking drugs."

Mr De Jong - who admitted to smoking one joint a month before he was tested but said he had never taken methamphetamine - questioned the accuracy of the tests and said he would consider suing the force for compensation. He said he was shocked police were refusing a public apology. While he supported roadside drug testing, he urged other drivers to challenge positive tests unless the technology was reviewed.

Assistant Commissioner (Traffic) Bob Hastings said police had simply applied the law.

Random roadside saliva testing began on December 13. Statistics revealed 31 per cent of Victorian motorists killed last year had tested positive to drugs.

The saliva tests detect the presence of THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the active ingredient in cannabis) and metamphetamines, commonly found in speed.

If two tests return positive, a third sample is taken and divided in two. Half is laboratory tested at the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine while the other half is given to the driver. The third test determines whether the driver will be charged.

NSW police will hold a similar trial next year but motorists will not be penalised. "Because it is a trial of new technology, we wish to make sure we get everything right before full implementation," NSW Chief Superintendent John Hartley said.

Mr Hastings called for public patience as the Victorian program was refined and independently evaluated to determine its effect on the road toll.

Police Minister Andre Haermeyer said the Securetec Drugwipe II Twin devices used for the tests had returned no false positive results during the pre-pilot testing. "But when you take something out into the field, there are a whole lot of issues around how the device is used, which obviously we've now had to have a look at," he said.

Shadow police minister Kim Wells called for a halt in testing "until they get the equipment right", otherwise there would be no confidence in the process.

Mr Hastings said the pilot was already proving to be"a great deterrent".

He said 283 random drug tests were done over five days. Of the first three laboratory tests, two returned negative - including Mr De Jong's - while the third returned positive.

Dr Philip Swann , manager of drugs, alcohol and fatigue at VicRoads, said the saliva screening devices were tested and refined by manufacturers for Victorian conditions.

Dr Swann, who wrote the performance guidelines for the devices and chaired the taskforce that oversaw their testing, said that while the rate of false positives could never be zero during the screening process, laboratory tests were 100 per cent accurate.

Workplace drug testing experts said motorists should not be liable to prosecution until the trial period finished. Andrew Leibie, national account manager for d:tec Australia, said the trial results would help scientists identify factors that caused false positives.

Gwen Wilcox, chief executive of the Australian Drug Management and Education Group, said education and testing were two most effective deterrents. Ms Wilcox said until the testing improved, it should be recognised that "saliva is not a reliable test and governments are leaving themselves open to be sued".

From The Age

Roadside tests to continue
By Norrie Ross, Ben Packham and Jeremy Kelly
December 23, 2004

VICTORIA'S tainted roadside drug tests will continue despite a humiliating blow for the State Government and police yesterday.

On the day the Herald Sun revealed an independent laboratory had cleared van driver John De Jong, a police lab confirmed the negative result.

Mr De Jong was the first driver in the world to return a positive roadside saliva test and he may now sue the Government and Victoria Police for the slur on his name.

The Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV) said the drug bus launch was a "fiasco" and that motorists had to be sure the tests were accurate.

And a scientist who advised the Government on the program admitted he was warned of a legal disaster if it went ahead.

But VicRoads drugs specialist Dr Philip Swann said he ignored the warnings because of the road safety benefits of saliva testing.

Police Minister Andre Haermeyer yesterday tried to shore up confidence in the tests and said he had full confidence in the system.

He said a wrongly accused driver faced "a little bit of inconvenience".

"No one has been wrongly charged, no one has been wrongly convicted," Mr Haermeyer said. "This is a process that drivers are asked to undergo and the worst that can happen is that if the indicative screening test gets it wrong then the driver faces a little bit of inconvenience."

VicRoads funded the drug testing initiative, providing $1.4 million for training, wages, deployment and equipment, including testing kits and the drug bus.

Despite Mr De Jong being cleared, Assistant Commissioner for traffic Bob Hastings said Victorian Police retained confidence in the program.

He saw no need to apologise to Mr De Jong, who was initially tested in a media stunt on the drug bus's first day on the road. Mr De Jong's case was part of the learning experience and would assist police as they evaluated the system, he said.

Mr Hastings denied it was a black mark against the entire system.

"It shows that the system is working. It shows that whatever occurs on the side of the road is either validated or not validated in the subsequent laboratory test. And that's what the system is about," he said.

RACV general manager of public policy director Dr Ken Ogden said the RACV strongly supported the program but it needed to be accurate for the public to have faith in it.

"The whole episode on day one and its results were a fiasco and if it continues it will be a disaster for road safety," Dr Ogden said. "Clearly something has to be sorted out in relation to operating procedures.

"While the system works, in that there's been no person prosecuted for a faulty reading, nevertheless public confidence has been undermined."

Mr Norman Marshall, whose company does drug testing for some of Australian's biggest corporations and sports agencies, said the drug bus should be pulled off the road.

"The key issues for any drug testing program are fairness and reasonableness," said Mr Marshall, of the Australian Drug Management and Education Group.

"You cannot have a program which allows for someone who is innocent to be put in a position where they are suffering anxiety and distress. This is a classic example of it."

Mr Marshall said any device used on the roadside was always going to be a cheap version of laboratory tests.

A toxicologist, who did not want to be named, said government experts were warned of the legal dangers of roadside saliva tests.

The scientist said the issues were raised during a presentation on saliva testing by Dr Swann at an international toxicology conference in Melbourne last year.

"We raised the very scenario that happened," the toxicologist said.

"We said that if you use this on the roadside you will get a false positive and it will take days to get the true result.

"And depending on who is being tested you are leaving yourself open to being sued for pain and suffering, defamation and psychological shock."

Dr Swann confirmed these comments had been made to him but they did not change his mind.

Herald Sun

From News.com.au

Cleared driver wants apology
By Norrie Ross
December 23, 2004

ROADSIDE drug testing victim John De Jong has tearfully accepted his ordeal is over - but he says the hurt remains.

After Victoria Police finally cleared him of driving with drugs in his system he spoke of the toll on his loving family.

"It's a big weight that's been lifted," the Ballarat van driver said yesterday.

"The whole week has just been a mass of emotions. One minute you feel fine, the next it just hits you like a brick."

Mr De Jong has demanded a public apology from the police and signalled he will take legal action through law firm Slater and Gordon for compensation.

And he called for the drug bus to stop until a more accurate test is found.

Mr De Jong turns 40 on Christmas Day and said the best present he could ever receive was that the slur on his name be lifted.

With wife Kay and daughters Danielle, 17, and Belinda, 13, at his side there were some tears.

"It's not what it's has done to me. It's what it's done to my family," Mr De Jong said.

"My family have been supportive but of course they've been very emotional. They were as much in disbelief as I was.

"Right through they've said, 'We know you are innocent, but we can't understand why it's happened to you'."

Mrs De Jong said the police test proved what they already knew.

"I never doubted John. He's a good, honest man," she said.

"We've been married nearly 20 years now.

"We were married young. Honesty is our best policy."

Mrs De Jong said she was appalled her husband had been "named and shamed" and paraded as a drug taker.

And she said the slur on their father was particularly hard for Danielle and Belinda.

"The youngest it hit pretty hard," Mrs De Jong said.

"She's been very very emotional with it all. It has hurt Danielle as well. They are very close to their dad. They absolutely idolise him."

Mr De Jong said he was particularly upset he had received no apology.

"I always believed the test would come back negative. But I would have thought an apology was the least they could have given me," he said.

Mr De Jong said the police had prolonged his agony with the wait for them to give him their lab results.

"It's like they've they were holding back the test results," he said.

"They were just going to bring the results out when it was convenient for them to do so without any consideration to me and how I was feeling and knowing I would want those results as soon as they had them."

He said he believed it was just bad luck he was a target.

"I was just the person who happened to be passing, who got pulled over. I've said all along, I was more than happy to do the test because I had nothing to hide," he said.

Solicitor Katalin Blond, of Slater and Gordon, described the treatment of Mr De Jong as unacceptable.

"No one should go through this ordeal," Ms Blond said. "To be falsely accused of having these illicit drugs in your system is a huge burden to bear."

Herald Sun

From News.com.au

 

[BigTrancer]

Thanks hoptis, was just about to post those.

BT

 

[lazyboy]

feel free to delete this if you like. in another thread hoptis mentioned focus on a reunion party been held. would be interesting to see if the bus has a presence in that area before NYE hits.

 

[BigTrancer]

^ I believe he was referring to undercover police in this post, NOT the drug bus. It would be interesting to see if the efforts of the two sectors of the police force are co-ordinated on NYE, but this is highly unlikely - undercover police target dealing in clubs, the drug bus targets users in cars. Totally different aims.

BT

 

[Pop Popavich]

Muzby, Pop Popavich...you guys mention low time positives...2.5 hours for instance. What is the highest time with a positive you guys found? I imagine 36-40 hours is getting pretty much safe, or is that a stupid assumption?

I still have a few tests that I intend to do some further testing with and recording of the times etc. I know me and others have returned postitives up to 4-5 hours after heavy use, but haven't tested properly beyond that.... mainly because we have been asleep

We have done a couple the following day after minor use and they came back negative. But given the quantity differences and the fact that I didn't record amounts or times, this is not exactly conclusive. And as always it also depends on you own usage and personal metabolism.

I'm aiming to do some more tests over New years, and hopefully this time I'll actually be together enough to make a schedule and stick to it, recording the results as I go.

 

[hoptis]

Police modify roadside drug test
December 23, 2004 - 3:22PM

Victorian police have modified a world-first roadside drug test after two of the first three drivers to test positive were later cleared by laboratory analysis of their samples.

Police yesterday released the results of the laboratory tests amid demands for an apology and threats of legal action from van driver John De Jong, who tested positive for drugs at a highly-publicised launch of the system last week.

Private tests supported Mr De Jong's claims of innocence and subsequent police laboratory tests confirmed he was drug-free.

Today police said refinements to the way officers conduct the sophisticated screening tests had been made to ensure they were as accurate as possible.

"We have continually refined the way we do business on the side of the road," Assistant Commissioner for Traffic Bob Hastings said.

"We're continually evaluating the equipment, but overall it's having a great deterrent effect."

The minor changes involve the way in which a saliva swipe is taken for the first roadside test.

If that is positive, a second test will be carried out in a police bus, and a positive result from that will be sent to a laboratory for sophisticated analysis before any charges are laid.

Mr Hastings was speaking at the launch of the Christmas holiday road safety blitz in Melbourne today, which Police Minister Andre Haermeyer also attended.

Mr Haermeyer said there had not been a single false positive test since the modifications to the roadside drug testing process had been made.

"We always said there would be some teething issues with this when you're doing a world first," he said.

"We had it with random breath testing and we're having it with random drug testing."

While NSW yesterday announced it would begin a 12-month trial of roadside drug testing in March next year, but would not prosecute suspected offenders during the trial, Victoria will penalise any driver whose positive drug tests are confirmed by laboratory testing.

"Let me put this to you," Mr Haermeyer said.

"If the police were to pull over a driver and they were to do a screening test that shows that driver to be positive, they send that sample to the lab (and) that shows that driver to be positive, but they've put that driver back on the road and allowed that driver to go and kill somebody.

"What happens there?"

Police today would not apologise to Mr De Jong who was devastated when his image was captured by waiting press photographers and cameramen assembled by police to witness the first tests.

"If John De Jong needs an apology, I think the media ought to apologise," Mr Hastings said.

"On that particular occasion, we briefed all those present in terms of privacy issues, identity issues and we never identified any driver."

Officers so far had carried out 333 roadside drug tests, with laboratory analysis confirming one driver had tested positive to drugs, he added.

- AAP

From The Age

Interesting that details of the modifications haven't been released. From everything we've seen so far, I expect it to go something like this...

From today onwards, at the saliva testing stage, police will evaluate the driver and determine whether the driver looks like someone who might take drugs. If so, the officer will draw their service revolver and execute every person in the vehicle. Victoria Police expect this to greatly increase the accuracy and efficiency of roadside drug testing.

 

[syntech]

thanks for clearing that up for me. i should pay more attention. though i didn't hear anything mentioned about the NSW trials in the report i heard.

 

[Styptic_Pencil]

I still have a few tests that I intend to do some further testing with and recording of the times etc. I know me and others have returned postitives up to 4-5 hours after heavy use, but haven't tested properly beyond that.... mainly because we have been asleep

We have done a couple the following day after minor use and they came back negative. But given the quantity differences and the fact that I didn't record amounts or times, this is not exactly conclusive. And as always it also depends on you own usage and personal metabolism.

I'm aiming to do some more tests over New years, and hopefully this time I'll actually be together enough to make a schedule and stick to it, recording the results as I go.

Cool. Well If I get drug buss'd I guess I'll be doing some testing of my own. Hehe, this will be from the night before NYE though, so hopefully it will all be peachy!

Thanks.

 

[hoptis]

Two very intersesting revelations, highlighted in bold in the article.

Drug tests shake-up
Ben Packham and Norrie Ross
24 Dec 2004

POLICE have changed the way they conduct drug-driving tests after an outcry over their accuracy.

Officers have been ordered to take more care handling testing equipment and saliva samples after the botched John De Jong case.

Police command and Police Minister Andre Haermeyer refused to suspend the drug-testing trial or apologise to Mr De Jong, who tested positive but was later cleared.

It was also revealed yesterday that motorists charged with drug-driving risk losing their licence from July 1 next year due to a clause in the law.

It was believed drivers who tested positive during a 12-month trial of the program would be fined $300 and get three demerit points.

A barrister who specialises in drink and drug-driving cases revealed the so-called "soft" penalties would end in six months.

Following an inquiry from the Herald Sun, a spokesperson for Mr Haermeyer said legislation would be introduced to extend the sunset clause on the penalties by six months.

Assistant commissioner (traffic) Bob Hastings yesterday said police had tightened up testing methods to ensure greater accuracy when taking and processing saliva swabs.

"We've gone back and refined that to try to minimise these sorts of outcomes," he said.

"It's the way we actually manipulate the device, handle the device, work with the device on the side of the road."

Mr Hastings said police had done 333 roadside drug tests so far, with one confirmed positive result and two false positives.

Mr Hastings and Mr Haermeyer said they saw no reason to apologise to Mr De Jong, despite police parading him in front of the cameras on day one of the tests last week.

They said it was the media who should apologise for identifying him.

Mr Haermeyer said he still had confidence in the drug-testing system.

Barrister Paul Reynolds said the part of the Road Safety Act that specifies the penalty has a sunset clause of July 1, 2005.

If the Government had not decided to make the change in the legislation, drivers who tested positive to amphetamines or cannabis would have faced court, where they could have been fined and have their licence suspended or cancelled.

Mr Reynolds was called in by law firm Slater and Gordon for advice in the case of Mr De Jong.

He said the German-made Securetec Drugwipe Twin was chosen so that Victoria could boast it had a world-first test.

Mr Reynolds said the sensitive device was open to contamination from several sources.

An officer could have touched coins before administering the test and it was estimated 80 per cent of currency had cocaine, cannabis or amphetamine traces on it.

From The Herald Sun

 

[mongman]

That is discusting they are straight out lieing and I think that even the general public are going to have had enought of this very soon..... I hope that Mr De Jong's case goes ahead and he gets the justice he deserves.

I agree that officers should NOT be the ones responsible for administering a test. To perform these tests reliably people who have actual trained chemisty knoweldge should be handling the testing.
How many officers have found and handled drugs when making an arrest in the past when wearing the same uniform? Scary stuff realy.

Edit: How can it be argued that these tests proove beyond reasonable doubt that a motorist is significantly affected by drugs or actually affected at all for that matter?

 

[Leprechaun]

Can anyone verify this comment

HOW TO FOOL SALIVA TESTS:

Upon approach to van, have mouth wash on hand. Take large gulp, swish for as long as possible. Then swallow.

Nothing should remain of active substances on your tongue as these are all soluble in the active ingredients off most otc mouth wash. Primarily methanol.

 

[hoptis]

The above is either urban legend, or foolproof drug-avoidance method.

Just wanted to point out, was reading the Herald Sun over lunch and today's Voteline result is interesting.

"Should drug testing of drivers be abandoned?"

Y 69%/ N 31%
352 / 156

out of 510

The Herald Sun Voteline is a very conservative social barometer.

 

[Pop Popavich]

^^^ I don't know it the mouthwash thing would work or not, But I'll give it a try with the tests I have. I know doing the same thing with Vinegar didn't work (another urban legend put to rest).

Swishing mouthwash would almost definately make you register well above the legal limit for alcohol however. If you have an excuse for blowing above and they let you wait a few minutes before blowing again, you would probably be OK, but by that time, your saliva would be back, and you would probably test positive for drugs again.

 

[phase_dancer]

I have a list of over 4 pages from the Handbook of Drug Analysis (by Lui and Gadzala). This covers the known interferences for each immuno test.

However, as this is not in the interests of Harm Reduction, you'll just have to check the book yourself. Don't PM me on this.

Also, please don't post methods for false negatives on this board unless they are first mentioned in the media.

 

[Fordy]

Hi,

Spratic reader, first time poster...

I justed wanted to post in relation to the drug testing after being blown away by an episode which happened to my mate last night.

Nothing out of the ordinary, sitting round with a few mates having a beer / bongs...one mate decides to head down to the Altona Pier and have a fish. He knocks down a beer, coupled with about fives cones in a row and heads off. Nearing the pier on the Esplanade, a couple of police traffic cars had blocked off the road and were diverting all traffic into a car park. He was stopped and asked to blow in the bag, then soon after a second officer performed the saliva swab. Obviously he was shitting himself, to the point where he was about to get out the car to deal with the situation when the office turned to him and said 'thanks sir, please exit over there'. And with that he cruised to the pier and began to fish.

He without hesitation states that he would've smoked at least 10 cones in the hour prior, possibly more. And was stoned, actually he's stoned 24/7.

The only thing he said he did was suck on a Listerine pocket pak tab as he was being pulled in to be tested. This wasn't intentional at all.

Just thought I'd add this one to the mix.

 

[eccitude]

He without hesitation states that he would've smoked at least 10 cones in the hour prior, possibly more. And was stoned, actually he's stoned 24/7.

In the interest of Harm Minimisation, do you think it would be possible to post the location of your mate in future when he's driving so stoned, so other road users can avoid him?

 

[Fordy]

In the interest of Harm Minimisation, do you think it would be possible to post the location of your mate in future when he's driving so stoned, so other road users can avoid him?

Totally understand where you're coming from, some people are so used to being in this state of mind that they can still adequately run their lives normal as per say.

I certainly don't encourage this, but the point being though that this individual was tested, should've quite rightly been found to be driving under the influence of an illegal drug, but was not.

 

[hoptis]

Fordy's story would have to be the most hilarious thing I've ever heard, not that his friend should have been driving... but; someone who is apparently a habitual pot smoker, who had just smoked between five to ten cones in the previous hour can return negative on a sailva test???

That's like an alcoholic returning zero BAC after drinking all day.

I'm lost for words. I just hope stories like this start filtering through to the media.

 

[syntech]

did they actually test this method of drug detection with a small group of ppl first before it was taken out onto our roads???


you'd think that if they did they would have ironed out such major problems.
i dont have a single problem with drug testing drivers as long as the system works . this just seems to be causing problems for innocent people, and failing on those that it clearly should be working on!