People charged with DUI, DWI, and even drug intoxication, are convicted with secret FST accuracy evidence they can not examine.

Secret Evidence

This web site gives the opinions of Dr. Greg Kane. Everything you read here is expressed only as my personal opinion.

Secret evidence

IF YOU THINK people charged with crimes should be able to see the evidence against them, FSTs disappoint. FST accuracy evidence is secret. The government makes extravagant claims about the accuracy of the FST, but it has never published and now refuses to release the raw data on which those claims are supposedly based. I have tried to get that raw data. Not hard you'd think; this is official government research, and the major studies are only about ten years old.

What evidence?
The NHTSA's DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing, Student Manual cites and relies on several so called studies. (Study reports linked below)

Study

Paid Contractor

Paid corporation

Raw data

San Diego, 1998

Dr. Burns, Dr. Stuster

Anacapa Sciences

released by Dr. Stuster

Florida, 1997

Dr. Burns

SCRI

Colorado, 1995

Dr. Burns

SCRI

1981

Dr. Burns, Dr. Moskowitz, Dr. Tharp

SCRI

1977

Dr. Burns, Dr. Moskowitz

SCRI

The authors of these studies claim to have gathered data which they claim to analyze in a way they claim proves FSTs are "extremely accurate" at identifying BAC levels. Criminal defendants are unable to examine any of these claims because, with the exception of one study, the raw data on which they are supposedly based is kept secret.

Why it matters

1

Convicting people with secret evidence is un-American.

2

When the raw evidence for the San Diego study was released, it showed that 99% of everyone who took the "extremely accurate" FST failed, and that on innocent people the FST gave the wrong answer 93% of the time.

3

The study reports themselves prove FST "accuracy" claims are based on statistical tricks.

4

Convicting people with secret evidence is un-American.

 

Searching for the evidence.
I myself have tried to get copies of the government's raw data on FST "accuracy."

Anacapa
Sciences

Anacapa Sciences contracted to do the 1998 San Diego FST validation study. Dr. Jack Stuster, principal scientist at Anacapa Sciences and an author of the study, quickly and cheerfully sent the relevant data set. This was the only FST study for which I have been able to get raw data.

What the data proved about FST inaccuracy is shocking.

NHTSA

All data

A FOIA request to the NHTSA failed to get any FST study raw data.

So I called Washington, DC and spoke with the NHTSA's Chief Counsel's Office—the agency's self described "FOIA experts." Agency lawyers claim all the FST data was lost "when we moved to this new office." The data was also lost, "when we moved to a paperless office." This happened, "a few years ago"—some time after a similar FOIA request was honored, resulting in Dr. Hlastala's 2005 scientific article sharply critical of NHTSA's statistical methods.

Two FST validation study reports originally included raw data about individual drivers. The final report of the 1995 Colorado study originally had an appendix matching driver BACs with officer arrest decisions. It does not give FST scores. The final report of the Florida study originally had an appendix with a "case log," apparently revealing raw data for each driver.

Based on my FOIA request and my discussions with the agency's Chief Counsel's Office, these appendices have been expunged from the reports now released by the NHTSA. The expunged Colorado appendix is available on the web. The expunged Florida appendix is not in any version of the report I have found. IF YOU HAVE THE FLORIDA STUDY, APPENDIX 4, please let me know. FST (at) medmalexperts.com

SCRI

All data

Southern California Research Institute contracted with the NHTSA to do the Florida, Colorado, 1981, and 1977 studies. SCRI raw data seems to be secret. SCRI's executive director, Dr. Dary Fiorentino, answered my emails, but refused to release any raw data. At least I think he did—I was never able to decode his responses to tell whether the data has been lost, or destroyed, or whether it still exists but is secret.

SCRI's executive director even refused to release the "case log" appendix originally included in the Florida study's official final report (a study he worked on), although again his apparent evasiveness left me unsure if the official report SCRI was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to prepare has been lost, destroyed, or is secret.

Dr. Marcy Burns
All data

Dr. Marcy Burns, principal author of the San Diego, Colorado, Florida, 1981, 1977 studies, refused to release any data. The only response I've yet gotten from her is the green USPS certified mail receipt she signed when my request was delivered.

People charged with DUI, DWI, and even drug intoxication, are convicted with secret FST accuracy evidence they can not examine. When subsets of that evidence are obtained from other sources, the raw data proves FSTs do not work.
IF YOU HAVE COPIES OF THE GOVERNMENT'S SECRET DATA SETS FOR ANY OF THESE STUDIES, please let me know.  FST (at) medmalexperts.com

 

Here are links to the official reports of relevant NHTSA FST studies.

Early NHTSA sponsored lab studies, and failed field validation studies

1977

The raw data set for this study is .

Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest
M. Burns, H. Moskowitz
Open

1981

"Validates" the SFST at 0.10% BAC

The raw data set for this study is .

Development and Field Test of Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest
V. Tharp, M. Burns, H. Moskowitz
Open

1983

The raw data set for this study is .

Field Evaluation of a Behavioral Test Battery for DWI
Open

"Successful" NHTSA sponsored SFST field validation studies cited in the Police SFST Training Manual

1995

"Validates" the SFST at 0.05% BAC

The raw data set for this study is .

A Colorado Validation Study of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) Battery
Marcelline Burns & Ellen Anderson
Open

1997

"Validates" the SFST at 0.08% BAC

The raw data set for this study is .

The Final Report for this study originally included Appendix 4 -- a "case log" that presumably reveals the SFST score and BAC for each driver.

If you have a copy of this secret appendix, please let me know. email: FST - (at) - medmalexperts.com

A Florida Validation Study of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test (S.F.S.T.) Battery
Marcelline Burns and Teresa Dioquino
Open

1998

"Validates" the SFST at 0.08% BAC and 0.04% BAC

The raw data for this study is available and posted here.

On innocent drivers, at BAC 0.08%, the SFST has an accuracy of 28%.

On innocent drivers, at BAC 0.04%, the SFST has an accuracy of 4%. That's not a typo. Four percent. Ninety-six percent of innocent drivers fail the SFST.

Validation of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test Batter at BACs Below 0.10 Percent
Jack Stuster and Marcelline Burns
Open

Police DWI and SFST training manual

2004

DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing / Student Manual / 2004 Edition
OPEN

 

top