Feb16

The New Breathalyzer

Posted on February 16, 2012 by acumen

The police in British Columbia are now introducing a new breathalyzer, the Intox EC/IR II. The first one we know of is at the West Vancouver Police detachment.

The device performs the same function as the BAC Datamaster, i.e. analyzing the alcohol content in breath exhaled into the instrument and then calculating a blood/alcohol concentration. But this unit employs 2 methods of analyzing the sample. Like the BAC Datamaster, the device has an infrared sensor to measure the diffusion in a chamber containing a captive sample of breath. It also has an electrochemical fuel cell, like the Alco-Sensor IV to provide a second quality check.

The reason that this is considered an advancement is because infrared analysis cannot always differentiate between alcohol and other interfering chemical compounds. The electrochemical fuel cell devices are not known to mistake interfering substances with alcohol.

You can expect a news report about this in the coming days. When the BAC Datamaster was introduced in the mid 90s, the police in BC gave interviews in which they claimed that their new device was infallible, that you could not question the readings and that it would eliminate all doubt in “over .08″ cases.

The police will claim that this new device is the ultimate machine. And they made the same claims about the previous breath-testing instrument. What they will not tell you is that in 2008 we identified and made public a problem with a valve in the BAC Datamaster. It is mentioned in a newscast here.

If you Google Paul Doroshenko BC Breathalyzers you will get a few hundred hits about problems we identified with fuel cell devices.

Despite the problems with the BAC Datamaster, it is very rare that a malfunction leads to an acquittal. Usually an over .08 charge is thrown out due to the police violating Charter rights, or not following the correct procedure in conducting their investigation. So in our view there is no justification to replace the BAC Datamaster at this time, particularly when our government claims that it does not have the money to properly fund the courts and legal aid.

We all get excited about getting a new toy. We can understand why the police are delighted about a fun new device. But it is expensive and this is our tax money they are spending. It would be nice to see them explain how many cases were unsuccessful at trial because of a failing of the BAC Datamaster. We doubt that more than a dozen cases turned on this issue in the last decade in British Columbia.

And of course, you read it here first: this device will also have problems. It may take a decade to identify the significant problems, but it is a truism that there is no perfect machine. Simply put, the new instrument is likely an improvement. But like any device, it can malfunction.

As a defence lawyer we cannot get these devices until they have been in service for a number of years, so it will be some time before we can examine the Intox EC/IR II, take it apart and figure out the potential problems. When we get one, it will probably take us a couple of months of looking at it and thinking about it before we find the weaknesses.

In any event, we doubt very much that it will have an impact on the conviction rate. Despite what the police may claim, it is simply another instrument that is very similar to the last. Both are designed to present the results in a manner that makes them look objective and reliable. Both are usually correct, infrequently incorrect and may not provide you with the information to say whether it is correct on a specific occasion.

Here are some links if you want to read further: