When State drug labs are run by the state police running tests for police you will get that. For instance any amount of THC in the blood can get an impaired driving charge. Unless it is a legalized state in which case it minuscule tiny amount that could have resulted from smoking 14 week days ago is still enough. With the smallest amounts, one nanogram per milliliter, false positives are as high as 40%, but when they go into court they don’t say that. They make it sound like this is what it is science. We could speak of a dozen different types of junk science they have been involved in as well. Like hair analysis.
If you need a source to explain the inherent conflicts of interest and having the Police lab run by the state police for the police, it would not make a difference anyway. Likewise since you are unaware, and keep scorn on the idea, it shows that you either do not follow the news very closely, or are dishonest about it. Either way think what you want.
For instance any amount of THC in the blood can get an impaired driving charge. Unless it is a legalized state in which case it minuscule tiny amount that could have resulted from smoking 14 week days ago is still enough.
Sure, that’s just the law.
With the smallest amounts, one nanogram per milliliter, false positives are as high as 40%, but when they go into court they don’t say that.
I don’t think the lab techs attend the court cases to provide details about how testing works…
If you know that, you don’t think a decent defense lawyer knows that?
What I asked for was a source for your bold claim that:
drug testing Labs try to give the results the cops want.
Interesting that you’d downvote me just for asking for a source for your strong claim though…
Source? That’s a strong claim…
When State drug labs are run by the state police running tests for police you will get that. For instance any amount of THC in the blood can get an impaired driving charge. Unless it is a legalized state in which case it minuscule tiny amount that could have resulted from smoking 14 week days ago is still enough. With the smallest amounts, one nanogram per milliliter, false positives are as high as 40%, but when they go into court they don’t say that. They make it sound like this is what it is science. We could speak of a dozen different types of junk science they have been involved in as well. Like hair analysis.
So no source then, just making things up. Got it!
If you need a source to explain the inherent conflicts of interest and having the Police lab run by the state police for the police, it would not make a difference anyway. Likewise since you are unaware, and keep scorn on the idea, it shows that you either do not follow the news very closely, or are dishonest about it. Either way think what you want.
Not sure why you felt the need to come back and double-down on having nothing of substance to back up your bold claim whatsoever, but thanks.
Because you are purposely being obtuse here because you have an ax to grind defending the police apparently.
That State Police labs are biased in favor of the police is common knowledge and doesn’t need a source.
I don’t know why I would waste time with someone that heaps scorn on the idea that the cops would be anything less than forthright.
Tripling down on it now!
Wow…
We get it. You don’t have even a single example of this to point to.
Sure, that’s just the law.
I don’t think the lab techs attend the court cases to provide details about how testing works…
If you know that, you don’t think a decent defense lawyer knows that?
What I asked for was a source for your bold claim that:
Interesting that you’d downvote me just for asking for a source for your strong claim though…