Bill C-2 essentially requires the defence lawyer to point to instrument malfunction or operator error to present an evidence to the contrary defence. In other words, a defence lawyer has to be able to say to the judge, “The breath testing instrument was broken and I can physically show you how it was broken and how this mistakenly led to a reading of over 80 mgs. of alcohol in 100 mls. of blood.”
As pointed out by many Ontario DUI lawyers and judges, the Bill C-2 amendments are now forcing DUI lawyers to bring applications for technical disclosure including asking for the repair, maintenance, and calibration records and computer downloads (an intoxilyzer is a computer) of the breath testing instruments. It is also important that the video tape of the breath testing procedure be received and examined carefully. The only way to show instrument error or operator malfunction is to attempt to obtain all possible records relating to the instrument which was used to seize our clients’ breath sample. Our expert Ontario DUI/DWI attorneys and forensic toxicologists then examine the records to determine if there was instrument malfunction or operator error.
|It may be possible for an Ontario DWI lawyer to get your case reduced or even dismissed. If there is a way to win your OVI, DUI, or drunk driving case anywhere in Ontario – Kruse Law Firm will find it.|
Crown Attorneys across the province are vigorously opposing these technical disclosure requests. This has resulted in expensive and time consuming court battles across the province. Application records, factums and extensive case briefs are filed by both the defence and Crown. Privately retained forensic toxicologists who have expertise regarding the approved instruments then square off under oath in court against experts from the Centre of Forensic Sciences. These battles are being played out everyday in the Ontario courts. Kruse Law firm is one of the firms leading the battle.
The question the judge must decide at these one to three day disclosure applications is as follows: are maintenance, repair, and calibration records and computer downloads (referred to as Adams or Cobra data) relevant to making full answer and defence and should they be produced to the defence.
Kruse law firm is one of the leaders in the province in successfully bringing technical disclosure applications. The advantage the DUI/DWI lawyers have at Kruse law Firm is that in addition to their legal knowledge and courtroom experience, they have extensive training, knowledge and understanding of how the breath testing instruments work and how to “attack the instrument” or “attack the operator” in a given case.
In fact, Michael Kruse is a fully certified intoxilyzer technician and is an expert regarding the use and functionality and internal workings of breathalysers. This training and knowledge is very advantageous in defending an over 80 case. For example most police forces videotape the breath test procedure. The lawyers at Kruse law firm are able to review the videotapes and have the expertise to determine whether the qualified breath technician followed proper procedure or whether there was instrument or operator error.
Kruse law firm also retains adept forensic toxicologists – experts regarding the function and use of the breathalyzer and intoxilyzer. Let Mr. Kruse and his team of impaired driving lawyers and forensic toxicologists put their legal and technical expertise to work for you in defending your over 80 charge.