Jerry Punch said:
There wouldn't have been a backlash if JJ wasn't charged? Get real, PR. Even you can't believe that. Anyone who knows the Missoulian's agenda or aggravated "women's rights" proponents would have made an incredible storm about not charging it. In addition, the Justice Department was waiting for a move just like that to vindicate their reasons for being there in the first place. I don't disagree that the trial negatively impacted rape victims generally, but there is no doubt that had more to do with the "victim" herself than the Missoula County Attorney's office. The fault of the trial rests on her - there is only so much a prosecutor can do to prepare a witness like that. They can only rely on her words. If they are false, the trial is there to expose them as such.
Further, if an intoxilyzer wasn't calibrated properly or non-functional that too would be exposed in trial. Each officer is required to have their intox units certified and calibrated. That's part of laying foundation for the admission of those results. If the machinery is faulty, the foundation wouldn't be there and the sample wouldn't be admissible. It's as simple as that.
Nope, there wouldn't be outrage if JJ hadn't been charged. The Missoulian may have said something, but even they couldn't have created outrage. The DOJ still hasn't come to agreement with the county prosecutor. The DOJ investigation probably influenced the county prosecutor to bring the charges, but the DOJ, if they ever looked at the file (and they probably looked at the police file), could see that the case was weak and a loser. It's obvious that you don't live in Missoula and have little or no clue about what goes on in Missoula or what the bulk of the people are thinking.
Disagree on the breath machines. From the internet:
"A number of factors can influence the reliability of breathalyzer test results, including user or administrator error, equipment failure, and environmental causes.
Foreign Substances – Substances present in the mouth that contain alcohol can produce false positives because the amount of alcohol vapor they emit may be greater than the amount exhaled from the lungs. For example, some mouthwashes, breath fresheners, and toothache medicines contain alcohol.
Averaging – Breathalyzer settings are often based on the averaging of such traits as metabolism, sex, gender, and weight. Thus the inherent limitations of a one-size-fits-all testing approach can skew readings.
Breathalyzer Malfunction – An equipment malfunction or mechanical defect can cause a breathalyzer to not function properly, thereby affecting test results.
Calibration – Breathalyzers must be calibrated periodically and batteries must be replaced in order to maintain accuracy. Failure to do either can result in false readings.
Software – Breathalyzers run on special software, just as computers rely on operating systems, which can result in occasional bugs and glitches.
Human Error – No equipment is immune to human error. As easy as breathalyzers are to use, they still require some attention to detail.
Consistency – To ensure accuracy, breath tests should be performed multiple times to produce a reliable result. Breathalyzers that utilize fuel cell sensor technology provide the most reliable and accurate results in repeated tests.
Environmental Factors – False results can be triggered by the presence of paint fumes, varnish, chemicals such as acetone, plastics and adhesives, and other chemicals.
Sensor Types – As noted, fuel cell sensors provide more accurate BAC readings for repeated tests and over a longer period of time and over a higher BAC range than semiconductor sensors and other sensor technologies."
