Toxicology versus solid drug dose examination for controlled substances

Toxicology versus solid drug dose examination for controlled substances

On July 3, 2012, in GC-FID & GC/MS, Identification, Laboratory Procedure, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

When we use GC-MS for forensic science purposes for controlled substance detection, we can basically divide the world into two camps. First, is the world of solid drug dose in pre-consumption form. The second is in the world post-consumption form analysis in a biological matrix (blood, urine, or oral fluid) which is otherwise known as […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Of moos and clucks-the myth of FTIR identification

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Of moos and clucks-the myth of FTIR identification

On March 8, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Infrared Spectroscopy, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Of moos and clucks-the myth of FTIR identification By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. [1] OK, so we will now discuss moos and clucks. Which is the basis for the problem with Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) in forensic science. [2] If you close your eyes in a stock yard you can’t tell what moo came […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Circuitous thought-the myth of reliable and valid marijuana identification in the courtroom

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Circuitous thought-the myth of reliable and valid marijuana identification in the courtroom

On March 1, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Circuitous thought-the myth of reliable and valid marijuana identification in the courtroom By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. [1] As scientists we all agree that the hallmarks of science are validity and reliability. What do we mean by that? Well, the government scientist has to agree that his method of answering a question put to him […]

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Mr. Fletcher vs. Mr. Daubert A Journey into the Surreal

Guest Blog Post From Dr. Frederic Whitehurst PhD JD: Mr. Fletcher vs. Mr. Daubert A Journey into the Surreal

On February 2, 2012, in Chemistry, Contextual Bias, Identification, In The Courtroom, Laboratory Procedure, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Mr. Fletcher vs. Mr. Daubert: A Journey into the Surreal   By:  Frederic Whitehurst, J.D., Ph.D. Many a defense attorney has looked in amazement at the courtroom “identification” of Cannabis Sativa L. by a law enforcement officer sporting a gilded pot metal badge and a high school diploma who has written a report that would […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 7: Is there a better way to test for marijuana?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 7: Is there a better way to test for marijuana?

On January 31, 2012, in Chemistry, Equipment, Ethics, Ethics: Scientist, Identification, In The Courtroom, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

Throughout this series of posts we have examined the Thorton-Nakumura protocol that is used throughout the United States for the prosecution of illegal possession marijuana. A fair examination of the question reveals that there is no validity to the notion that the 3 test regimen produces a valid conclusion that the unknown examined in fact […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 6: Is the combination of all three tests create a “good” testing scheme?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 6: Is the combination of all three tests create a “good” testing scheme?

On January 26, 2012, in Chemistry, Identification, In The Courtroom, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

The modern day prosecution for the unlawful possession of marijuana is based upon a three test regime involving microscopic morphological examination, modified Duquenois-Levine colorimetric testing, and Thin Layer Chromatography. Each of these three tests are non-specific for THC which is the pharmacodynamically active ingredient which makes marijuana illegal. The question becomes is this three test […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 5: What is Thin Layer Chromatography? Is it a “good” test?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 5: What is Thin Layer Chromatography? Is it a “good” test?

On January 24, 2012, in Chemistry, Equipment, Identification, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

All prosecutions for the unlawful possession of marijuana requires as an essential element of the crime for the government to advance proof that the unknown submitted for testing is in fact marijuana (contains THC). Can the government actually do that based upon its typical testing method? In this series of posts we are going to […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 4: What is the modified Duquenois-Levine test? Is it a “good” test?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 4: What is the modified Duquenois-Levine test? Is it a “good” test?

On January 19, 2012, in Chemistry, Identification, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

In this series of posts we are going to examine this seemly simple question: What is the goal and the purpose of testing of unknowns generally? How do we best design a test for marijuana? How is most marijuana testing conducted in the United States? What is microscopic morphological examination? Is it a “good” test? […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 3: What is microscopic morphological examination? Is it a “good” test?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 3: What is microscopic morphological examination? Is it a “good” test?

On January 17, 2012, in Equipment, Identification, In The Courtroom, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

In this series of posts we are going to examine these seemly simple questions: What is the goal and the purpose of testing of unknowns generally? How do we best design a test for marijuana? How is most marijuana testing conducted in the United States? What is microscopic morphological examination? Is it a “good” test? […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 2: How is most marijuana testing conducted in the United States?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 2: How is most marijuana testing conducted in the United States?

On January 12, 2012, in Chemistry, Identification, In The Courtroom, Laboratory Procedure, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

In 2006, more than 829,000 people were arrested in this country for marijuana-related offenses alone. Since 1937 with the passage and adoption of the Marihuana Tax Act, marijuana has been effectively prohibited in the United States. Literally millions upon millions of people have been accused of possessing marijuana. The question becomes are these convictions scientifically […]

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 1: What is the goal and the purpose testing of unknowns generally?

The myth of specific identification of Marijuana in criminal court Part 1: What is the goal and the purpose testing of unknowns generally?

On January 10, 2012, in Identification, Solid Drug Dose, by Justin J. McShane

In many courtrooms all across the United States today, a state analyst opines under oath that a unknown leafy green vegetable like substance is in fact marijuana. The question becomes, in the typical case, is this a valid conclusion? Is it the whole scientific truth? In this series of posts we are going to examine […]