Post on 06-Jul-2015
Evidence in Prosecutions: Sampling and Analysis
CEC November 18, 2008
Dianne Saxe, Ph.D. in Law
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 2
Overview Sampling Analysis Reporting Special Cases
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 3
Reliable results Clear official rules Thorough training Meticulous attention to detail
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 4
Adequate samples? How many samples?
Statistically valid? Correct locations? Correct tool? Correct container? Quantity?
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 5
Samples representative? Cross contamination? Purged/ non purged? Multiple layers/ levels? Time of year? Composite samples? Capture volatiles? Limited access?
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 6
Heterogeneous solids Difficult to sample accurately Especially mixed wastes Must match statutory test
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 7
Selecting samples for analysis For what parameters? Are correct samples analysed? Field evidence reasonable?
Preserved?
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 8
What happens to the sample? Correctly preserved? Correctly transported? Chain of custody? Proper record keeping?
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 9
Analysis Lab qualified for that particular analysis? Qualified analyst? Using correct method? Sample suitable?
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 10
Lab Sample Preparation Timeliness Refrigeration Manipulation
Fletcher v. Kingston Inco
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 11
Appropriate test? Bulk analysis Leachate Flammability Toxicity Odour
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 12
Quality assurance/ control QA/ QC Field blanks Travel blanks Duplicates Calibration
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 13
Reliability of result Good record keeping? False precision?
Method detection limit Dilution/ masking
Judgment required?
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 14
Reporting Official certificate
Correct form, correctly completed? Chain of custody Statute may make admissible
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 15
Appropriate benchmark Often contentious Especially if drawing on other jurisdictions Statute may determine
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 16
Relevance of result Background? Natural variability? Forms of contaminant
Arsenic/ arsenate Chromium: hexavalent v trivalent
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 17
Special cases: Field variables Noise/ Vibration Odour Lay Evidence
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 18
Field variables: pH Temperature Volatiles Opacity Wind direction/ speed
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 19
Noise/ Vibration Completely different Unique expertise and equipment Measured on site Logarithmic scale Excess over background? Level, impulse, tone
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 20
Odour Samples taken Panel of “trained noses” Reproducibility? “Odour units” Detection/ identification/ objection Strong emotional element
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 21
Lay evidence Accurate record keeping? Credible? Independent? Corroboration
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 22
Reliable results Clear official rules Thorough training Meticulous attention to detail
November 18, 2008 Dianne Saxe 23
Thank you!!
Saxe Law Office248 Russell Hill Road
Toronto, Ontario M4V 2T2
Tel: 416-962-5882
Fax: 416-962-8817
Email: admin@envirolaw.com
www.envirolaw.com