TWO months elapsed before a sam- ple of urine was tested for the pres- ence of drugs at the Medical Bureau of Road Safety, due to the Christmas backlog.
SUiiMoselucemnre meebo MmmClebubercams ele case of an east Clare man, accused of driving under the influence of an intoxicant. While his urine sample was sent away for analysis just days after he was stopped by gardai, the test for the presence of drugs did not take place for two months.
Niall O’Gorman (21), of MHur- lestown Meadow, Broadford, was charged with the alleged offence, at Hurdlestown, Broadford, on Novem- ber 23, 2007.
Garda Joe McGlynn told Ennis Dis- trict Court that he was carrying out a checkpoint shortly before midnight on Friday, November 23, 2007.
He said that a car was driven around a bend at great speed and in an er- Teele Com eaten evele) m
He stopped the driver, Mr O’Gorman. He said he got a strong smell of cannabis from him, his speech was slurred and his eyes were glazed.
He searched the car and found a half joint of cannabis in the ashtray. He brought Mr O’Gorman to Killa- loe Garda Station, where he provided a sample of urine.
The following Monday, the garda sent the sample by registered post to the Medical Bureau of Road Safety. On December 20, he received a certificate from the Bureau, which
stated the result for the presence of alcohol was ‘nil.’ Three months later, on March 20, 2008, he received no- tification from the bureau, indicating the presence of cocaine class and cannabis class in the urine.
Defending solicitor Daragh Has- sett said his client denied that he was travelling at speed. He said his client accepted that he had smoked canna- bis in the past.
However, he said the accused would deny that his speech was sounding slurred.
‘He didn’t say that was his joint. There were two people in the car,” said Mr Hassett, to which the garda replied, “No he didn’t, but I got the smell of cannabis from his breath.
“Judging by his driving initially, then the presence of cannabis in his car and the smell of cannabis from his breath and the presence of ash on his clothes would arise my suspi- cions,’ said the garda.
Mr Hassett asked the garda did he make a recommendation for the sam- ple to be tested for the presence of ora b ees
The garda said he asked the doctor to write it on the certificate which was Sent to the bureau, “to try and as- sist the Medical Bureau. I was under the impression the driver was driving under the influence of drugs.”
Mr Hassett then called two witness- es from the Medical Bureau. One of them, Grainne Harrington, said she received the sample of urine in the post on November 27, 2007, and be- gan testing it on December 12.
She signed off on the analysis on
December 20 and sent notification to Mr O’Gorman and also to the garda the following day.
She said the sample had not been immediately tested as “we are ana- lysing many, many samples every Chae
She said that while samples are awaiting testing, they are stored in refrigerators and said the time span would not be unusual.
Ms Harrington said that the sample returned a reading of ‘nil’ for alcohol and was then passed to a colleague to test for the presence of drugs.
Mr Hassett then asked her why the test for the presence of drugs did not take place for three months. She said the bureau was extremely busy over
the Christmas period.
Four or five scientists work on drug analysis, while six or seven are em- ployed in the area of analysis for al- cohol, she said, and the work is d1- vided out.
Susan McDonald, also from the bureau, told the court she tested the sample of urine between January 28 and March 20, 2008.
Mr Hassett put it to her that there was almost two months of a gap be- fore the sample was tested for drugs. She said this analysis was com- pletely different to the analysis for the presence of alcohol. Analysis for the presence of seven different drug classes takes place.
“There are lots of different proc- esses involved,’ she said.
“Two months and one day had elapsed before you began to test this sample. This is not in compliance with Section 19 which calls on the bureau to carry out a test as soon as is practical,’ said Mr Hassett.
She replied, “It was done as soon as was practical. Other samples were being tested.”
She said samples were stored in re- frigerators while they were waiting to be analysed, “so the content of the specimen is not in doubt.”
Asked by Inspector Tom Kennedy, prosecuting, had there ever been any difficulty with a sample due to the lapse of time, she replied, ““There has been no difficulty with analysis.”
Asked did the wording, by the doc- tor, on the sample, have any signifi- cance on the test, she said it hadn’t.
Inspector Kennedy said the critical
issue was that the sample remained good.
“It’s in accordance with procedures and that’s what is there,’ he said.
However, Mr Hassett said it was incumbent on the gardai to get the samples off to the bureau and for the bureau to analyse the specimens as quickly as possible.
‘Ms Harrington appeared to suggest the delay in the certificate of analysis was due to the Christmas backlog. I don’t think the Road Traffic Act had that in mind, sure there will be a lot of drink drivers at Christmas. There is a delay of three months here for a positive drug analysis,” said the so- licitor.
Judge Joseph Mangan then recalled Ms McDonald, asking her, “Am I to understand this sample stood in a queue for two months and one day for no other reason than there were other samples to test?” She said that was the case.
Inspector Kennedy then said the defendant had not been disadvan- taged by the delay.
“The State has six months to bring a case like this,’ he said. However, Mr Hassett disputed this.
“Of course there is prejudice. He got a certificate in December to say the sample was nil (for alcohol) so he assumed he was out of the woods. He was prejudiced by receiving the cer- tificate three months later,’ he said.
Judge Mangan said he would de- liver a ruling on the charge later this month.