Intoxilyzer 8000 (BrAC) 0.547 is really mouth alcohol, CBS video.ASF

This is more proof that the Intoxilyzer 8000 is nonspecific for ethyl alcohol and the Intoxilyzer 8000 has serious flaws in the software design because it is unable to differentiate between mouth alcohol and breath alcohol (BrAC).

The first breath sample @ 1:43 on the video was PURE MOUTH ALCOHOL and that test resulted in a BrAC reading of 0.263 with a Breath Volume of 1.570 (the minimum breath needed for the Intoxilyzer 8000 to analyze a breath sample is 1.1 liter). The second breath sample @ 4:34 in the video was again ONLY PURE MOUTH ALCOHOL but the Intoxilyzer 8000s alcohol slope detector FAILED to analyze the breath sample correctly and gave a false BrAC reading of 0.547 with a Breath Volume of 1.218. What does this mean? Well, IF I WAS DRINKING VODKA.. I WOULD BE DEAD.

To go from a 0.263 BrAC reading @ 1:43 to a 0.547 reading @ 4:34, (less than 3 minutes) would mean that I drank and my body absorbed a total of 53 shots of Vodka. How can we determine this? Simple, by using the Windmark Formula we can determine the amount of drinks in my body at the time of each Breath Test.
1st sample BrAC reading of 0.263
250 lbs. x 454 (grams per lb.) = 113500113500 x .68 (water for men) = 77180
77180 x .0026 (grams of alcohol consumed) = 200.668
200.668 ÷ .8 (specific gravity of alcohol) =250.825
250.825 ÷ 30 (grams in a shot) = 8.360
8.360 ÷ .5 (100 proof ÷ 50% = Vodka) = 16.721
16.721 x 1.55 (covert back to drinks, drop last 3 digits) =25.918
Means I had 25 shots of Vodka in my system when I provided my 1st breath sample

2nd Breath Sample
250 lbs. x 454 (grams per lb.) = 113500
113500 x .68 (water for men) = 77180
77180 x .0054 (grams of alcohol consumed) = 416.772
416.772 ÷ .8 (specific gravity of alcohol) =520.965
520.965 ÷ 30 (grams in a shot) = 17.365
17.365 ÷ .5 (100 proof ÷ 50% = Vodka) = 34.731
34.731 x 1.55 (covert back to drinks, drop last 3 digits) =53.833
Means I had 53 shots of Vodka in my system when I provided my 2nd breath sample.

So this means that from the time of my 1st breath sample and my 2nd breath sample I consumed and absorbed a total of 28 shots of Vodka in 2:51. This is why I stand behind my statement that the Intoxilyzer 8000 is JUNK SCIENCE Now you know why CMI, Inc. will not disclose the source codes to any state. CMI, Inc does not want someone like me to get a hold of the Florida Intoxilyzer because they know that independent testing like what you have just seen will prove that the Intoxilyzer 8000 has serious design flaws and the machine should NOT BE USED TO COLLECT EVIDENTARY SAMPLES!!!

In opinion, CMI, Inc. has intentionally designed software flaws into the operational functions of the Intoxilyzer 8000 that prohibit accurate detection of Mouth Alcohol. The Intoxilyzer 8000 cannot distinguish difference between mouth alcohol "true" Breath Alcohol concentration. Why? The more people that get convicted DUI, equals more revenue generated for state.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Intoxilyzer
• 8000
• SERIOUS
• software
• design
• FLAWS
• Mouth
• or
• Breath
• Alcohol

[sizzles666]

Way to toy with the intox, except, at least in my state, the deprivation period and duplicate test agreement would have invalidated the test you did.

[AverageJoe121]

sizzles666, obviously you are one of those individuals who doesnt understand how the Intoxilyzer 8000 functions. The video has "NOTHING" to do with the deprivation period. The video clearly demonstrates that the Intoxilyzer 8000 has serious operational deficiencies differentiating between mouth alcohol (MA) and "true" breath alcohol (BrAC). Opinions like yours not only expose your bias for the state, but your lack of understanding the complexities of infrared spectroscopy & breath testing.

[sizzles666]

I work with the intox daily and understand it quite well. I think you're missing my point, which is that the safeguards built into the Intox (slope, deprivation assuming it's done correctly, and duplicate tests/agreement), ensure that an accurate test is done.

Is it perfect? Of course not, but every defense expert I've spoken with has conceded that it is, in fact, reasonably related to true BAC, and generally produces somewhat lower readings.

[AverageJoe121]

Blah, ba blah, ba blah... yeah I've heard the same from every state witness, the machine is accurate, and then the BIG LIES start coming out, "it's never the machine when there is a malfunction, it's always something else, the simulator, the operator, any other bogus excuse for a testing failure but the "magical" machine.

[AverageJoe121]

I guess the problems with FDLE Dept Inspectors and local Agency Inspectors deleting failing test results is more proof of this so called accuracy and reliability, huh? Stay tuned, as Paul Harvey says, for the rest of the story...

[sizzles666]

The Paul Harvey quote, use that often? ;-)

[AverageJoe121]

Clap, Clap, Clap. Another classic reply from yet another "uneducated law enforcement" officer. Your reply is associated with LEO's who have DUI tunnel vision. Use your high school education to read the rest of the posts on this channel before you show your ass. I'm aware of the 20 min observation period. The purpose of the video is to show that the Intoxilyzer 8000 has serious "problems" with being able to differentiate the difference between mouth alcohol and "true" BrAC.

[fr33d0m999]

Very scary, and prosecutors try to use this inaccurate piece of junk. What a waste of tax dollars.