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