Why One Lawyer Doubts Drug Dogs
By Clark Adams | Published on July 28, 2011 | 0 Comments
The term “criminal law” is as general as it sounds. What does “criminal” mean? And how does the law of the land apply to “criminals”? Clark Adams, Attorney at Law, is a criminal defense lawyer in Columbus, GA. In order to understand what criminal law is, he prefers to zero in on one topic that in many respects defines criminal law—or at least gives it a defining flavor. How an attorney answers the question of which areas define criminal law will vary depending on whom you ask. Adams’ opinion is that drug cases really encapsulate what criminal law and criminal defense law work are for him.
Adams recognizes that another criminal defense lawyer in Columbus, GA, might easily say that armed robberies give the layman a good picture of what a criminal act is. That would be more typical of a public defender, though, says Adams. There are developments in drug areas of criminal law that Adams finds particularly intriguing in ways that illustrate how crimes are investigated and how criminal charges are prosecuted, for better or for worse. Lately, Adams has been paying close attention to whether drug-sniffing dogs were used to implicate his clients. He’s found out that as a defense lawyer, he must learn if when they found drugs on his clients, the dogs were sniffing the kinds of drugs they were taught to sniff—because these dogs can make mistakes.
In one case, a client of Adams’ was charged with possession of dangerous drugs. Law enforcement came to this conclusion because their drug-sniffing dogs caught the scent on the client. But in truth, the client had been carrying female fertility drugs, which the dog had never been trained to detect, and the scent of which matched the steroids the drugs were taught to sniff for. Dogs may be trained to sniff for cocaine, heroine, methamphetamines, and marijuana, but not prescription fertility drugs. And they’re not taught to admit they made any mistakes. Yet according to the police, the dogs are always right; they couldn’t possibly be wrong, ever. If the dog barks during a search, but the police find no substances, their response is that the dogs had scented a “residual odor,” thereby proving the subject has been in possession of illegal substances.
This discrepancy has defined Adams’s work recently. He’s working hard to fight the bogus charges that derive from these drug dogs’ “discoveries”. Adams investigates records to learn how the dogs were initially trained, and how or if their training is continually updated to keep their work accurate. Overall, Adams has concluded that most offices do not update their drug-sniffing dogs’ training. It’s the Columbus, GA, criminal defense lawyer’s opinion that law enforcement may not keep their dogs’ training up-to-date. That way, they can push their argument that the dogs found something—even though the dogs’ skills have been waning.
For his part, Adams has learned that as a criminal defense lawyer in Columbus, GA, if the drug dogs have outdated training, do not trust them.
*Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. You should not rely on this article as a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances, and you should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Publication of this article and your receipt of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.