The great Bard once penned:

All: God save your majesty!

Cade: I thank you, good people—there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score, and I will apparel them all in one liv­ery, that they may agree like broth­ers, and wor­ship me their lord.

Dick: The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.

Cade: Nay, that I mean to do.

Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2, 71–78

Shakespeare’s char­ac­ter Dick the Butcher’s idea of a per­fect soci­ety was one where jus­tice pre­vailed because there were no lawyers. The trai­tor­ous Jack Cade had not so noble a rea­son for want­ing to get rid of all of the lawyers. He wanted to become the auto­crat in a quasi-communistic social rev­o­lu­tion. Cade alleges that all lawyers do is use laws and lan­guage set up by fel­low lawyers to oppress and ruin the life of every day man. There­fore, in his esti­ma­tion, no jus­tice results.

That is an extreme view.

I sug­gest that per­haps jus­tice best results when we have an edu­cated and orga­nized defense bar who is sci­en­tif­i­cally edu­cated in foren­sic sci­ence. As I have blogged before, the foren­sic sci­ence com­mu­nity as cur­rently prac­ticed in the United States today is very flawed. Extremely flawed. Fun­da­men­tally flawed. In some cases, if not the major­ity of cases, it is utterly unsci­en­tific. I agree with the sen­ti­ments that the crim­i­nal defense com­mu­nity shares a large por­tion of the blame. Many lawyers well before our times, let come into evi­dence prac­tices, tech­niques, and “the­o­ries” that had just but the very veneer of sci­ence and were, how­ever, any­thing but sci­en­tific and far from valid. This insti­tu­tional prop­a­ga­tion of error is a large hur­dle for many of us to over­come now where busi­ness as usual or sim­ple rep­e­ti­tion is some­how equated with validity.

So what are we to do?

Set up pro­grams where we edu­cate the defense bar.

I would like to high­light one of these: The Amer­i­can Chem­i­cal Soci­ety Hands-on Foren­sic Chro­matog­ra­phy course.

It is a five-days hands-on class con­ducted at Axion Ana­lyt­i­cal Lab­o­ra­to­ries, Inc. in Chicago, Illi­nois. This hands-on course is taught by three icons of chro­matog­ra­phy (Dr. Harold McNair, PhD, Dr. Lee Polite, PhD and Mr. Lew Fox) and two attor­neys who spe­cial­ize in eval­u­at­ing chro­matog­ra­phy and foren­sic sci­ence related cases (Justin J. McShane and Josh D. Lee).

 

The agenda includes:

Day 1

8:15am Reg­is­tra­tion and Snacks
8:30am Intro­duc­tion to Gas Chromatography
9:30am Inlet Sys­tems for Liq­uid Injections
10:30am Lab 1: GC Famil­iar­iza­tion and Parameters
11:45 Lab Review
12:00pm Lunch
1:00pm Fun­da­men­tals of Sep­a­ra­tion — Resolution
2:30pm GC The­ory
3:30pm Cap­il­lary Columns
4:30pm Lab 2: Col­umn Installation
6:00pm End of Session
7:30pm Group Din­ner

Day 2

8:30am Quan­ti­ta­tive Analysis
9:30am Dis­cus­sion of QC in the Foren­sic World
10:30am Lab 3: GC Quantitation
12:00pm Lunch
1:00pm Lab Review
2:00pm Head­space GC
4:00pm Lab 4: Head­space Demo
5:00pm End of Session
6:30pm Axion Labs spon­sored Group Dinner

Day 3

8:30am GC-MS The­ory
10:30am LC-MS The­ory
12:00pm Lunch
1:00pm Labs 5–7: Wet Lab –Sam­ple Preparation/ Inte­gra­tion / GC-MS Instrumentation
3:00pm FID Detec­tor
4:00pm Dis­cov­ery
5:30pm End of Session
7:05pm Sport­ing event

Day 4

8:30am Ethics
9:30am Lab 8: Walk­ing Down a Case-How to Sort, Iden­tify and Exam­ine Data (Con­fronta­tion Clause)
11:00 am Gen­eral Review of Major Concepts
12:00pm Lunch
1:00pm Defenses That Work
3:00pm Lab 9: Trou­bleshoot­ing GC Problems
4:30pm Lab 10: Beers and Data Round­table (Bring your own data set eval­u­ate with your small group)
8:30pm End

 

Day 5

8:30am Trou­bleshoot­ing Lab Review
9:00am Cross exam­i­na­tion of an Analyst
10:30am Direct Exam­i­na­tion of an Expert
12:00pm Trou­ble Shoot­ing Lab Review
12:30pm Soft stop of the course with gen­eral discussion
2:00pm Hard Stop-End of Course

This class attracts full of attor­neys from all across the United States. In this class atten­dees not only are instructed in the class­room the­ory that under­lies chro­matog­ra­phy (both liq­uid and gas chro­matog­ra­phy) in gen­eral and the spe­cific the­o­ries that allow for head­space analy­sis and how Flame Ion­iza­tion Detec­tor, UV-DAD and Mass Spec­trom­e­try (EI and EC based) works, and get to see the instru­ments, but they also get to do the fol­low­ing with their own two hands and more:

Hands-on Lab 1

Instru­ment Famil­iar­iza­tion where the atten­dees pre­form direct injec­tions into a Gas Chromatograph-Flame Ion­iza­tion Detec­tor (GC-FID) using EtOH sam­ples, and learn to inter­pret GC-FID chro­matograms, import and manip­u­late a method, change the dif­fer­ent vari­ables on the GC-FID and elu­ci­date the results.

Hands-on Lab 2

The atten­dees on their own GC machine remove and install cap­il­lary columns and all of the com­po­nents of the injec­tor (septa, liner, gold seal, etc.), check for effi­cien­cies, res­o­lu­tion, the­o­ret­i­cal plates, and learn about split ver­sus split­less injec­tor settings.

Hands-on Lab 3

The atten­dees on their own GC machine estab­lish a cal­i­bra­tion curve from CRMs for EtOH. The atten­dees on their own GC machine ana­lyze the response and pro­gram a cal­i­bra­tion curve (exter­nal stan­dard) and also use the Inter­nal Stan­dard method to assure qual­ity. The atten­dees on their own GC machine estab­lish meth­ods and report­ing of this cru­cial part of testing.

Hands-on Lab 4

The atten­dees con­tinue to use Head­space Gas Chromatograph-Flame Ion­iza­tion Detec­tor and also use Gas Chro­matog­ra­phy Mass Spec­trom­e­try (GC-MS) sys­tem, and use an High Per­for­mance Liq­uid Chro­matog­ra­phy (HPLC) system.

Hands-on Lab 5

Sam­ple Preparation-sampling ver­sus sam­ple selec­tion is demon­strated. The atten­dees do their own Pipet­ting. The atten­dees do their own con­trol chart­ing. The atten­dees use vol­u­met­ric flasks. The atten­dees learn about pre-analysis error hands-on and how it affects quan­tifi­ca­tion. The atten­dees are intro­duced to issues of metrol­ogy and Uncer­tainty Measurement.

Hands-on Lab 6

Inte­gra­tion. The atten­dees on their own Chem­Sta­tion work­sta­tion learn about inte­gra­tion and how easy it is to manip­u­late the data. The atten­dees manip­u­late their own data. The atten­dees learn what to look for that shows that the data was manip­u­lated, and the atten­dees learn how to manip­u­late data so that it is not dis­cov­er­able with­out the raw com­puter data in the soft­ware files.

Hands-on Lab 7

GC-MS Instru­men­ta­tion. The atten­dees see how easy life is for an ana­lyst. The atten­dees get to see the analy­sis of the raw data on a GC-MS and dis­cover how a true novice can turn into an “expert” with a sim­ple push of a but­ton. The atten­dees see with their own two eyes the “hid­den” data that the Gov­ern­ment and its lab­o­ra­tory doesn’t want any­one to see that will reveal the truth that the sup­posed “gold stan­dard” that pro­vides for the alleged “unequiv­o­cal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion” of test­ing of unknowns that is GC-MS is not perfect.

Hands-on Lab 8

How to Obtain Discovery/Walking Down a Case/Defenses that Win-Advanced Issue Spot­ting: In this lab, the best prac­tices in how to obtain dis­cov­ery with a spe­cial empha­sis on how to strate­gi­cally and prac­ti­cally build a record so that the atten­dees can get the raw data in its un-manipulated raw com­puter form and also in its print form. The atten­dees go through an actual case that was lit­i­gated that fea­tured experts on both sides, and issue spot all of the prob­lems with the dis­cov­ery and the data as it was presented.

Hands-on Lab 9

Trou­bleshoot­ing. The atten­dees on their own GC machine run an unknown sam­ple which may result in some sort of “prob­lem” in the chro­matogram. The atten­dees issue spot the prob­lem and ratio­nal­ize what is wrong, and fix it.

Hands-on Lab 10

The atten­dees with their lab part­ners go over their own data set from real cases to fig­ure out what is wrong with the atten­dees’ local laboratory.

Grad­u­ates of the group include:

STATE LAST NAME FIRST NAME   STATE LAST NAME FIRST NAME
Alaska Slone Fred New Jer­sey Her­nan­dez Steven
Ari­zona St. Louis Joe New Jer­sey Levow Evan
Cal­i­for­nia Barba Manny New Mex­ico Frechette Rod­er­ick
Cal­i­for­nia Brehmer Jeremy Okla­homa Edge Bruce
Cal­i­for­nia Ganci Eric Okla­homa Fabian Stephen
Cal­i­for­nia Gore­lick Lynn Okla­homa Hosty Tom
Cal­i­for­nia Laun­dry Vir­ginia Okla­homa Lee (x5)
Josh D.
Cal­i­for­nia Mid­dle­brook Richard Okla­homa Pat­ter­son Clint
Cal­i­for­nia Moore Ron Okla­homa Sifers Jeff
Cal­i­for­nia Sturm Craig Ore­gon Carini, Jr. Peter
Cal­i­for­nia Tie­mann Roland Penn­syl­va­nia Bar­rouk Tim
Cal­i­for­nia Was­son James Penn­syl­va­nia Man­ches­ter Brian
Cal­i­for­nia Wap­ner Terry Penn­syl­va­nia McShane (x6)
Justin
Col­orado Bussey Tim Penn­syl­va­nia Sher­man Mike
Col­orado Cessna Christo­pher Ten­nessee Garza (x2)
Mar­cos
Col­orado Her­ringer William Ten­nessee May Roger
Col­orado Savela Jason Ten­nessee McK­in­ney Rob
Col­orado Orr Rhid­ian Ten­nessee Ryan Edward
Florida Kessler Mike Texas Bal­a­gia Jaime
Florida McIn­tosh Brett Texas But­ler Jim
Geor­gia Adams Clark Texas Boatwright Nicky
Geor­gia Bab­son Rocky Texas Case Kelly
Geor­gia Caron Brian Texas Cof­fey Mimi
Geor­gia Frye Kim Texas de la Paz Brent
Geor­gia Par­man Ann Texas del Cueto Andrew
Geor­gia Stein George Texas DeLuca Matt
Illi­nois Ram­sell Don­ald Texas Flood Tyler
Illi­nois Toney Sarah Texas Grant Dean­dra
Kansas Hul­nick Les Texas Hamil­ton Stephen
Louisiana Delatte (x2)
Glynn Texas Hunter David
Louisiana Bates, Jr. James Texas McK­in­ney Troy
Mary­land Alpert Andrew Texas Mur­phy Doug
Mary­land Bruck­heim Michael Texas Ray Ben­nie
Mary­land Stamm Lenny Texas Segura Anthony
Mass­a­chu­setts Ober­hauser Gre­gory Texas Stauf­fer Phil
Michi­gan Boyle Michael Texas Trichter (x2)
Gary
Min­nesota Ram­say Charles Texas Wilder Dou­glas
Mis­souri East­man Jef­frey Utah Schatz Jason
Mis­souri Holling­shead Jeremy Vir­ginia Keefer Bob
Mis­souri Ward Carl Vir­ginia Solak– (x2)
Michael
Nebraska Dowd­ing Steve Wash­ing­ton Calla­han Linda
Nebraska Island Bell Wash­ing­ton DeBray Ted
Nevada Hayes Dale West Vir­ginia Wag­ner Harley
New Hamp­shire Russ­man Ryan Wis­con­sin Stuck­ert Lau­ren
New Hamp­shire Tenn John

There have been 89 grad­u­ates to date.

The next class (which is full) will be in April is sched­uled to have the fol­low­ing folks:

Patrick Maher

MD

Hunter Bie­der­man

TX

Wayne R. Foote

ME

John Hun­sucker

OK

Andrew Mishlove

WI

Michael J Snure

FL

Clark Adams (2nd time through)

GA

Andrew Bucher

OH

N. Cole Williams

NC

Jay M. Tiftickjian

CO

Bruce Edge (2nd time through)

OK

Brent de la Paz (2nd time through)

TX

Paul Liam McGlone

VA

Kevin Leck­er­man

PA

Jon W Woolsey

CA

Gor­don Senerius

SC

Nico La Hood

TX

Bryan E DePowell

PA

Joseph Cit­ron

GA

John j Eastland

TX

Jonathon Rands

WA

Shawn Dor­ward

PA

Jared Bartell

CA

To insure jus­tice, we need to have an edu­cated defense bar. We need more sci­en­tific pro­grams like this one.

2 Responses to “First, let’s educate all of the lawyers”

  1. Rob McKinney says:

    I am a proud grad­u­ate of this course. I read the post with the thought all those that take the time to attend are no longer the dump truck lawyer. Get the fee. Plead the case and move to the next case. Those that attend this course are the lawyers that will bat­tle the state and hold the labs account­able. This course pro­duces warriors.

  2. Benton Baker IV says:

    I am a Texas attor­ney inter­ested in attend­ing the Gas Chro­matog­ra­phy course. Please for­ward me enroll­ment infor­ma­tion. Thank You.

    Sin­cerely,

    Ben­ton Baker IV

Leave a Reply