<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DUI and the Presumption of Guilt</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/22/dui-and-the-presumption-of-guilt-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/22/dui-and-the-presumption-of-guilt-2/</link>
	<description>Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:35:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DUI BLOG : Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution</title>
		<link>http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/22/dui-and-the-presumption-of-guilt-2/comment-page-1/#comment-4051</link>
		<dc:creator>DUI BLOG : Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:28:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/22/dui-and-the-presumption-of-guilt-2/#comment-4051</guid>
		<description>[...] I&#8217;ve expounded on this blog at great length in recent years on the unreliability and inaccuracy of the various machines used to measure the breath of citizens accused of drunk driving.&#160;&#160;See for example,&#160;&#160;&quot;Trial by Machine &quot;&#8211; But&#160;How Good Are the Machines?.&#160; I&#8217;ve also blasted the unconstitutional laws of most states which presume the accuracy of these machines.&#160;&#160;See&#160;If You Can&#8217;t Prove&#160;It, Make the Defendant Disprove It.&#160;&#160; In many cases, as in my home state of California, the defense is even prohibited from offering critical scientifically-accepted evidence of the machine&#8217;s defects.&#160; See DUI and the Presumption of Guilt. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] I&#8217;ve expounded on this blog at great length in recent years on the unreliability and inaccuracy of the various machines used to measure the breath of citizens accused of drunk driving.&nbsp;&nbsp;See for example,&nbsp;&nbsp;&quot;Trial by Machine &quot;&#8211; But&nbsp;How Good Are the Machines?.&nbsp; I&#8217;ve also blasted the unconstitutional laws of most states which presume the accuracy of these machines.&nbsp;&nbsp;See&nbsp;If You Can&#8217;t Prove&nbsp;It, Make the Defendant Disprove It.&nbsp;&nbsp; In many cases, as in my home state of California, the defense is even prohibited from offering critical scientifically-accepted evidence of the machine&#8217;s defects.&nbsp; See DUI and the Presumption of Guilt. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DUI BLOG : Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution</title>
		<link>http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/22/dui-and-the-presumption-of-guilt-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1807</link>
		<dc:creator>DUI BLOG : Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:43:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/22/dui-and-the-presumption-of-guilt-2/#comment-1807</guid>
		<description>[...] &quot;trial by machine&quot;.&#160; If the machine says the blood alcohol level is .08% or higher, the law presumes him to be guilty &#8212; and at trial the jury will be so [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] &quot;trial by machine&quot;.&nbsp; If the machine says the blood alcohol level is .08% or higher, the law presumes him to be guilty &#8212; and at trial the jury will be so [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

