Citation

Krause D, Wittig H, Schmidt U, Jachau K, Bartels H. Blutalkohol 2000; 37(3): 154-160.

Affiliation

Institut fur Rechtsmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke-Univ. Magdeburg, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2000, International Committee on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety and Bund gegen Alkohol und Drogen im Straßenverkehr, Publisher Steintor Verlag)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In compliance with a circular order issued by the Ministry of the Interior on 7 June 1999 in the federal state of Saxony-Anhalt a breath alcohol concentration of 0.8 mg/l without performing an additional blood alcohol test is deemed sufficient evidence for charges to be pressed according to section 316 of the StGB (German Criminal Code) provided that the breath alcohol was measured by means of an 'evidentiary' breathalyser. In a criminal case the local court of Klotze had to rule on a breath alcohol concentration that was 0.92 mg/l at the time of the incidence. In his calculations, the court expert Prof. Dr. G. Schoknecht used older pairs of breath and blood alcohol values which had not been measured with an evidentiary breathalyser. He came to the conclusion that with a probability of 99.86%, the blood alcohol concentration had been 1.45 g per mille if not higher. The expert, Prof. Dr. D. Krause based his findings on 455 pairs of blood and breath alcohol concentrations which had been measured simultaneously in compliance with the blood alcohol concentration regulation or by using the Drager Evidential 7110 MK III breathalyser. As the limit value of 1.10 (per mille) relevant to criminal law is considered to include the overall error when establishing blood alcohol concentrations, the expert offers a proceeding-specific blood alcohol-to-breath alcohol ratio (Q) as a 'limit value ratio'. This may be used until the Federal High Court of Justice has made a binding decision. In the above-mentioned case with a breath alcohol concentration of 0.92 mg/l at the time of the incident, the value for Q was calculated. Since an investigation into the available data material comprising 455 pairs of values had revealed two Q values below 1.19, the court ruled to give the accused the benefit of the doubt and didn't declare a driving inability according to section 316 of the StGB (the German Criminal Code). This particular court decision also coincides with the recommendations given by the 38th German Traffic Court Conference held on 28 January 2000 where breath alcohol analysis was declared 'not to be a suitable method within the criminal law at present'.