Classic D.C. Trial Transcript: Key on St. Ledger, Part II
by Jamison Koehler on August 11, 2013
Q: When was the last time this particular machine, the one in Government’s Exhibit Number 4, was actually calibrated?
A: You mean auto-cal’d? Are you talking recertified or auto-cal’d?
Q: All of them. You tell me when is the last time you calibrated this machine?
A: That machine I haven’t calibrated.
Q: So, when was the last time this machine was calibrated?
A: From the factory.
Q: In what year?
A: I’m not positive.
Q: Was that back in 2004?
A: That’s possible.
Q: So, this machine hasn’t been recalibrated since, well, since 2004?
Q: And you didn’t even do that calibration, did you?
A: No, the factory did.
Q: You don’t even know what solutions they used, do you?
A: Yes, I do.
Q: You know the lot numbers?
Q: Do you know the lot number of any of the solutions that they used?
Q: Okay, in fact, isn’t it just that you have some simple document from them saying that they calibrated it with nothing else?
Q: Okay, and that doesn’t say what solutions they used or anything else, does it?
Q: And since 2004 you’ve never calibrated that machine?
Q: You’ve never done an auto-cal of that machine?
Q: Okay. All right, let’s talk about the machine very briefly. I’m not going to go into a lot of detail, but there’s a sample chamber, right?
Q: And on either end of the sample chamber there’s – on one side there’s a light source, right?
Q: And on other side there’s something that measures the light that comes through the chamber, right?
Q: So, this is the heart of the machine, that’s where all the magic or whatever it does, that all happens in that chamber, right?
Q: Okay, and so that chamber is basically like a car engine, right? It’s running the machine, right?
A: It’s part of it.
Q: Okay, it’s not just a part of it, it is a significant part of the machine, right?
Q: Okay, any time you do major maintenance on a machine you are supposed to recalibrate it, correct?
Q: Isn’t it true that you replaced the sample chamber back in April of 2010?
A: I don’t know. I’d have to look at the log.
MR. KEY: Approach with the front page?
THE COURT: Sure, go ahead.
BY MR. KEY:
Q: Does that refresh your memory, Mr. –
Q: All right, so you replaced the sample chamber in April of 2010, right?
Q: Okay, so you replaced the major part of this machine, you had to take the light source off?
Q: Okay, you replaced the sample chamber?
A: We replaced the entire piece; sample chamber, light source, motor.
Q: So, say that again. What did you replace?
A: The sample – we took the sample chamber off one of the other instruments and placed it in 1771.
Q: You replaced the light source as well?
A: No, it was all one piece, and from – I think it was from 1772. We took that light – that sample chamber which had the light source and the motor already mounted on it and we replaced it in 1771.
THE COURT: It’s called cannibalizing.
BY MR. KEY:
Q: Wow. So, that’s be like taking an engine out of one car and putting it in another, right? I mean, it’s a major – you took the guts out of the machine and you replaced it? You took not only just – so you didn’t just take the sample chamber, you took the light source, you took the thing that measures the light source, and you took the motor?
A: If you look at the instrument it’s all one piece.
A: Yeah, so we took that and placed it in 1771.
Q: Okay, that would be major maintenance, right?
A: I don’t consider it major maintenance.
Q: You don’t consider replacing basically the whole machine, you basically kept the skeleton of one and took the motor off another and out it on it and you don’t consider that major?
Q: So, it’s your consideration that you don’t have to do any calibration, right? Because if you call that major, you would have had to recalibrate, right?
A: Well, when we turned the instrument back on and ran through its diagnostic tests everything worked out fine.
Q: That’s wonderful, but that’s not what the manual tells you to do, it tells you after any major maintenance that you have to recalibrate, isn’t that true?
A: I don’t know what the manual say but I don’t consider that major maintenance.
Q: Okay, so by calling it not major maintenance you don’t have to calibrate is your professional opinion?
A: Well, when we took the instrument up, as I said –
Q: No, answer my question. Is that what you say, that if you don’t call it major maintenance now you get away from calibrating, is that it?
A: No, that’s not my language, major maintenance.
A: That was yours.
Q: But you said – well, first of all, let’s talk about what you wrote here on the maintenance log. You wrote, replaced sample chamber. That’s not all you replaced, is it?
A: It’s all one piece.
Q: Okay, is the motor part of it?
Q: Why didn’t you write replaced sample chamber? Because you don’t have to replace – the sample chamber can replace by itself. You could take it apart, you could take the light source, right?
Q: And you could take everything else apart and you could just replace just the sample chamber, right?
A: Yes, correct.
Q: That’s not what you did, is it?
A: No, I replaced the whole thing.
Q: Okay, so when you wrote, replaced sample chamber, that doesn’t describe what you did, does it?
A: I think it does.
Q: All right, well, what if you had replaced just the light source, would you write replaced sample chamber?
Q: No. So, you could take off any one of those parts. How many parts are in there?
A: There’s multiple parts in there.
Q: Approximately how many?
A: I don’t know.
Q: Lots, right?
Q: Okay, so if you took an engine out of a car and took one from another car, would you say replaced carburetor?
A: I’m not a mechanic, I don’t know, sir.
Q: Do you know that a carburetor is part of an engine?
A: I know it used to be, I don’t think it is anymore.
Q: Now it’s fuel injection, right? Okay, well, if you put a new fuel injection system on it is that the same as replacing the entire motor?
A: I’d say not.
Q: You’d say not, right? So, no recal since 2004, no recal after replacing the guts of the machine because you don’t determine that to be major, right?
A: Because the instrument told me I didn’t have to auto-cal it.
Q: The instrument said, Officer Ledger, by the way, you don’t need to auto-cal it.
A: No, when I ran it through its diagnostic tests everything came back positive.
Q: Yeah, is that –
A: When I hooked up the 1-0 solution to it, it worked out fine.
A: And when I ran it through all its recertification stuff, it came out fine.
Q: And you know that’s not sufficient. If you’re supposed to do a calibration, you have to calibrate and then do accuracy testing, isn’t that true?
A: If you’re going to auto-cal the instrument, yes, but the instrument tells you when it’s time to be auto-cal’d.
Q: So, you have not done an auto-cal or any kind of calibration since 2004, is that your testimony? Any kind of calibration.
A: On that instrument?
Q: On that instrument.
A: Not to my knowledge, no. No, since ’04, definitely not.
Q: Okay, and you didn’t even do that one?