DNA police checkpoint lawsuit
Reading, PA. police helped a private contractor pull over innocent drivers to take cheek swabs to check for prescription drugs, a driver claims in court.
Ricardo Nieves sued the City of Reading, its Mayor Vaughn Spencer, Police Chief William Heim, and the Pacific Institute for Research & Evaluation, in Federal Court.
He also sued a John and Jane Doe, allegedly employees of the Pacific Institute.
The Calverton, Md.-based Pacific Institute, a nonprofit with 10 research centers around the country, studies individual and social problems related to alcohol and drugs, according to its website.
The company "receives money from the federal government to research the driving habits of motorists," Nieves says in the lawsuit.
The Pacific Institute was working on a contract with the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration, according to Pennsylvania newspaper reports on the bizarre stops.
Nieves claims the company had permission from the mayor and police chief to pull over drivers who had not broken any laws, to test them for prescription drugs and study their behavior.
It happened to him on Dec. 13 as he drove on a public road in Reading, Nieves says.
"A cruiser owned and operated by the City of Reading Police Department was parked by the side of the street with its lights flashing," the lawsuit states.
"Bright orange security cones lined the lane where plaintiff was driving. Plaintiff was in the right hand lane and the lane to plaintiff's left was full of traffic such that he could not pull over to change lanes.
"Defendant John Doe stepped out into plaintiff's lane of traffic, blocked his further advance, and flagged him to pull off the public road into a parking lot on Laurel Street."
Nieves had no choice but to drive into the parking lot, where five to seven improvised parking spaces had been created by orange security cones. He pulled into one.
"Nieves reasonably believed under the totality of the circumstances that he was being stopped by the Reading Police Department because of the flashing lights of the police car on the street, the fluorescent orange cones on the street and in the parking lot, and the presence of a police car in the parking lot that was occupied by a police officer," he says in the complaint.
A woman with a clipboard, allegedly a Pacific Institute employee, came up to his car and told him he had done nothing wrong and he was not being "pulled over" - a statement Nieves says was "clearly false."
Jane Doe told him, "the purpose of the stop was a survey of drivers' behavior and that she wanted to take a cheek swab to check for the presence of prescription drugs," according to the lawsuit. She told him he would be paid to do it, Nieves says.
She asked him twice more - the third request Nieves calls coercion - at which point he told her "very firmly, 'No. Thank. You,'" according to the complaint.
She tried to hand him a pamphlet, which he did not accept, then walked away from his car. A Reading police officer in a parked police car then pointed him the way out of the lot, Nieves says.
"Under Reading's Stop-and-Swab Policy, motorists are apparently not even stopped for the purpose of determining whether they are engaged in criminal activity, but rather for the purpose of gleaning information about their long-term driving habits," Attorney Aaron Martin wrote in a brief to the court. Martin went on to say: "If such a purpose can justify a suspicionless stop, one wonders what other survey subjects the city of Reading asserts are sufficiently compelling to justify the random stopping of vehicles. Inquiries into religious preferences? Television viewing habits? Sports team support?"
Nieves claims the city and its police department receive money from the Pacific Institute for letting the private contractor stop drivers without probable cause, which is unconstitutional.
He seeks an injunction and damages for conspiracy to violate the Constitution, constitutional violations and false imprisonment.
Senator Dan Coats last month called on NHTSA to pull the plug on the program pending congressional hearings into the matter.
"I am extremely concerned that NHTSA is using federal dollars to both hire local uniformed police and conduct a checkpoint where DNA samples are taken through coercion from drivers stopped without probable cause," Coats wrote in a letter to NHTSA's administrator. "Since these checkpoints are being conducted through NHTSA, I urge you to immediately halt this program until it can be fully reviewed by Congress."
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/12/30/64123.htm
http://thenewspaper.com/news/43/4302.asp
Traffic Safety Administration takes its blood & saliva 'Survey' to PA, with predictable results:
It appears the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (in conjunction with the White House Office of National Drug Policy) isn't done turning American citizens against their local police departments with its quest to determine what percentage of drivers are hitting the road while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The police department of Ft. Worth, Texas, didn't seem to enjoy the extra attention its assistance of the NHTSA at "voluntary" checkpoints brought with it. After first defending his officers' actions during the saliva/blood/oxygen draws, the chief later backtracked, offering a sincere apology that actually apologized for his department's participation rather than simply leaving any contrition left unsaid. ("We apologize if any drivers were offended…" Seriously?)
The claims made by both the NHTSA and Ft. Worth PD about this "survey" didn't add up. It was supposedly both "voluntary" and "anonymous." But drivers who refused to participate had their breath surreptitiously "tested" by Passive Alcohol Detectors, which means at least one aspect wasn't "voluntary." And those that did agree to give blood or saliva had to sign a release form, which knocks a pretty big hole in the "anonymity" side of it. Furthermore, having law enforcement officers ask nicely for cooperation tends to make "voluntary" experiences feel more "mandatory." A sign posted before the checkpoint could have pointed out the survey was voluntary, but one would imagine this sort of notification would have eliminated the desired "randomness" the NHTSA was seeking.
Police there joined forces with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation - a company hired by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy - to conduct the road stops.
Reading Police Chief William Heim said to the Reading Eagle that federal authorities are only trying to determine the extent of drunken and drugged driving statistics as part of an overall fight to lower road crashes and driving-related injuries. And he said the cheek swab requests weren’t aimed at collecting DNA but rather checking for the presence of prescription drugs, Fox News said. Moreover, he claimed police only served as security and weren’t actually pulling drivers to the side or asking questions.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131218/16503525610/traffic-safety-administration-takes-its-blood-saliva-survey-to-pennsylvania-with-predictable-results.shtml
http://readingeagle.com/article/20131217/NEWS/312179910#.UsMJfXl3uUk
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/18/penn-police-pull-people-over-random-dna-tests-feds/
NHTSA saliva, sweat & hair DNA testing information:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/StateofKnwlegeDrugs/StateofKnwlegeDrugs/pages/3Detection.html