COURT ROOM TESTIMONY:
This is where any testimony outside the K-9 industry standard opens the door for the defense to challenge you. It should be noted that some standards vary from one organization to another, such as NASAR versus the state of California, etc.
As an example, a NASAR industry standard for K-9 team certification is a written exam for the handler. However, a NASAR certified K-9 handler testifies in court that he has never taken a written exam to certify as a K-9 handler.
This is an example of the
handler or dog (team) not being within the NASAR SAR
K-9 industry standard. Testifying to anything outside the SAR K-9 industry standard
will question you or your dog's reliability.
Other problems in courtroom testimony are:
Potential areas of attack during court room testimony could mirror existing
areas of attack in the contraband detector dog industry. The six areas where
handlers are currently being challenged are:
1. The percentage of the dog’s reliability, including the dog’s “false
response” rate;
2. Scenario based training, based upon discipline (such as tracking, area search,
etc.), length of search, duration of search, etc;
3. Training on various quantities of odor. As an example, a human remains detection
dog should train not only small amounts of odor, but a human body as well;
4. Training on “novel” (new or distracting) odors;
5. Doing negative (blank) searches where no odor is found. (Usually not a problem
with a SAR dog, as most real searches are negative searches.);
6. Extinction (proofing) off of related odors, such as clothing, articles,
etc.
What is the industry standard in some areas? There are several areas where there is no clear cut answer. Examples are:
Animal behaviorists are assisting us in answering many of these questions. One of the leading research agencies is Auburn University's Canine and Detection Research Institute.
Created and maintained
by Terry Fleck. Contact: k9fleck@aol.com
Copyright © 1999
- 2008 Terry Fleck. All rights reserved.