re: Deputies arrest 4 in LSU student Madison Brooks case

I was an analytical chemist at a medical lab once upon a time. Think about it like this. The boss asks you to come in for a test the day after you've eaten poppy seed bread. You pee and it goes to the lab. We put your sample through a massive spectrophotometer testing hundreds of samples at a time. If it comes back negative, your employer is notified immediately. Unfortunately your poppy seed bread made you kick back hot for opiates. We then run your pee through a few solvent digestions then analyze it using GC/MS or GC/ITD and ascertain that the metabolites in your sample don't match any illegitimate opiates. Your employer gets a negative result a few days later than your coworkers that were clean. It's the same thing here. I can guarantee that her blood went through a GC/MS that quantified every single thing in it (looking for booze, drugs, and poisons). It can tell the difference between methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, etc.

quote:

---

No. There isn’t yeast in the blood sample and the sample is kept at temperatures where fermentation can’t take place.

The issue of fermentation had absolutely no relevance in this thread. It’s only relevant in highly decomposed bodies.

---

Gotcha. You guys have provided a lot of good info on the BAC stuff that was previously not known in the thread.

quote:

---

I can guarantee that her blood went through a GC/MS that quantified every single thing in it (looking for booze, drugs, and poisons). It can tell the difference between methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, etc.

---

Good news. How long would second test take?

quote:

---

I was an analytical chemist at a medical lab once upon a time. Think about it like this. The boss asks you to come in for a test the day after you've eaten poppy seed bread. You pee and it goes to the lab. We put your sample through a massive spectrophotometer testing hundreds of samples at a time. If it comes back negative, your employer is notified immediately. Unfortunately your poppy seed bread made you kick back hot for opiates. We then run your pee through a few solvent digestions then analyze it using GC/MS or GC/ITD and ascertain that the metabolites in your sample don't match any illegitimate opiates. Your employer gets a negative result a few days later than your coworkers that were clean. It's the same thing here. I can guarantee that her blood went through a GC/MS that quantified every single thing in it (looking for booze, drugs, and poisons). It can tell the difference between methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, etc.

---

But the defense lawyer said the BAC was inaccurate!

And ell’s lawyer friend said they could have swabbed wrong and Judge saw a 10 second video of her walking!

quote:

---

The tubes have preservatives in them to prevent fermentation.

---

Also interesting… and more accurate than the previous response to that post.

quote:

---

How the hell did y’all get off on this tangent?

---

Apparently a few people are concerned about their future chances of having sex after seeing a girl with a .319 BAC level isn’t automatically passed out.

Or concerned statue of limitations has not passed yet…

If one wants to rely on a grainy video of a drunk girl briefly running before stumbling and being held up as reasonably doubt on whether or not they should have known how drunk the girl was here is a tip: after sex that doesn’t take 5 or more attempts to get a yes, get her home or to friends safely like promised, show her at least a little respect while getting her home, and then you will not have to keep trying to explain away a .319 BAC taken after being admitted into ER an hour after leaving bar with you and less than hour after having sex with you not mention why you left on a street in that condition like a typical rapist.

quote:

---

Judge saw a 10 second video of her walking!

---

quote:

---

But the defense lawyer said the BAC was inaccurate!

---

And so will his expert.

quote:

---

Judge saw a 10 second video of her walking!

---

And so will a jury. I’ve tried a lot of expert cases. Juries rarely understand the science. They decide cases on what they know. And most people will think you can’t walk with a .319 BAC. Visuals often matter more than numbers on paper.

Now we need a Medical Examiner to come in the thread to break down the line from the affidavit "evidence of previous sexual assault anally".

Surely this is referring to the rape episode preceding her death and not some odd note about previous scarring in her rectum that could have come from a multitude of things. No?

Seems that note was to clearly indicate trauma in her anus resulting from rape.

Prosecutions lab expert will have the science on his side