By Charmayne Schmitz
On Thursday, the trial of People vs. Ryan Baird continued with evidence presented by the prosecution. The defendant is charged with 2nd Degree Murder, Gross Vehicular Manslaughter and Driving Under the Influence of both alcohol and drugs.
Deputy District Attorney Amanda Zambor questioned a witness sworn in the previous day, CHP Officer Pascoe. This officer was the lead investigator of the accident, which occurred on the evening of January 6, 2012. We heard about various items that were found in the vehicle or on the ground near the vehicle, such as energy drink cans. Zambor asked if it’s possible to test a person for this type of consumption. The officer was not aware of any such test.
Zambor then presented several documents: a receipt and appointment card for a drug and alcohol center program with the defendant’s name on it; along with a study guide for the center’s program. Both were found inside the vehicle. There were handwritten notes inside the study guide. It was agreed by both the prosecution and the defense that the handwriting is Ryan Baird’s.
The officer spoke of several duties he performed at the scene. He spoke to the defendant who was strapped to a backboard at the time. He reviewed each passenger’s injuries and noted that Bobby Sunderland, one of the passengers, was pronounced dead at 9:45 p.m., before being transported by helicopter. Another passenger, Oscar Rodriguez, spoke with the officer, also while strapped to a backboard.
Zambor then presented a number of photographs, including aerial ones of the off ramp where the accident occurred at the I-5/County Road 102 interchange. The photos depicted skid marks, signage, and various views of the nearby stoplights. After that, maps were presented depicting the home of James Black and the home of another friend. There had been a birthday party for Mr. Black at his home. The young men left Black’s house and headed to visit another friend of the defendant, Mr. Parminder.
Defense Attorney Richard Dudek proceeded to cross-examine the officer about the breathalyzer test. One of the test requirements is to observe the suspect for 15 minutes before administering the test. The observation period is to ensure there is no burping or regurgitation that would create mouth alcohol and skew the test. It is also required that an additional test be performed after two minutes have passed. In this case there was only one test and it was given before the initial 15 minutes had passed. The officer didn’t wait because the victims were being transported. There was no field sobriety test because Baird was lying on the backboard.
A blood test was taken by the paramedics at the request of the officer. The vial was put in an evidence locker that is not refrigerated and the officer has no knowledge of how long it remained in that locker.
After the first breath test, Baird asked to call his mother. The officer told him he couldn’t call because someone had died.
Another line of questioning by Dudek involved the officer’s verbal exchange with Oscar Rodriguez. The officer testified that he believed Oscar was being deceptive at the scene. The defense attorney questioned whether this was a viable determination considering that he was strapped to a backboard and clearly in pain. The noise of the transport helicopter blocked out some of Oscar’s responses. Another line of questioning raised the point that in a traumatic accident some victims are unable to remember what happened. The officer insisted that in his experience it is rare that the victims don’t remember what occurred.
The officer himself did not remember if Baird seemed disoriented. He did not ask Baird who was in the car, if he knew he was in an accident or if he had been driving the car. The officer also did not know if Baird was injured (a broken ankle) or had a head injury. Some of the symptoms of a head injury can be similar to intoxication, such as slurred speech.
Dudek switched to another topic, the recent construction and realignment of the off ramp. A left curve was added to what was previously a sweeping long curve to the right. The advisory speed for the ramp was previously 35 mph and after the construction it was changed to 30 mph.
The items found on the ground near the crash scene were collected and put in the vehicle. An officer went to the storage site a few days later and retrieved them.
We also heard from the deputy coroner, who described some of the injuries to the deceased, Robert Sunderland. At this point the death certificate was put into evidence by D.D.A. Zambor.
Timothy Appel, a California Department of Justice Criminalist, was called by Zambor to the stand. Mr. Appel tested the blood sample a year after the accident to determine if there were drugs present. He described the differences in effects of marijuana on a “weekend” user versus a chronic daily user. Common to both is a decrease in reaction times.
A study was done in the Netherlands in 1993 where the Autobahn was shut down and drivers were given both marijuana and alcohol and then drove under observation. Dudek objected to the testimony on the study and after a conference at the judge’s bench it was abandoned. Appel then described the testing process that he performed. His testing found a level .6 nanograms of marijuana in Baird’s blood. Appel determined that Baird had ingested or smoked marijuana about four hours before the blood test. A blood test alone does not determine the ability to drive safely. It must be accompanied by a situational observation of the person. But, the observation that Baird was speeding on an off ramp indicated to Appel that he was too intoxicated to drive.
Dudek stressed in his cross-examination that the blood test only confirms that marijuana was found in the blood. Appel has no other evidence of his own that proves Baird was unable to control the vehicle. Appel admitted that Washington State has set a minimum allowed in the blood of .5 nanograms to accompany the legalization of marijuana in that state. But, Dudek’s questioning stressed that there is no consensus in studies of what level creates impairment. Unlike alcohol that is eliminated from the blood in a linear fashion, marijuana does not have a predictable elimination rate. 80% of marijuana is eliminated within 30 minutes, but after that the amount is uneven.
Appel tried again to quote the Netherlands study, but the resulting cross-examination by Dudek only stressed that the study can’t be translated into anything useful for today’s purposes.
Under re-direct by Zambor, Appel stressed that the blood test shows usage four hours prior and, in his opinion, would impair driving abilities.
Dudek questioned Appel again in re-cross about whether there is proof from any study as to what blood level would result in definitive levels of impairment. The only thing Appel could confirm is that marijuana was in the blood.
The jury asked Appel if Washington State has any laws about combining alcohol and marijuana. Appel replied no.
At the end of the day, the medical records of Baird and all the passengers were entered into evidence. The results were agreed upon or “stipulated to” by both sides, so there will be no need to present them as testimony in court. The trial was to continue on Friday, May 3 at 9 a.m.
