No abstract

No abstract

The conviction rate in drug facilitated sexual assault (DFSA) cases is known to be very low. In addition, the potential impact of toxicological results on the case is often not well understood by the judicial authorities. The aims of this study were (1) to obtain more knowledge concerning the prevalence of incapacitating substances in DFSA cases, (2) to create a more efficient DFSA analysis strategy taking background information into account, and (3) to evaluate the potential impact of systematic toxicological analysis (STA) on the final judicial outcome. This small-scale epidemiological study (n = 79) demonstrates that ‘commonly-used’ illicit drugs, psychoactive medicines and ethanol are more prevalent in DFSA cases in contrast to the highly mediatized date rape drugs. Additionally, via case examples, the interest of performing STA—to prove incapacitation of the victim—in judicial procedures with mutual-consent discussions has been demonstrated as it led to increased convictions. However, more attention has to be paid to ensure a short sampling delay and to get more accurate information from the medical treatment of the alleged victim. This will improve the interpretation of the toxicological analysis and thus its applicability in a DFSA case. The future is multi-disciplinary and will certainly lead to an efficient and more cost-effective DFSA approach in which STA can impact the final judgment.

A relatively high-throughput analysis (40 samples in 4 hours) adapted for routine DUID analysis was developed and validated for THC quantification in oral fluid samples collected from drivers under the influence of cannabis.

In the past decade much research concerning the impact of cannabis use on road safety has been conducted. More specifically, studies on effects of cannabis smoking on driving performance, as well as epidemiological studies and cannabis-detection techniques have been published. As a result, several countries have adopted driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) legislations, with varying approaches worldwide. A wide variety of bodily fluids have been utilized to determine the presence of cannabis. Urine and blood are the most widely used matrices for DUID legislations. However, more and more publications focus on the usability of oral fluid testing for this purpose. Each matrix provides different information about time and extent of use and likelihood of impairment. This review will focus on the practical aspects of implying a DUID legislation. The pros and cons of the different biological matrices used for Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol screening and quantification will be discussed. In addition, a literature overview concerning (roadside) cannabinoid detection, as well as laboratory confirmation techniques is given. Finally, we will discuss important issues influencing interpretation of these data, such as oral fluid collection, choice of cut-offs, stability and proficiency testing.