An evaluation of the Cozart RapiScan system as an on-site screening tool for drugs of abuse in a non-conventional biological matrix: vitreous humor

The aim of this project was to evaluate the Cozart RapiScan Oral fluid Drug Testing System as an on-site screening tool for vitreous humor samples collected during post-mortem examinations. Vitreous humor is easy to collect and as it is contained within the eye it is almost completely unaffected by post-mortem redistribution. The ability to carry out an initial drug screen on vitreous humor at the earliest stage of the death investigation process could contribute significantly to the assessment of the role drugs may have played prior to confirmation with toxicological analyses at the laboratory. Vitreous humor (n = 146) was collected from autopsy examinations (111 males and 35 females) with a specific focus on cases where death occurred following a road traffic accident or where an overdose was suspected. All samples were screened using the five-panel methadone Cozart RapiScan Cartridge with an overall positive rate of 29%. Of the positive results, 43% screened positive for benzodiazepines, 17% for cocaine, 7% for methadone and 33% for opiates. Positive samples, with the exception of benzodiazepines, and 20% of negative samples were analysed by GC/MS. This is the first reported use of this system as an on-site forensic tool in death investigation and for screening for drugs of abuse in vitreous humor. The conclusions from this study show that the Cozart RapiScan System could play an important role in obtaining information on the toxicological state of the person at the time of death.     

Decisional Capacity to Consent to Clinical Research Involving Placebo in Psychiatric Patients

Evidence from a few studies indicates the existence of several issues related to psychiatric patients' decisional capacity to give informed consent to clinical research. Clinicians often face difficulties in acquiring valid informed consent in clinical practice and even more so in drug trials. Participants often fail to fully understand or retain information regarding the actual implications of research protocols. The Brief Assessment for Consent to Clinical Research (BACO) was developed to investigate capacity to consent to clinical trials and further compare patients with schizophrenia and healthy comparisons' decisional capacity. A method to avoid possible confounding effects of choosing a treatment regarding a current disease was applied. The study groups were administered the BACO and the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research. Psychiatric patients performed poorer in comprehending, appreciating, and reasoning abilities, than their healthy counterparts. Impaired cognitive functioning and psychiatric symptoms severity were associated with reduced capacity to consent.     

Toxicological Analysis of Opiates from Alternative Matrices Collected from an Exhumed Body

In this case study, the body of a 45‐year‐old man was exhumed after 1 year at the request of the public prosecutor to assess whether the death was caused by drug consumption. Toxicological analyses were performed on several matrices, including liver, kidney, and the alternative matrices hair and teeth. The systematic toxicological analysis (STA), which consisted of basic and acid liquid/liquid extraction and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) analysis, showed the presence of opiates in each of the matrices analyzed. Subsequently, to confirm and quantify the presence of opioids, samples of each of the matrices were subjected to solid‐phase extraction and specific GC‐MS analysis. The case presented demonstrates the possibility of drug detection in an exhumed body that has been buried for 1 year, despite the problems of quantitative interpretation of the data, and that toxicological results could be useful along with other forensic evidence.     

Interpretation,Argumentation, and the Determinacy of Law

This article models legal interpretation through argumentation and provides a logical analysis of interpretive arguments, their conflicts, and the resulting indeterminacies. Interpretive arguments are modelled as defeasible inferences, which can be challenged and defeated by counterarguments and be reinstated through further arguments. It is shown what claims are possibly (defensibly) or necessarily (justifiably) supported by the arguments constructible from a given interpretive basis, i.e., a set of interpretive canons coupled with reasons for their application. It is finally established under what conditions such arguments provide single outcomes or rather support alternative interpretive conclusions, thus leading to propositions of law whose truth-value is undetermined.