In a landmark case, a Federal Judge Jack Weinstein ruled that hair testing was “effective and accurate.”

0

In a landmark case, Judge Jack Weinstein, who participated in the SOFT conference earlier that year delared in U.S. v. Medina (1990) 749 F.Supp.59 (E.D N.Y.) that the Society’s expressed scientific cautions – centering around the biochemical mechanisms of absorption and quality control in the laboratory – were not based upon a challenge to the scientific principles which formed the foundation of hair testing technology. Judge Weinstein, citing the support of other evidence, concluded that “These accepted principles establish that [hair testing] is an effective and accurate method of detecting the presence of various compounds including narcotics,” and ruled against the defendant Anthony Medina.