The Eyes of the Tiger

Immediately following the most recent car crash of Tiger Woods there was an overwhelming suspicion that he was likely operating the vehicle under the influence of something.  It could be an easy conclusion to draw based on what the media tells us about him and it’s easy to judge the cause of someone’s actions when there is no cost to being wrong.  This could not be further than the case for a Police Officer who is investigating an incident.  

Police Officers set aside emotional judgement and develop a cause-and-effect relationship based on facts and evidence from a scene and plug them into their training and experience.  While the media will report to us what they think happened and the rest of us can fill in the gaps with our own judgement, the Police investigate what really happened using science and victim/witness testimony.

Enter the Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Conversation.  Many Monday morning quarterbacks are questioning the lack of involvement of a DRE in this case.  I will start by saying, a DRE is not a magician who waives a wand, and the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program is not Voodoo Science as some of my former colleagues used to call it.  It is a prescribed 12 step process that when deployed properly, the DRE will provide an expert opinion on whether the subject was under the influence of an intoxicating drug or alcohol and by which of one or more of the seven drug categories that the intoxication was caused by. 

Upon the arrival of the first Deputy to the Tiger Woods crash, his first priority was to secure the scene and render it safe for additional responding rescuers.  Next priority is the preservation of life for the victim and provide any aid possible. While doing so, the Deputy likely took in additional “information” from the scene.  Was there an odor of alcohol, were there any signs of impairment, were there any illicit drugs or prescribed medications in plain view, etc.?  These actions fall under the basic responsibilities of a basically trained police officer.  Additionally, you don’t need to be a DRE to make an arrest for driving under the influence (DUI) of drugs.

The reporting Deputy in this case, as well as the Sheriff, have indicated that DUI was never a suspected factor in this case.  Additionally, there was no indication of substance use or abuse by any other authority.  That said, this was not likely to ever have been a case for a DRE. The 12-step process requires several physical observations of a suspect to make an accurate conclusion.  This includes Step 1 as a Breath Alcohol Test, which in this case was not possible because the driver was brought directly into surgery upon arrival at the hospital.  Based on the injuries sustained by Mr. Woods, many other parts of the evaluation could not be completed such as the Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand and the Romberg Sway Test.  There would also be a legitimate challenge to the validity of Steps 4 and 7 of the exam related to eye movement and pupils size due to head trauma. Finally, any loss of consciousness (like reported in this case) would most likely render a DRE evaluation not admissible in court.

While a DRE is highly trained to observe and evaluate behaviors that may be overlooked by other Officers, the integrity of the program relies on the Standardized and Systematic application of the evaluation.  Any deviation could result in a misguided opinion and ultimately compromise the scientific reliability of the program.  Without the ability to properly evaluate a suspect, an official DRE report should not be completed.  I would note, however, just because the ability to complete a proper evaluation is not possible, a DRE can still opine to specifically observed characteristics in a standard operations report, State crash report or supplemental report to the investigating officer based on their training and experience.  While this may seem like splitting hairs, their observations are still recognized and documented, just not as an expert witness.

The court of public opinion is not subject to any legal standard and usually renders a defendant guilty without the ability to prove themselves innocent.  Fortunately, these cases are also heard in a court of law where facts are presented, challenged and adjudicated by experts in their field and a defendant is presumed innocent unless found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

Opinion: Tiger was not given preferential treatment in this case as a celebrity.  He was treated as a person who suffered traumatic injuries from a crash that fortunately did not involve or injure anyone else.  Law Enforcement (not the media or public) treated him with the dignity that we would all want to be treated with ourselves.  The Police are experts in their field and take an Oath to “faithfully execute” their duties “to the best of their abilities.”  Let’s give them the respect they deserve. 

David Berez is a retired Police Officer and Drug Recognition Expert, having served more than 20 years with the East Windsor Police Department and a total of 30 years in Emergency Services. Following his retirement, Mr. Berez is now the President and Founder of Six4 Consultants, a Public Safety Consulting Firm. Mr. Berez is also a featured columnist, guest speaker and panelist on a variety of Public Safety discussions. In September of 2020, Mr. Berez was trained as a Resiliency Program Officer.

Contact: David@Six4Consultants.com LinkedIn: www.dhirubhai.net/in/david-berez/