Drug Dogs: Assessing Accuracy

• In Event: Police Strategies Targeting Illegal Markets

Abstract

Dogs have been a valuable tool as part of a law enforcement team since Roman times; more recently in the detection of illegal drugs during traffic stops and public encounters. Information on accuracy and reliability of the team (dog/handler) is inconsistent and predictably polarized. Compounding the ambiguity, the USSC ruled that an alert from a K9 is probable cause so long as the dog has certification (Florida v. Harris, 2013). Later, the Court accepted P/C from a certified K9 with success comparable to a coin-toss (U.S. v. Bentley, 2015), and the 4th Circuit okayed a dog whose accuracy was 43%. The case law seems to rely upon the science of K9 olfactory performance, rather than questioning the totality of the circumstance of traffic stops and handler interaction. Methods used to certify dogs lack consistency, objectivity, scientific rigor, or any effort to reveal deficiencies in the team. This paper explores the factors that lead to a "false alert", and proposes a protocol for independent evaluation of the K9/handler team that could detect under-performing teams, empirical support for team accuracy, as well as providing a better benchmark than self-certification. Included is discussion of results from preliminary implementation and discrepancies with official data.

Authors

• Kevin Walsh, Columbia Southern University

• Stephanie A. Whitus, Aurora University