A look at how to determine if the circumstances of a bath salts case constitute probable cause

Transcription

1 What s Inside Volume 2 (June, 2012) Bath Salts Confirming Probable Cause A look at how to determine if the circumstances of a bath salts case constitute probable cause Analog Laws A discussion concerning the ever-changing nature of synthetic drugs and how some states are writing legislation to keep up Legal Bath Salts (a-pvp) A brief look at a new substance that is not an analog of synthetic drugs currently covered by legislation Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent (Meth Test) A rundown concerning the use of test reagents to determine the presence of methamphetamine in an unknown substance Instructor Training Classes Information concerning how your department can take advantage of no-charge classes in the use of presumptive drug test reagents K2 Synthetic Cannabinoid Update The latest information on the development of a test reagent for K2

2 to We will BATH SALTS Confirming Probable Cause One of the most common questions I m asked concerning the new Bath Salt field tests is what kind of independent testing did they undergo before being offered to the law enforcement community? Sirchie prides itself in only offering presumptive field tests that meet both the stringent standards of the National Institute of Justice color test (NIJ standard: and scrutiny of independent government testing. The Commonwealth of Virginia requires that all narcotic field tests being offered to law enforcement to confirm probable cause and bind through preliminary must have previously been approved by the Virginia Division of Forensic Science. (Regulations for the Approval of Field Tests for the Detection of Drugs - 6 VAC ) All of the standard field tests in both the tube and pouch configuration have all been approved through this process. Both the MDPV/ Methylone Reagent (#NAR10024 tube and #NARK20024 pouch) and Mephedrone Reagent (#NAR10025 tube and #NARK20025 pouch) have also been approved in This now raises the issue of what probable cause do you have to suspect the substance being seized is potentially a synthetic stimulant (bath salts)? How is the substance packaged? Was it offered for sale as bath salts? What quantity of substance is being seized? Is the person suspected a known drug user or dealer? What does the substance look like? Let s now consider two (2) sets of circumstances and determine whether or not both of these cases meet the standard of probable cause. Case #1: Through circumstances, a teenager agrees to be searched. In his pocket is a foil package labeled as Ivory Wave which reports to contain 1 gram of substance. Examining the substance itself, it is an off white powder. Case #2: Through circumstances, a teenage agrees to be searched. In his pocket is a plastic baggie containing approximately 30 grams of a white powdery substance. Even though circumstances allowed the officer to search the teenagers in both cases, their discoveries were drastically different. The 1st case is clearly leading the officer to suspect bath salts and would start his testing with the MDPV/ Methylone Reagent. In case #2, we have something drastically wrong. In most cases, the sale of 1 gram of suspected bath salts would run as high as $ This means the teenager is carrying a value of $ of loose powder which potentially could be bath salts. Does that make sense? If this teenager were a dealer, his customers want to see cont on next page

3 the substance sold in a recognizable package or with recognizable markings. In this case, the officer should be very wary of what he has seized. Let s now assume when the field tests were conducted, both cases were positive results in the #NARK20024 MDPV/Methylone Reagent. What would you do? I would suggest that in Case #1, considering all the facts including the positive result of the field test, there is clearly sufficient reasonable belief to establish probable cause to bind the suspect through preliminary hearing. However, in Case #2, even with a positive result I would be very wary of processing this case. Ask more questions and see whether or not there is a reasonable explanation for why this teenager had the loose powder. Can his explanation be verified? If so, verify the explanation before proceeding. What is a gram? Investigators dealing in narcotics all the time have little difficulty in visualizing one (1) gram of substance. Those not dealing in dope regularly struggle with this concept. Take an everyday product we see, Sweet n Low, and dump the whole package in front of you. You are now looking at one (1) gram of powder. Bath Salts are sold in ¼, ½ and 1 gram packages. Relate that to the two cases presented above. Just one more piece of evidence that the zip lock bag containing a large volume of powder should be looked at with extreme caution. In law enforcement we have long taken the results of field tests like Duquenois-Levine (Marijuana); Scott Reagent Modified (Cocaine); and Mecke s Reagent (Heroin) for granted. However, we must remember that all of these substances are natural products that originated from a plant. When legislation was enacted for these substances, they could be simply identified as THC, Cocaine and Opiates respectively. Since they are natural substances, they could not be changed to new formulations or new substances. Now we have these synthetics. Even though the DEA emergency schedule recognizes the three (3) substances of MDPV, Methylone and Mephedrone, we also must recognize that you can tweak those substances into various analogs of the original formulas. Sweet N Low packets contain 1 gram of sweetener. to We will

4 to We will ANALOG LAWS When the synthetic substances first appeared, the DEA was quick and correct in responding with their two (2) Emergency Schedules: Synthetic Cannabinoids (K2 or Spice): rules/2011/fr0301.htm Synthetic Stimulants (Bath Salts): Google DEA Bath Salts and click on the first result: News from DEA, News Releases, 10/21/11 Under the Federal regulations, all of the precursors and analogs are automatically covered in their two (2) schedules. This is not the case with the individual state CSA s. Many states reacted quickly and with good intentions by duplicating the Federal emergency schedule and the chemistry formulas listed. However, synthetics offer us the new problems of tweaking those formulas very slightly and creating new substance formulas. Individual states either had to change to wide encompassing language to include all precursors and analogs or become very specific in which formulations they will add to their CSA s. Some examples of the wide encompassing language: Indiana: The legislative body passed an amendment that would make all synthetic substances illegal. It was worded in such a way that the State had the right to add any new chemical formulations that the DEA were to deem dangerous and add to their emergency schedule and all analog and precursors for synthetic substances. To read through the amendment, go to the following link and scroll down to the controlled substance section: HE html Wisconsin: Wisconsin passed their amendment early in This amendment was effective in closing the loop holes on the new synthetic substances of K2 and Bath Salts as well as the older synthetic substance of MDMA (Ecstasy). What has happened in the past, chemists have changed the formula for MDMA very slightly adding or reducing the amount of hallucinogenic or euphoric substance and making a new synthetic substance. These new substances (referred to as letter drugs) take the new letter designations of MDEA, MDA, BDB, MBDB, DXM, etc. When law enforcement agencies checked with their prosecuting attorneys, these new letter drugs are not listed under the CSA, and are therefore, legal. Some of the wide encompassing language Wisconsin used is as follows:... including any of their salts, isomers, precursors, analogs, esters, ethers, and salts of isomers, esters, or ethers that are theoretically possible within the specific chemical designation, in any form contained in a plant, obtained from a plant, or chemically synthesized. ₁ To read the specific language and a more full description of the Wisconsin amendment, go to: cont on next page

5 related/acts/31.pdf ₁ This is a mere sample of the wording of statutes that two (2) states have enacted. Many of the states across the country have enacted similar amendments to make charging of these synthetic substances more simplified. However, this also opens another important discussion. Are all analogs of these substances harmful and if so, how can you determine the new chemical formulas are harmful? Both Arizona and Nevada have asked those questions which have led to more conservative legislation. In the case of bath Salts, Arizona has recognized seven (7) specific formulations and Nevada six (6) specific formulations (including the original three of MDPV, Methylone and Mephedrone). In each case, these specific formulations have been deemed harmful. In both of these states, if the subsequent analog substance cannot be determined to be harmful, it has not been added to their CSA. Please check with your prosecutors to determine the breadth of your analog legislation. What does that mean about the effectiveness of the new field tests for synthetic stimulants? Any state that has a limited synthetic stimulant law (similar to either Arizona or Nevada) be very careful about laying charges with the field test only. These two field tests are designed to identify the original substances of MDPV/ Methylone (NAR10024 or NARK20024) or Mephedrone (#NAR10025 or #NARK20025) and ALL analogs of these substances. In those states, you may still want to use the field tests to confirm your believe you have a synthetic stimulant, but always proceed to the crime lab for your report prior to laying charges. What possible benefit would there be in field testing in these more limited states if we cannot charge the individual and bind through preliminary? Remember, even though you are dealing with a state crime lab, for that lab to touch your sample, process and write a report, you are looking at between $ and $ Your agency may not have to pay that bill, but with the chemist s time, lab time, lab chemicals, etc, the charges are significant for every exhibit you send. In addition, many states have extensive delays on waiting for their substances to be tested and lab reports returned. If you field test a substance and the results are positive, at least you now know the substance is one of the original formulas or an analog. At this point, allow the crime lab to determine if the substance is chargeable or an analog not covered under your CSA. Under the Federal regulations, all of the precursors and analogs are automatically covered in their two (2) schedules. to We will

6 Molecular Structure of a-pvp (alpha- Pyrrolidinopentiophenone) to We will LEGAL BATH SALTS a-pvp (alpha- Pyrrolidinopentiophenone) In the 1st edition of the NARK News we discussed the synthetic stimulants and the three (3) basic chemical formulations: MDPV; Methylone; and Mephedrone. All three (3) of these were placed as Schedule I substances in the emergency legislation introduced and passed by the DEA. Many states have addressed these substances and like Wisconsin and Indiana, have introduced and passed amendments to include these substances and all analogs. Remember what an analog is; a structural derivative of a parent compound. Now we are introduced to a new chemical formulation of alpha- Pyrrolidinopentiophenone (a-pvp) which is a standalone synthetic stimulant not related to any of the three (3) original substances. This is the optimum result for anyone mixing and introducing these synthetic products. By having a brand new substance, it forces the Federal Government to introduce additional emergency legislation and all states to add the substance individually to their CSA. Until this substance has been evaluated and added, a-pvp will be a legal substance and hence the expression legal bath salts. A-PVP has many of the same physiological results as MDPV. Users will see an improvement in their productivity, wakefulness, motivation, locomotion and endurance. So we don t interpret the substance as a positive influence, the side effects of a-pvp are paranoia, hallucinations, schizophrenia and possible psychosis like symptoms. The high is consistent with MDPV where it will last between 3 to 6 hours. It will be very easy to misinterpret a-pvp for the other synthetic stimulants since the appearance of the substance is going to be consistent in a white to offwhite powder. It will also be sold in the same size (¼, ½ and 1 gram) packages and type (both foil pouches and small round plastic containers). The preferred method of taking the substance will be either snorting or vaporization off a piece of foil. Neither swallowing nor injection will be popular with this new substance. Field Testing a-pvp: Even though this substance is not yet controlled, we are trying to take the initiative and having an answer with a proper field test. We have conducted extensive testing at our lab which appears to have given us an answer to this new synthetic substance. Before sharing this information, we want to have the results reviewed by a 3rd party, independent crime lab. My hopes are we will be able to disclose these findings either in the 3rd Edition of NARK News or before in an a-pvp Field Test Announcement.

7 SODIUM NITROPRUSSIDE REAGENT (Meth Test) Positive or Inconclusive? One of the most common technical questions I m asked is why do we have two (2) specific colors on the front of the Meth Test (#NAR10015 tubes; #NARK20015 pouches) and how do I correctly interpret the color reaction I received? Before answering these questions, let s think about what the Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent is designed to do and how it does it. This specific field test is designed to color react with a substance referred to as a secondary amine. Secondary amines are found in two (2) specific controlled substances commonly found throughout the country; Methamphetamine and MDMA (Ecstasy). Many departments have opted to field test these substances by going directly to the specific test (Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent) rather than start their testing procedures with the general screening test of Marquis Reagent (#NAR10002 tubes; #NARK2001 pouches). Let me run through both procedures. Before starting the test, walk yourself through the probable cause in the case. What type of substance do you have? How is it packaged? If it is being offered for sale, at what price? Is there anything distinctive about the substance you are testing? Is the person a known drug user or dealer? Where is the substance found? Substance #1: white powder; small bag 1 gr.; offered at $35.00, known meth user; console of a vehicle. Substance #2: 8 red tablets; individually sold; offered at $18.00 ea, jumping jack insignia; stripper; purse. Substance #3: 6 clear chunks, small bag 3 grams; offered at $55.00/gr, meth dealer; front right pocket. Substance #4: 3 white tablets; individually sold, offered at $15.00 ea, no insignia (not well formed); teenager; pocket. Before testing, how would you classify the above substances? Substance #1: suspected Meth #2: suspected MDMA #3: suspected Meth #4: suspected MDMA Method #1: Marquis Reagent + Sodium Nitroprusside Start with substances #1 and #3, mix each substance thoroughly to ensure if both a cut and controlled substance are present, you will be testing the controlled substance. Reduce a very small amount of one tablet in each case into powder (DO NOT crush the entire cont on next page Molecular Structure of Methamphetamine to We will

8 Sirchie s Nark II #01 Marquis Reagent Test pouch to We will tablet only reduce enough substance for testing. When you now send the tablet you test plus the additional tablets to the crime lab, the chemist can see the similarities between the tablets. The same being the case for the prosecutor, he can then show the jury the sample you tested and the other tablets. They can see the similarities and know they are all the same lot. Introduce each of the four substances to the Marquis Reagent (equivalency to 5 grains of Sweet n Low). Break and agitate the single ampoule watching closely for the color reaction. You will see an initial color followed by a second color reaction. In all four (4) cases, the initial color seen was a bursting of Orange throughout the test. In the case of substances #1; and #3 this was followed by a Brown color within 12 seconds. In the case of substance #2; and #4 the Orange color only remained for the briefest period followed by what appeared to be a very dark Purple or almost Black color. Interpretation of the Results: Substance #1; and #3: Amphetamine/ Meth Substance #2; and #4: MDMA or letter drug In all four (4) cases you would now proceed to the Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent. Follow the same procedures in introducing a small amount of substance to the test. The tube configuration will have two (2) ampoules and the pouch configuration three (3) ampoules. Break the 1st ampoule (bottom) of the tube and the left and center ampoules of the pouch and agitate. Whatever color has been developed at this point should be disregarded. Only the color generated in the last ampoule in both cases is relevant. When you break the top ampoule (tubes) and right ampoule (pouches) you will see an IMMEDIATE dark Blue or Purple color develop. This color happens within one (1) second. If the color you develop initially turns a Pink and slowly (over 5 to 20 seconds) into a lavender color, this is NOT A POSITIVE REACTION. Let s now go back to what we are testing and what a positive reaction indicates. The Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent is looking for a secondary amine. This test will only turn positive if a secondary amine is present. The two (2) substances containing a secondary amine are either Methamphetamine or MDMA. Interpretation of the Results: Substance #1: Resultant color was a Pink slowly changing to Lavender. NOT Positive for Meth. Marquis indicated either Amphetamines or Meth Substance #1: Amphetamines Substance #2: Resultant color was an immediate dark Blue. Positive for secondary amine Substance #2: MDMA (Ecstasy) Substance #3: Resultant color was an immediate dark Blue. cont on next page

9 Positive for secondary amine. Substance #3: Methamphetamine Substance #4: Resultant color was a Pink slowly changing to Lavender. NOT Positive for MDMA. Marquis indicated either MDMA or a letter drug Substance #4: Letter Drug (wait for lab results before proceeding with a charge) Method #2: Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent + Marquis Reagent This method is favored by most agencies across the country. The reason is the high percentage of cases of suspected Meth; do in fact turn out to be Meth. In the case of suspected MDMA, there is an advantage to this style of testing as well. In the past three (3) years, the majority of the tablets sold as MDMA have turned out to be a letter drug. The percentage of tablets containing any MDMA has dropped to the following levels: %; %; 2012 (end of March) 71.0%. To train in this procedure, the investigator first has to look at his substance and determine what forms either Meth or MDMA commonly appears. Meth is commonly found in a powder; chunk; or liquid form. MDMA is normally found in either a tablet or capsule. This is not to say that either could not appear in the other form, it only says that commonly you can categorize the substance in this manner. If a powder, chunk or liquid (never introduce a liquid directly into the test always place a small amount on a porous substance, air dry then place in the kit) were to turn IMMEDIATE dark Blue or Purple, you have positively identified Meth. If the color were to turn a Pink slowly changing to Lavender, this indicates the substance is NOT Meth and return to the Marquis Reagent. If the resultant color in the Marquis were an immediate Orange changing to Brown within 12 seconds, you have identified Amphetamines. If a tablet or capsule were to turn an IMMEDIATE dark Blue, you have POSITIVELY identified MDMA. If the resultant color were to turn an immediate Pink slowly changing to Lavender, you have a letter drug and send it to the crime lab for identification. Why do agencies find this method of testing advantageous? With the limited funds available to agencies, by using only a single field test (Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent) in most cases, departments save $1.50 per test. By having officers use only one (1) test and the results of the Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent being so distinctive, it makes testing simpler. Recommendation: Regardless of the method of testing, procedure #1 or #2, I recommend all agencies using the Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent follow this procedure. cont on next page Sirchie s Nark II #15 Sodium Nitroprusside Reagent Test pouch to We will

10 Photo of Methamphetamine crystals For the officers authorized to test for Meth/MDMA, take a brand new field test from the box with nothing in the test at all. This is referred to as a blank. In front of the officers, break each of the ampoules in sequence and show them graphically the color reaction. They will see an immediate Pink color develop and slowly transition into a Lavender. Preferably, you should now take a 2nd field test and place a very small amount of Meth (equivalency to 5 grains of Sweet n Low). Break and agitate the ampoules in sequence. Show the officers the IMMEDIATE Dark Blue or Purple color that develops. When they see these two (2) distinct colors, they will never make a misinterpretation again. Why do we see an immediate Purple color instead of the immediate dark Blue? This reaction is entirely dependent on the amount of suspect material you have placed into the test or the purity of the suspect substance. To see the immediate Purple instead of dark Blue, take a new test and introduce only about 2 grains of Meth. This will simulate either lower purity or as it is testing, small quantities. to We will

11 Instructor Training Classes With the advent of the new synthetic substances and the continuing flux we see in the narcotics industry, Sirchie is pleased to offer all departments using the NARK product No Charge Instructor classes. These classes are 3 to 4 hours and are customized to cover the specific substances your agency is encountering. We also show officers how to eliminate false positives and give them a better understanding of how specific substances are manufactured. We also discuss trends in the narcotic industry and why many agencies are seeing a tremendous increase in the amount of Heroin. We can offer these classes with or without a practical session. If a host department were to have some controlled substance ready for destruction, they could ask a judge for a destruction order and we could use the substance during the training. If you opt for this option, we will provide the field tests for the class. This is not a requirement to host a class; we can conduct them with or without controlled substance. If you wish to host a training class, we do encourage you to invite the surrounding departments. I am not limited by numbers for the class. If your scheduling is such that it would advantageous to conduct a morning and afternoon class, I am very open to that concept. We will also provide an announcement flyer outlining the class and specifying how guest agencies can register for the training. I usually require between 4 and 6 weeks notice. To try and keep my travel under control, I prefer to group training classes within regions. If you are interested in hosting a training session, please contact me, Jack Thorndike, at (910) or to We will

12 K2 Synthetic Cannabinoid Update Many of you have contacted me concerning when we will have a new Synthetic Cannabinoid Field Test. Please be assured that this is the #1 Priority of our Research and Development section. We do not have a firm date on the finalizing of the test, but IMMEDIATELY upon approval from an outside lab we will contact you with all pertinent information. Next Issue Synthetic Opiates: Oxycodone; Hydrocodone; Fentanyl New Pharmaceuticals: Suboxone; Naloxene; Buprenorphine Heroin Presence Increasing Across the Country New Developments on Synthetic Stimulants (Bath Salts, a-pvp) New Developments on Synthetic Cannabinoids (K2, Spice) to We will