Drug testing’s worst of the worst

And the candidates for drug testing’s worst of the worst are…

We’ve all heard of the best of the best, but what about the worst of the worst? Here are some of the latest contenders for the title of drug testing’s worst of the worst on our roads.

Five fail drug testing across Lower Eyre

First contenders are five people who failed drug testing during random stops across the Lower Eyre in South Australia. These included:

  • A 26-year-old who returned a positive check for methamphetamines. To make matters worse, it was soon discovered he was driving on a suspended licence.
  • A 58-year-old and a 36-year-old who failed drug testing for cannabis.
  • A 41-year-old who tested positive for methamphetamines. He also went for the double whammy, with police determining the man had a disqualified learners permit.
  • A 48-year-old who failed drug testing after positive readings for both methamphetamines and cannabis.

One person who failed drug testing for two illegal drugs and two people who were also driving while having a suspended licence or disqualified permit. That’s pretty good, or pretty bad as the case may be, but really that’s just a typical week on Australia’s roads.

Learner driver and supervisor fail drug testing

Topping the above, we think, for the worst of the worst title are a learner driver and his supervisor who both failed drug testing in Marylands, NSW.

According to an article in the Mirage, a 34-year-old was pulled over after performing an illegal u-turn. The police drug tested both the driver, who was a learner, and their supervisor and detected drugs on both. Further drug testing also proved positive.

The article went on to highlight that last year in NSW, police conducted 166,351 mobile drug tests, with 8910 prosecuted as a result. That’s a worrying 1 in 18 ratio.

Drug testing result just the start

Next candidate and perhaps the winner of the worst of the worst drugged drivers is the case of a South Australian man who refused to undergo roadside drug testing in October 2017. At court to defend the charge, the man provided a letter from his doctor stating that at the time of the drug testing, he was suffering from an oral infection and an aversion to intravenous medical procedures.

You might think that’s a fair enough defense for refusing the drug testing, except that the letter was fabricated.

The irony was that if the man had undergone the drug testing when asked to do so or accepted that he should have complied with drug testing later and taken the punishment, he wouldn’t have faced an imprisonment. Fabricating evidence is another matter and in South Australia carries a maximum 7-year imprisonment term. He received a prison term of one year and 21 days.

On a serious note, as we’ve mentioned before in our blogs, if you are asked to undergo drug testing on the roads or at work you should always comply. Generally, the consequences for refusing can be as bad, if not worse, than having the test and failing.


And the candidates for drug testing’s worst of the worst are… Credit Blogtrepreneur https://www.flickr.com/photos/143601516@N03/27905720280/

By Michael

Michael is the founder of Integrity Sampling and is responsible for overseeing all national operations. He is based at Integrity Sampling's head office in Melbourne and is also responsible for the co-ordination of drug and alcohol testing within Victoria, assisting in the implementation of drug and alcohol (fit for work) policies and the presentation of drug and alcohol education and awareness programs. You can connect with Michael Wheeldon on LinkedIn

Leave a comment