James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Before I go to Ms Sugiyama, who I think has her hand up, I want to make an observation on the point Dr. Murray made. He mentioned the black box. I think he means the magic computer that has the technology within it. It is a black box in the sense that we cannot access the algorithms within. I am reminded that in this jurisdiction there is a plethora of challenges to the technology used to detect motoring offences. It could be a speed van or a Breathalyser for drink-driving offences, and so forth. A cottage industry has sprung up around criminal defence in terms of challenging those devices. I am interested in the views of the expert witnesses. In those type of prosecutions, or certainly within the area of drink-driving or speed capture, it is submitted that the machine is determinative of the offence in the sense that the machine said the person was going past the speed limit or was over the drink-driving limit. As I understand it, what has been put forward today by the Commissioner and others who are advocating for the technology, it is not determinative, rather this is an aid to evidence-gathering and that another process, be it the court or an officer reviewing the outputs, etc. would make the next step. In other words, it is of assistance but not determinative. Does that make any difference in the opinion of the witnesses?

Ms Sugiyama is up next to speak. She will say something anyway but I might just come back to the witnesses on the question I have asked. I would like to hear what they have to say on that. I know Ms Sugiyama has a point to make anyway, and she can answer my question if she likes. Then I will hear from witnesses across the board on the question I have asked, if that is in order.