https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/5795957001I refused to lie under oath for the state of Arizona, and the courts aren't on my side

I can't recover my losses after I was punished by the state of Arizona for refusing to lie under oath. Why? The doctrine of qualified immunity.

I refused to lie under oath for the state of Arizona, and the courts aren't on my side

I can't recover my losses after I was punished by the state of Arizona for refusing to lie under oath. Why? The doctrine of qualified immunity.

The doctrine of qualified immunity has been used to protect police from civil lawsuits and trials. Here's why it was put in place.

JUST THE FAQS, USA TODAY

When a witness testifies in court, they take an oath to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Laws also prevent a witness from being persuaded to give inaccurate testimony or commit perjury. Arizona, for example, makes it a felony to attempt to “influence” the testimony of a witness. 

As I found out, however, if you work for the government, your superiors can't be held financially responsible for ordering you to change your testimony and retaliating against you when you refuse.

I worked as a forensic scientist for nearly 40 years in a variety of agencies and medical laboratories, including the Arizona Department of Public Safety, Scientific Analysis Bureau, which I ended up suing.

I regularly testified in court about the results of defendants' blood-alcohol samples. 

A USA TODAY Opinion series: Faces, victims, issues and debates surrounding qualified immunity

Greg Ohlson retired from the Arizona Department of Public Safety in 2017.

LAURA SEGALL FOR USA TODAY

At the Arizona Department of Public Safety, samples from multiple defendants were analyzed in batches. The department preferred to give criminal defense attorneys only their defendant's sample. I told my supervisors that the most fair and objective method was to provide defense counsel with the entire batch of samples, so they could better review and determine the results. I considered that a best practice and within my professional discretion.

Told to change testimony in court

In 2016, I testified in two DUI cases that the disclosure being provided to defense attorneys was incomplete. I was asked whether there was any scientific reason not to disclose the information. I said no. I was asked whether the undisclosed data could demonstrate that there was a problem in the blood run. I said yes, based on my professional opinion.

Then all hell broke loose.

A lot more with many links.

Also current cases involved in qualified immunity.