The Walk and Turn (WAT) test represents another cornerstone of field sobriety testing, yet its reliability merits significant scrutiny. While law enforcement portrays this test as an objective measure of impairment, numerous factors undermine its validity, making it a questionable tool for determining intoxication.

Understanding the Walk and Turn Test's Structure

The WAT test involves two distinct phases: the instruction stage and the walking stage. During the instruction stage, subjects must maintain a heel-to-toe stance while listening to complex directions. The walking stage requires taking nine heel-to-toe steps along a line, turning in a specific manner, and returning nine steps. Officers look for eight possible clues of impairment throughout both stages.

This seemingly simple test actually demands considerable physical coordination, cognitive processing, and divided attention - abilities that vary widely among individuals regardless of alcohol consumption.

The Dubious Scientific Foundation

The test's claimed 79% accuracy rate originates from the same flawed research methodology that validated the HGN test. These studies, conducted in the 1970s and 1980s, occurred in controlled environments with cooperative subjects and trained observers. Such conditions bear little resemblance to real-world roadside investigations conducted in darkness, on uneven surfaces, with nervous drivers.

The accuracy claim also assumes perfect test administration by officers who may have received minimal training. When administered incorrectly or under adverse conditions, the test's reliability plummets dramatically.

Inherent Design Flaws

The WAT test's fundamental design creates numerous opportunities for false positives. The test requires subjects to balance in an unnatural heel-to-toe position while processing instructions, remember and execute a complex series of steps, maintain perfect heel-to-toe contact throughout, execute a specific turning procedure, and count steps aloud while walking.

These requirements challenge even sober individuals, particularly those with physical limitations, anxiety, or lack of coordination. The test essentially measures athletic ability and grace under pressure rather than intoxication.

Environmental Factors That Compromise Results

Roadside conditions severely impact test validity. Officers often administer the test on sloped or uneven surfaces, gravel, grass, or debris-covered areas, poorly lit locations, and areas with distracting traffic or noise.

Despite research recommendations that the test be conducted on "a reasonably dry, hard, level, non-slippery surface," officers frequently ignore these requirements, compromising results from the outset.

Physical and Medical Conditions Affecting Performance

Numerous non-alcohol-related factors can impair WAT performance. Age, particularly over 65, obesity at 50 or more pounds overweight, back, leg, or foot injuries, inner ear disorders, neurological conditions, arthritis or joint problems, footwear issues such as high heels or boots, and anxiety or nervousness can all affect test results.

The original research acknowledged these limitations, yet officers rarely consider such factors when interpreting results.

Subjective Interpretation of Clues

Officers must make subjective judgments about whether observed behaviors constitute official "clues." They must determine how much arm movement constitutes "using arms for balance," what degree of foot misalignment represents "not touching heel-to-toe," and whether a slight pause qualifies as "stopping while walking."

Different officers may reach different conclusions observing identical performance, introducing significant bias into the process.

How Experienced DUI Attorneys Challenge WAT Results

Skilled defense attorneys employ multiple strategies to discredit WAT evidence. They begin by examining video footage for administration errors, environmental issues, and alternative explanations for poor performance. Many officers fail to provide proper instructions, demonstrate incorrectly, or rush subjects through the test.

Attorneys also investigate physical or medical conditions that could affect performance. Expert witnesses can explain how various health issues impact balance and coordination, creating reasonable doubt about alcohol as the cause of observed difficulties.

Cross-examination focuses on the officer's subjective interpretations and potential bias. Attorneys question how officers distinguished between nervousness and intoxication, or between physical limitations and alcohol impairment. This scrutiny often reveals that officers jump to conclusions based on preconceived notions rather than objective evidence.

Defense strategies also highlight the test's inherent unfairness. Attorneys demonstrate how the test sets subjects up for failure by requiring unnatural movements under stressful conditions. They may ask jurors to imagine performing such tasks themselves while nervous, tired, or wearing inappropriate footwear.

Finally, experienced attorneys educate courts about the test's scientific limitations. They present research questioning its validity, emphasize the subjective nature of clue interpretation, and demonstrate how numerous factors unrelated to alcohol can produce identical results.

The Bottom Line

The Walk and Turn test, despite its widespread use, remains a deeply flawed method for determining intoxication. Its reliance on subjective interpretation, vulnerability to environmental factors, and failure to account for individual differences make it an unreliable indicator of impairment.

Those facing DUI charges based on WAT results should understand these limitations and seek representation from attorneys experienced in challenging field sobriety tests. A thorough defense can expose the test's weaknesses and create reasonable doubt about its conclusions, potentially leading to dismissal or acquittal.

Ohio OVI Defense Attorneys

This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case presents unique circumstances requiring individualized legal consultation.