Was he "under the influence" or was there just residual traces? Example being if you smoked dope on a weekend in Amsterdam, two weeks later you could still fail a drugs test but not be "under the influence" of it? Just curious.
Interesting thing in New Scientist recently:
If you had a guest come to your house, and you had two bowls, one full of peanuts and one full of E tablets. Which would be the most dangerous to offer your guest........(assuming not operating machinery of course)...