Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pill Penalty Puzzle - Should Rush Limbaugh be grateful he didn't get 25 years?
Reason ^ | May 3, 2006 | Jacob Sullum

Posted on 05/03/2006 12:38:20 PM PDT by JTN

Rush Limbaugh's defenders say he never would have been investigated for prescription fraud if he weren't a famous conservative commentator, and they're probably right. For one thing, it's unlikely The National Enquirer would have been interested in the pill popping habits of an average joe, or even an average millionaire.

Yet the talk radio titan's detractors also have a point when they complain that he got off with a slap on the wrist after obtaining thousands of painkillers under false pretenses, a result they find especially galling in light of his general support for the war on drugs and his specific support for incarcerating drug users. "Perhaps the only way for draconian drug laws to change," says Drug Policy Alliance Executive Director Ethan Nadelmann, "is for people like Limbaugh to join other nonviolent drug offenders behind bars."

One of those nonviolent drug offenders is Richard Paey, who faced allegations remarkably similar to those against Limbaugh. Both men suffered severe back pain for which they underwent unsuccessful surgery, and both were accused of fraudulently obtaining more narcotics than they really needed. But while Limbaugh remains a free man and will not even face criminal charges if he continues to attend drug treatment for the next 18 months (something he was planning to do anyway), Paey is serving a 25-year sentence in a Florida prison.

Limbaugh was accused of "doctor shopping," getting painkillers from several physicians who were not aware of the other prescriptions. Although he denies the charge, he admits he became addicted to the painkillers, which by definition means he was taking them for reasons the law does not recognize as medically legitimate--as an "escape" (his word) from stress or unhappiness.

Paey, who moved to Florida from New Jersey, was accused of forging painkiller prescriptions from his New Jersey doctor. The doctor, who could have faced criminal charges if the government decided he was dispensing narcotics too freely, at first confirmed that the prescriptions were legitimate but later changed his story.

There was no evidence that Limbaugh or Paey sold painkillers on the black market, and both men insisted they had done nothing illegal. But unlike Limbaugh, who publicly confessed to a drug problem and voluntarily entered treatment, Paey said he really did need large quantities of narcotics to treat his physical symptoms, a situation that is not uncommon among patients who suffer chronic pain for years and develop tolerance to the analgesic effect of their medicine.

Paey's refusal to call himself an addict, more than Limbaugh's celebrity, seems to be the crucial factor that led to such dramatically different outcomes in these two cases, both of which were handled by Florida prosecutors under Florida law. Like Limbaugh, Paey was initially offered an arrangement through which he could have avoided jail--although, unlike Limbaugh, he would have had to plead guilty.

After Limbaugh's deal was announced, a spokesman for the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office explained that "it's a diversion specifically for first-time offenders with no prior criminal history or arrest." He called it "standard for someone who is dealing with their addiction."

But because Paey insisted there was no addiction to deal with, the prosecution threw the book at him, charging him not just with prescription fraud but with drug trafficking. That charge, which carried a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years, was based entirely on the quantity of pills involved, a standard under which Limbaugh also qualifies as a drug trafficker--which is presumably why the single charge filed against him refers to just 40 pills, rather than the thousands he reportedly obtained.

I'm not saying Limbaugh should be grateful he's not in prison. He is understandably angry about the way his private life became fodder for prosecutors and the press. But maybe the next time he goes on a tear about prosecutorial abuses, he could spare a few words for Richard Paey.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: apples; dopersrights; fishingexpedition; florida; floriduh; getrush; limbaugh; oranges; partisanwitchhunt; richardpaey; rush; rushlimbaugh; warondrugs; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-166 next last
More on Richard Paey
1 posted on 05/03/2006 12:38:28 PM PDT by JTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: traviskicks; Wolfie

Ping


2 posted on 05/03/2006 12:38:53 PM PDT by JTN ("I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Limbaugh was accused of "doctor shopping," getting painkillers from several physicians who were not aware of the other prescriptions.

[snip]

Paey...was accused of forging painkiller prescriptions from his New Jersey doctor.


3 posted on 05/03/2006 12:39:56 PM PDT by weegee ("Season's Greetings and Happy Holidays")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
So what makes you think that if there was one scintilla of evidence of anything illegal Rush wouldn't be in prison? That was the whole idea, wasn't it?

This is so lame.
4 posted on 05/03/2006 12:40:36 PM PDT by Tarpon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

This was a democratic planned accusation and power play to discredit El Rushbo....plain and simple...I do hope he stays of the pills.


5 posted on 05/03/2006 12:41:03 PM PDT by Meadow Muffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
"Should Rush Limbaugh be grateful he didn't get 25 years?"

The District Attorney should be grateful that he didn't get disbarred for this stunt.

6 posted on 05/03/2006 12:41:10 PM PDT by TommyDale (The North Carolina State Government would debate ethics, but no one has any.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

How many rich people go to jail for drug problems? You'd need recording studios in prison just to get new music in the stores. :)


7 posted on 05/03/2006 12:41:55 PM PDT by P-40 (http://www.590klbj.com/forum/index.php?referrerid=1854)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
...after obtaining thousands of painkillers under false pretenses,...

Mustn't let little things like evidence, due process or presumption of innocence get in the way of a perfectly good smear.

8 posted on 05/03/2006 12:42:31 PM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN
rather than the thousands he reportedly obtained.

Reason...all the hearsay that's fit to print.

9 posted on 05/03/2006 12:42:36 PM PDT by ez ("Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee

"Although he denies the charge, he admits he became addicted to the painkillers, which by definition means he was taking them for reasons the law does not recognize as medically legitimate"


10 posted on 05/03/2006 12:42:44 PM PDT by JTN ("I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JTN

Paey's case is entirely different.

Paey was convicted of fraud. Limbaugh was convicted of nothing.

Paey refused treatment. Limbaugh has voluntarily entered treatment and will continue.

The Prosecutor had Paey dead to rights, with documentary evidence and the doctor presumably willing to testify. The Prosecutor, by his own admission, would have had a hard time making a case against Limbaugh, however.

Besides that, the two cases are exactly the same!


11 posted on 05/03/2006 12:43:49 PM PDT by bondjamesbond (RICE 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JTN

which is presumably why the single charge filed against him refers to just 40 pills, rather than the thousands he reportedly obtained....Reported is not evidence. The prosecutor could only PROVE 40 pills were illicitly obtained.


12 posted on 05/03/2006 12:44:38 PM PDT by Safetgiver (Stinko De mayo, Stinko to the Commies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee

That, and there was the whole "complete and total lack of evidence" thing that the prosecutor on Limbaugh's case had to deal with.


13 posted on 05/03/2006 12:44:56 PM PDT by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
The District Attorney should be grateful that he didn't get disbarred for this stunt.

Not enough has been made of this point.

Has anyone suggested that the DA made this deal in exchange for a promise of not being named in a countersuit for defamation, medical privacy abuse, prosecutorial abuse, etc.?

-PJ

14 posted on 05/03/2006 12:45:11 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JTN

Man, I'm so sick of this liberal vendetta crap against all Conservatives.

Sandy Burglar steals classified documents ffrom The National Archives, and gets diddly-squat. And... etc etc etc... the list of lib-dem criminals getting off with a mere slap is legion.

Whatever happened to the Rule of Law? It's AWOL, since BJ Klintoon's 8 horrid years.


15 posted on 05/03/2006 12:45:20 PM PDT by butternut_squash_bisque (The recipe's at my FR HomePage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bondjamesbond

PLEASE, no facts to muddy up the smear.....


16 posted on 05/03/2006 12:45:57 PM PDT by Meadow Muffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Show me anyone who has taken OxyContin and I will show you a potential addict. My own nephew got hooked on it as well.
17 posted on 05/03/2006 12:47:08 PM PDT by TommyDale (The North Carolina State Government would debate ethics, but no one has any.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JTN
Show me anyone who has taken OxyContin and I will show you a potential addict. My own nephew got hooked on it as well.
18 posted on 05/03/2006 12:47:11 PM PDT by TommyDale (The North Carolina State Government would debate ethics, but no one has any.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: bondjamesbond

Thank you! You summarized the differences far more quickly and efficiently than I would have. You also appear to have done so without growling "BULLS**T" at your computer at every other sentence in the original article. Great work!


19 posted on 05/03/2006 12:47:15 PM PDT by RebelBanker (If you can't do something smart, do something right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bondjamesbond
Paey's case is entirely different.

You're right about that. Paey is in a wheelchair and was taking the drugs to control his pain...not because of an addiction.

Paey was convicted of fraud. Limbaugh was convicted of nothing.

Paey refused to cut a deal because he had done nothing wrong. Rush made one.

The Prosecutor had Paey dead to rights, with documentary evidence and the doctor presumably willing to testify.

Actually, the doctor originally told the feds that the prescriptions were legitimate, then changed his story when they threatened to come after him. The pharmacists backed Paey.

20 posted on 05/03/2006 12:47:46 PM PDT by JTN ("I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-166 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson