Replies

A judge would not just give a conviction to a first time user case. A no contest plea to the same charges with the same penalty would not result in a loss of rights. Even the 2nd.

The prosecutor's goal is clear, they want the symbolic gesture of rush not being able to vote.

This is punative.

This is not equal treatment under the law.

Since there are no charges, they can be as punative as they want in the court of public opinion.

Having probably cause for ten charges is not the same has having proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not unheard of for the prosecution to sandbag charges in order to manuver for one plea deal.

10 counts means? 10 appointments? 10 perscription fillings? 10 different doctors?

If it is doctor shopping then it means Cline was not his supplier. So why was she getting money? Blackmail against exposig adiction...

"A judge would not just give a conviction to a first time user case. A no contest plea to the same charges with the same penalty would not result in a loss of rights. Even the 2nd."

Are you sure about that? In most jurisdictions no contest pleas are accepted just like guilty pleas and the defendants are found guilty just as if they had given a guilty plea.

"This is not equal treatment under the law."

I don't know if they are treating him more harshly than they treat others in that particular county in Florida, but I will tell you that all across America regular people are nailed against the wall for small time drug offenses all the time. People do get felony records and they do in many cases actually get jail or prison time out of minor drug offenses.

What do you think about what Rush's lawyer said when talking about the plea offer he had made. "I believe this proposal would be in keeping with the public interest," Black wrote. "The public is better served by treating addicts as patients rather than criminals."

Do you agree with Rush Limbaugh's attorney who is speaking on Ruish's behalf?