Limbaugh's pill use not extraordinary, lawyer says

Miami Herald ^ | Jan. 26, 2004 | DANIEL de VISE

[AlwaysLurking]

Limbaugh's pill use not extraordinary, lawyer says

BY DANIEL de VISE ddevise@herald.com

Rush Limbaugh's attorney mounted an offensive Monday, accusing Palm Beach County prosecutors of smear tactics and likening his client to any ordinary American with chronic pain.

''This nation is full of people who take medication every day and will do so for the rest of their lives,'' said Roy Black, speaking in a news conference in Miami.

Discussing the prescription-drug abuse allegations in unprecedented detail, Black reasoned that the quantity of medicine Limbaugh is accused of ingesting -- 1,800 pills in 210 days -- works out to roughly 8.5 pills a day, ``certainly not an outrageous amount.''

Black questioned the motives of Palm Beach County State Attorney Barry Krischer in releasing details last week of sensitive plea negotiations between Limbaugh and prosecutors.

The December correspondence, unflattering to Limbaugh, shows the radio talk-show host proposing to settle the case through treatment, potentially averting a permanent criminal record. Prosecutors counter: Plead guilty to a single felony charge of ''doctor shopping'' and avoid prison time. Both offers were rejected.

Black said the plea negotiations shouldn't have been released. He portrayed the incident as part of a politically motivated campaign to discredit his client.

Black said the government's plea offer came with a veiled threat: If Limbaugh did not plead guilty, the state would release his confidential medical records.

''The only conclusion that I can draw is that Mr. Limbaugh ... is being singled out more than anyone else for actions that no one else in this community would be subjected to,'' Black said.

Black and other prominent South Florida attorneys said they couldn't recall another case of plea negotiations released to the public.

''There has to be some thought about the long-term consequence'' of routinely releasing such documents, said Robert Jarvis, a law professor at Nova Southeastern University. ``And the long-term consequence in this case is that no one would begin a negotiation about a plea.''

But Michael Edmondson, spokesman for the Palm Beach County state attorney, said prosecutors were confident they'd done the right thing.

Prosecutors consulted the Attorney General's Office and the Florida Bar in response to the Jan. 15 public records request by the Landmark Legal Foundation, which sought all available documents in the case. They concluded the state public records law required releasing the plea dealings, even though doing so violates ethical rules for lawyers.

''The way the Florida public records law works is, anything that is not specifically exempted under the law is permitted,'' Edmondson said. State law trumps any ethical concerns, he said.

But he offered nothing in writing to back up that account. And Limbaugh's legal team produced documents Monday that seemed to contradict it.

Telephone notes from a Florida Bar attorney, paraphrasing Kirscher himself, state that plea negotiations ``are not normally to be revealed [and] so may or may not be [a] public record.''

Attorney General spokeswoman JoAnn Carrin wouldn't say what legal advice her agency gave the chief Palm Beach County prosecutor, citing the ongoing investigation.

Prosecutors began investigating possible prescription-drug abuses by Limbaugh, 53, last year, based on a report from his former maid. Limbaugh has not been charged with any crime.

Limbaugh's attorney accused Edmondson, the state attorney spokesman, of leaking a false story last month that Limbaugh was poised to plead guilty to doctor-shopping. Edmondson denied the assertion.

Doctor-shopping is duping multiple physicians into dispensing excessive prescription medications.

''I can say categorically now that Mr. Limbaugh would not plead guilty to doctor-shopping, and that's because Mr. Limbaugh did not engage in doctor-shopping of any kind,'' Black said.

[ClintonBeGone]

...since it seems clear many of the elements of doctor shopping exist.

Name those elements in detail. Provide sources.

Here is the statute. Here is a partial list of his prescriptions from ONE pharmacy, as provided by the search warrant. As you can see, he has overlapping (less than 30 days apart) prescriptions from different practitioners for the same drug or drugs of similar therapeutic use.

As I said, many of the elements are present for the charge of doctor shopping. In fact, the only one I can see that is missing is whether he withheld information from the doctors about the other prescriptions. That can be discovered by looking at his medical records or through the testimony of these doctors.

Florida Statute 893.13(7)(a)(8) makes it unlawful in Florida to: "To withhold information from a practitioner from whom the person seeks to obtain a controlled substance or a prescription for a controlled substance that the person making the request has received a controlled substance or a prescription for a controlled substance of like therapeutic use from another practitioner within the previous 30 days."

[TigersEye]

...since it seems clear many of the elements of doctor shopping exist.

Name those elements in detail. Provide sources.

I'm waiting.

[ClintonBeGone]

I'm waiting.

Did you see my post in #301?

[an amused spectator]

Some of us zeks were clever enough to figure out what the impeachment wars were about, and some, like ClintonBeGone & RS, were not.

The "rule of law" is in the eye of the manipulator. :-)

[ClintonBeGone]

The "rule of law" is in the eye of the manipulator. :-)

Some of you should be named Ostrich eye for keeping your heads in the sand and your eyes closed.

[TigersEye]

No, not before I reposted, I did not.

This only has four doctors on it over a six month period. Not many pain pills for that amount of time. Plus two of those must be the two doctors who share a practice in a clinic which is the equivalent of one practice. All records are shared. Is one his ear surgeon? I have no doubt Rush flew to CA, tricked a surgeon into believing he was deaf and got a choclear implant in order to get some pain pills.

If this is evidence of "doctor shopping" then tens of millions of Americans are guilty too. Why is the the one and only case ever where prosecutors used a warrant instead of a subpoena to get medical records?

[ClintonBeGone]

Let me translate for the disabled. In Florida, it is illegal to:
Withhold information from you doctor from whom you seeks to obtain a prescription for a drug, where;
You have received a prescription for a drug of like therapeutic use from another practitioner, and;
You received that prescription within the previous 30 days.
Now that wasn't too difficult, was it? It's called learning to read a statute. Oh, and the source is still Florida Statute 893.13(7)(a)(8).

[ClintonBeGone]

No, not before I reposted, I did not.

Sorry, I thought you were being cute.

[TigersEye]

Right. He got a choclear implant in order to get pain pills. Your head is in a much darker place than the sand.

[ClintonBeGone]

This only has four doctors on it over a six month period. Not many pain pills for that amount of time. Plus two of those must be the two doctors who share a practice in a clinic which is the equivalent of one practice.

That statute says practitioner. I'm not saying that the charges are pretty lame and unwarranted, but technically he's violated the law if he didn't tell his doctors about the other prescriptions. This med list is for just one pharmacy near his house. There may be more, including the CA doctors.

[ClintonBeGone]

Right. He got a choclear implant in order to get pain pills. Your head is in a much darker place than the sand.

What does his implant have to do with anything? He got the drugs. He got the drugs from different doctors. He got them within 30 days of each other. The only question is whether he told them or not. I think you know as well as I do the answer to that question is probably no.

[TigersEye]

There may be more, including the CA doctors.

They have already seized all of his med. records with a warrant. Did they only leak part of them to the press? There may be life on Mars too, loser.

[an amused spectator]

Some of you should be named Ostrich eye for keeping your heads in the sand and your eyes closed.

Yes, you should. Taken a gander at the Florida felony statutes sometime, Ostrich, and see exactly how easy it is for a prosecutor with an agenda and an unlimited budget to go after people like you, and me, and your family & friends.

We're not even talking misdemeanors, either.

Everybody's guilty, zekkie - they just haven't been prosecuted yet. :-)

[TigersEye]

I think you know as well as I do the answer to that question is probably no.

I'll leave the assumptions and wild speculations to you.

The only question is whether he told them or not.

Wrong. There is another question. Why haven't they filed charges if "doctor shopping" is so obviously evident? They've seen all of his records. (Along with half of south Florida.)

[ClintonBeGone]

Wrong. There is another question. Why haven't they filed charges if "doctor shopping" is so obviously evident? They've seen all of his records. (Along with half of south Florida.)

Is that what you want? If the records show that Rush informed his doctors of the other scripts, he's off the hook. If he didn't, he's committed a felony. Its time people learned about prosecutorial discretion. It's a VERY powerful tool the other side has and the voters in that county (or whoever elects or appoints the prosecutor) have given it to this guy. Its up to him to use his judgment to bring charges. The prosecutor might argue convicting Rush will do more to stop the practice than convicting 100 no names. But its because of this prosecutorial discretion I think it was foolish for Landmark to rattle this cage. Its come back and soured the relationship with the defense and in the end will hurt Rush more.

[ClintonBeGone]

Yes, you should. Taken a gander at the Florida felony statutes sometime, Ostrich, and see exactly how easy it is for a prosecutor with an agenda and an unlimited budget to go after people like you, and me, and your family & friends.

Its like that everywhere. If you don't want to fall into that web, don't break the law. Its as simple as that. I suspect Rush broke the law and he's not going to find many breaks with this prosecutor.

[unsycophant]

What law do you mean? I'm not aware of any law that requires citizens to uphold a bunch of government employees who are conspiring to get rid of a perceived political opponent by violating the very laws they're required (you know--sworn!)to uphold.

Limbaugh was addicted--big deal. Our enemies think they'll damage us all by destroying him, using whatever unethical illegal means they can use.... Big deal.

Rush's drug dealer walked away with immunity from prosecution, $500,000 dollars in cash--and a book deal. Ironic.

[TigersEye]

If you think they're pushing this case in order to discourage "doctor shopping" or drug use in general you really have your head in the sand.

[ClintonBeGone]

What law do you mean?

Florida Statute 893.13(7)(a)(8) which is the doctor shopping statute; and Florida Statute 119.011(1),et al, the public records statute.

[ClintonBeGone]

If you think they're pushing this case in order to discourage "doctor shopping" or drug use in general you really have your head in the sand.

Did I say that? Of course I didn't. On this we agree, its more political than anything. But gee, what do you say when Rush gave them the rope to hang him and his friends Levin, et al, helped tie one end to the tree?