Skip to comments.
Limbaugh's pill use not extraordinary, lawyer says
Miami Herald ^
| Jan. 26, 2004
| DANIEL de VISE
Posted on 01/26/2004 4:48:57 PM PST by AlwaysLurking
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460, 461-480, 481-500, 501-505 next last
To: ClintonBeGone
No, the prosecutor may not have to prosecute. But the prosecutor is obligated to be consitent.
There is no need to respect prosecutorial discretion because this case exposes it as completly subjective. The extra investigators, the extra resources, the extra effort. The prosecutor's zeal in this matter has discredited all thier efforts.
Discretion is also tempered with politics. A DUI arrest will be charged and tried in the absense of a plea. Never dropped. Prosecutors have desire to loose a poor case to a jury than to release anyone and risk political fallout.
The present situation is a charge by information not by arrest. Roy Black's public statements of legitimate reason for the pills suggests that he has an expert or two lined up to testify about the pill use, it suggests the doctors knew of each other.
Rush has not given anything to date. Remember, we have no controlled purchases by the police. Organizing a controlled purchase of a the alleged user is standard. If they had substantive proof of doctor shopping they would have arrested rush at the time his perscription was filled. They would have had a search of his home and confiscated the stockpile of pills. They have nothng. they had nothing. It is not groupies, it is knowing how the FL system works and how palm beach works specifically.
To: RS
soliciting a confession in the form of a guilty plea is investigatory.
The FL will change the rule to clarify the BS game.
To: longtermmemmory
should have been FL Bar
To: ClintonBeGone
"
to the audience"
You are a whole audience? Well then, my last post was addressed perfectly facing your seat. Evidently you are not in it.
484
posted on
01/28/2004 10:14:04 AM PST
by
bvw
To: bvw
You are a whole audience? He must be, because no one else was paying attention. ;-)
To: ClintonBeGone
"So, you believe that Rush committed a crime?"The only crime is in your mind, which is where I attempted to place my written thought.
However, I found it a backwards place, one full of maligned persecution, and I immediately left.
486
posted on
01/28/2004 10:30:13 AM PST
by
Edit35
To: dyno35
Justice Tries to Give Herself a Black Eye The Intrepid NY Prosecutors go after that MENACE TO SOCIETY, Martha Stewart
Wonder what IMPORTANT cases Barry "Lumbergh" Krischner is passing up this week? :-)
I don't hold any brief for Martha Stewart, liberal that she is, but she's getting railroaded by a like-minded crowd up in New York.
To: longtermmemmory
"It is like being a littel pregnant. You either have a deal or not. No deal=no plea. Happens every day."
OK have it your way ... If it was never a plea deal proposal then why is there a problem releasing it ?
488
posted on
01/28/2004 12:26:13 PM PST
by
RS
(Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
To: longtermmemmory; ClintonBeGone
"If they had substantive proof of doctor shopping they would have arrested rush at the time his perscription was filled."
Time line problem again - they didn't even look at his records until after the Enquirer article hit, and Rush purchase records ended just days before it hit.
( HHmmm?
Wonder if Rush was given a headsup to the Enquirer article ?
Wonder what his purchase records look like AFTER it hit, before he went to rehab ? )
489
posted on
01/28/2004 1:09:38 PM PST
by
RS
(Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
To: bvw
You are a whole audience?
Nope. Consider me one hand clapping.
490
posted on
01/28/2004 2:12:29 PM PST
by
ClintonBeGone
(Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.)
To: longtermmemmory; RS
There is no need to respect prosecutorial discretion because this case exposes it as completly subjective.
Isn't discretion USUALLY subjective?
491
posted on
01/28/2004 2:15:38 PM PST
by
ClintonBeGone
(Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.)
To: RS
Because there is no case, Settlements are generally held to be highly confidential communications.
It would have come out at the close of the case in time.
It also is intended to produce a confession. It is thus probative. It is just plain wrong. Ethically and morally.
To: longtermmemmory
"It also is intended to produce a confession. It is thus probative. It is just plain wrong. Ethically and morally."
Shoot - there are a lot of laws that I feel the same way about, and would like to change.
But Blacks letter has nothing about any confession related to the investigation.
493
posted on
01/28/2004 5:28:47 PM PST
by
RS
(Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
To: RS
a plea of guilty is a confession. duh.
To: longtermmemmory
"a plea of guilty is a confession. duh."
Slow down my friend - In BLACKS letter - the first one, where he wants everything to go away and Rush to stay in his current rehab program - He says NOTHING about Rush being guilty of anything regarding Doctor-shopping -
This one...
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/rushletters1.html
495
posted on
01/28/2004 6:02:22 PM PST
by
RS
(Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
To: RS
Legally the communications are a set. To release one requires the release of the other.
Blacks is also the letter which is clearly intended as a confidential communication. How many other cases are there which this would be a detriment.
How about defendants who turn witness. Usually some communication is required to show what they will be able to testify to. If that letter is public, then opposing defense attorneys will be able to find out more information.
If anything, Roy Blacks letter shows what Rush would be willing to do in response to the investigation.
You don't want to listen to what anyone says, either you are Al Franken, being paid to be here, or just plain obtuse.
To: longtermmemmory
"Legally the communications are a set. To release one requires the release of the other. "
... and you found this where ?
I have not seen the suposed "third letter" ( I believe you mentioned ) that would seem to be a part of this "set", or the records of the phone call that Black says he made that resulted in the first letter that should be a part of this "set".
"If anything, Roy Blacks letter shows what Rush would be willing to do in response to the investigation. "
... and what he was "willing to do" was exactly what he had been doing !
Read it again... "require him to CONTINUE his addiction treatment"...
.... and what conversely? ...if they don't drop the investigation he'll start taking drugs again ?
He was admitting NOTHING and willing to give up NOTHING - it was an offer of NOTHING.
497
posted on
01/28/2004 6:48:47 PM PST
by
RS
(Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
To: an amused spectator
...And you are reading a list that was gotten illegally. How do you know "the List" is even legit?
I for one, don't care for your crappy retort. ;)
To: madison10
**grin**
To: an amused spectator
...of course there are WAYS you could know, but I won't go there. Have a great evening!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460, 461-480, 481-500, 501-505 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson