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.

[longtermmemmory]

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.

[longtermmemmory]

soliciting a confession in the form of a guilty plea is investigatory.

The FL will change the rule to clarify the BS game.

[longtermmemmory]

should have been FL Bar

[bvw]

"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.

[an amused spectator]

You are a whole audience?

He must be, because no one else was paying attention. ;-)

[Edit35]

"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.

[an amused spectator]

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.

[RS]

"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 ?

[RS]

"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 ? )

[ClintonBeGone]

You are a whole audience?

Nope. Consider me one hand clapping.

[ClintonBeGone]

There is no need to respect prosecutorial discretion because this case exposes it as completly subjective.

Isn't discretion USUALLY subjective?

[longtermmemmory]

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.

[RS]

"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.

[longtermmemmory]

a plea of guilty is a confession. duh.

[RS]

"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

[longtermmemmory]

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.

[RS]

"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.

[madison10]

...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. ;)

[an amused spectator]

**grin**

[madison10]

...of course there are WAYS you could know, but I won't go there. Have a great evening!