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

Skip to comments.

Limbaugh and Black get the Goods on Brischer
The Rush Limbaugh Website ^ | 1-26-04 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 01/26/2004 9:17:19 PM PST by Angelica411

Caller's office received a public records request in Rush Limbaugh case. File includes letters from atty in SAO to Roy Black, defense counsel. Checked with AG's office and AG says the files are public records except there are two letters which include plea negotiations which are not normally to be revealed so may or may not be public record.

...

All info in file is confidential as to his client, the state, under 4-1.6.

(Excerpt) Read more at rushlimbaugh.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: krischer; limbaugh; loveyourush; rush
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-256 next last
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
I remember hearing about a study done at a local hospital here in San Diego. They had a section of the hospital wired to allow patients to medicate themselves.

Astonishingly, the patients did a better job of maintaining a certain level of medication. As a rule, they did not over medicate .. and most of them under medicated. The common result was most were happier not to be over drugged and most were willing to put up with a little more pain. The most common response was: "If the pain started to get too bad, I could just press the button and get instant relief".
21 posted on 01/26/2004 10:49:04 PM PST by CyberAnt ("America is the GREATEST NATION on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
"these charges"

What charges ..?? Rush has not been charged with anything. The reason Rush hasn't been charged is because there is nothing to charge him with. The SA even admitted they wanted Rush's medical records because "they thought he had committed a crime". If they don't have other evidence than the medical records .. then they're fishing!
22 posted on 01/26/2004 10:55:37 PM PST by CyberAnt ("America is the GREATEST NATION on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator; SAJ; LisaMalia
So there are no charges? Thanks for clearing this up. Must have been me, but I thought I heard the word "charged" hundreds of times on the radio and TV. If he isn't charged, I guess Rush is only a person of interest. Maybe Marta did it.

If it was me or you, we would have already experienced life in an orange jumpsuit, been perp-walked, and released from county jail, pending a court date.

23 posted on 01/26/2004 10:56:19 PM PST by My Dog Likes Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: big ern
See the link in post #7. At that link is a lot of other links which give a lot of info.

The "letter" is in reference to a letter from the FL AG's office indicating they did not approve the SA releasing the confidential memos between the SA and Rush's attorney. You see .. the SA claimed they had prior approval from the FL AG to release the documents .. and according to the FL AG - the SA WAS LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH.
24 posted on 01/26/2004 11:01:16 PM PST by CyberAnt ("America is the GREATEST NATION on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
Barbara Streisand
25 posted on 01/26/2004 11:03:15 PM PST by hobson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Angelica411
My opinion of the file, you linked, is different.
IMO, the key issue is wether the two documents
in question are 'public records'.
The ethics advice seemed to be ...that those two docs
are confidential, but IF they are 'public documents',
then public access laws trump confidentiality, but we don't give advice on those issues,
so you should consult a court.

26 posted on 01/26/2004 11:07:04 PM PST by greasepaint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
So there are no charges? Thanks for clearing this up. Must have been me, but I thought I heard the word "charged" hundreds of times on the radio and TV.

It sounds as though your problem is that your education has all been from the TV. "Charged" is a technical legal term that means something. "Charged" isn't something that a reporter says, or comes from a leak. If you are "charged" with a crime, it means you go to court!

.If he isn't charged, I guess Rush is only a person of interest. Maybe Marta did it. .

You either watch too much TV or you are a troll.

If it was me or you, we would have already experienced life in an orange jumpsuit, been perp-walked, and released from county jail, pending a court date.

More horse cr*p. If it was you or me, nothing would happen except POSSIBLY court mandated drug rehab. And even that's a stretch.

27 posted on 01/26/2004 11:09:12 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
PS - It's a good thing your dog likes you...
28 posted on 01/26/2004 11:10:16 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
If he gets me on the jury I think he is inocent.
29 posted on 01/26/2004 11:11:28 PM PST by southland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
They didn't disbar x42 for lying to us....
30 posted on 01/26/2004 11:13:43 PM PST by southland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
If it was me or you, we would have already experienced life in an orange jumpsuit

I believe that is wrong. Rush is the first case I'm aware of in the US where they're going after a former user of prescription drugs. The goal has always been to get the person treatment more than punish (for 1st time offenders at least), and I challenge you to find a case in the US where a prosecuter has gone after someone who just went through treatment. Not to mention all the privacy violations and fishing they're doing by seizing his medical records.

31 posted on 01/26/2004 11:14:31 PM PST by SirAllen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: southland
Yes they did! He didn't totally lose his license (which is what I wanted), but it was suspended for 5 years.
32 posted on 01/26/2004 11:17:16 PM PST by CyberAnt ("America is the GREATEST NATION on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: southland
I beleive Clinton WAS disbarred in Arkansas.
33 posted on 01/26/2004 11:17:39 PM PST by Sabretooth (I'm not SabERtooth, Im SabREtooth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
"I would like to thank the Academy..." :-)
34 posted on 01/26/2004 11:18:13 PM PST by My Dog Likes Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: southland
My little dog loves me!

We won't talk about her missing heartworm pills...
35 posted on 01/26/2004 11:21:27 PM PST by My Dog Likes Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Angelica411
The truth shall set you free.
36 posted on 01/26/2004 11:24:18 PM PST by i get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Actually, most likely a reprimand or suspension. However, the question is whether the impropriety is enough to remove him from office. He is not just a lawyer he is a public official the standards of compliance are much much higher.

Now if he has an addiction problem, he could participate in the FL Bar's in house drug diversion program sponsored by the bar. Lawyers who have such addictions can participate and upon completion of the program, are not disciplined.
37 posted on 01/26/2004 11:27:23 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SirAllen
I agree that digging through medical records, in this case, is excessive.

But think of the Elvis example for a moment. His doctor wrote him script after script of meds for years. That showed neglect and abuse of his medical license. But they were scripts.

In the case of Rush, it seems he went under the table and simply acquired the drugs in that magical way that only rich people demand. When he ran out of doctors, he turned to his house servant. You see, folks, there is a point where "prescription drugs" become "illegal narcotics." I think Rush crossed that point.

Put another way, if I am prescribed Valium or Xanax by my doctor and pick them up at the pharmacy, that's fine. BUT, if I buy a baggie full of same on a street corner, that's illegal. Orange jumpsuit time.







38 posted on 01/26/2004 11:36:12 PM PST by My Dog Likes Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: My Dog Likes Me
Perscription drugs never become illegal. The only become "obtained illegally".

If the SA had proof there would have been charges by now.
39 posted on 01/26/2004 11:40:33 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
I guess you're right. My bad.

40 posted on 01/27/2004 12:03:00 AM PST by My Dog Likes Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-256 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