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

Skip to comments.

Pill Sham
Reason ^ | April 23, 2004 | Jacob Sullum

Posted on 04/23/2004 12:29:20 PM PDT by neverdem

[home] [about] [search] [subscribe] [advertise]

Subscribe to
Reason


Reason Online [site navigation ...]






Jacob Sullum's
Syndicated Column

Pill Sham (4/23)

Hair Net (4/16)

Abetting Betting (4/9)

Earlier Columns





April 23, 2004

Pill Sham

A man seeking pain relief gets 25 years for drug trafficking

-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

Here's a bit of legal information that may interest Rush Limbaugh: Under Florida law, illegally obtaining more than 28 grams of painkillers containing the narcotic oxycodone—a threshold exceeded by a single 60-pill Percocet prescription—automatically makes you the worst sort of drug trafficker, even if you never sold a single pill. Even if, like Richard Paey, you were using the drugs to relieve severe chronic pain.

Although prosecutors admitted Paey was not a drug trafficker, on April 16 he received a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for drug trafficking. That jaw-dropping outcome illustrates two sadly familiar side effects of the war on drugs: the injustice caused by mandatory minimum sentences and the suffering caused by the government's interference with pain treatment.

Paey, a 45-year-old father of three, is disabled as a result of a 1985 car accident, failed back surgery, and multiple sclerosis. Today, as he sits in jail in his wheelchair, a subdermal pump delivers a steady, programmed dose of morphine to his spine. But for years he treated his pain with Percocet, Lortab (a painkiller containing the narcotic hydrocodone), and Valium prescribed by his doctor in New Jersey, Steven Nurkiewicz.

When Paey and his family moved to Florida in 1994, he had trouble finding a new doctor. Because he had developed tolerance to the pain medication, he needed high doses, and because he was not on the verge of death, he needed them indefinitely. As many people who suffer from chronic pain can testify, both of those factors make doctors nervous, since they know the government is looking over their shoulders while they write prescriptions.

Unable to find a local physician who was comfortable taking him on as a patient, Paey used undated prescription forms from Nurkiewicz's office to obtain painkillers in Florida. Paey says Nurkiewicz authorized these prescriptions, which the doctor (who could face legal trouble of his own) denies.

The Pasco County Sheriff's Office began investigating Paey in late 1996 after receiving calls from suspicious pharmacists. Detectives tracked Paey as he filled prescriptions for 1,200 pills from January 1997 until his arrest that March.

At first investigators assumed Paey must be selling the pills, since they thought the amounts were too large for him to consume on his own. But the police never found any evidence of that, and two years after his arrest prosecutors offered him a deal: If he pleaded guilty to attempted trafficking, he would receive eight years of probation, including three years of house arrest.

Paey initially agreed but then had second thoughts. His wife, Linda, says he worried that he could go to prison if he was accused of violating his probation. More fundamentally, he did not want to identify himself as a criminal when he believed he had done nothing wrong. He has since turned down other plea deals involving prison time.

Meanwhile, prosecutors have pursued Paey in three trials. The first ended in a mistrial; the second resulted in a conviction that the judge threw out because of a procedural error; and the third, which ended last month, produced guilty verdicts on 15 charges of drug trafficking, obtaining a controlled substance by fraud, and possession of a controlled substance.

A juror later told the St. Petersburg Times he did not really think Paey was guilty of trafficking, since the prosecution made it clear from the outset that he didn't sell any pills. The juror said he voted guilty to avoid being the lone holdout. He suggested that other jurors might have voted differently if the foreman had not assured them Paey would get probation.

The prosecutors, who finally obtained the draconian sentence that even they concede Paey does not deserve, say it's his fault for insisting on his innocence. "It's unfortunate that anyone has to go to prison, but he's got no one to blame but Richard Paey," Assistant State Attorney Mike Halkitis told the St. Petersburg Times. "All we wanted to do was get him help."

Paey's real crime, it seems, is not drug trafficking but ingratitude. "My husband was so adamant, and so strongly defending this from the very beginning, that it might have annoyed them," says Linda Paey. "They were extremely upset that he would not accept a plea bargain. They felt that anyone who had any common sense would....But he didn't want to say he was guilty of something he didn't do."

-------------------------------------

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason and the author of Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use (Tarcher/Putnam).


© Copyright 2004 by Creators Syndicate Inc.

 

 




Site Meter


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: drugtrafficing; drugwar; mandatoryminimum; pleabargain; reason; rush; warondrugs; wod; wodlist
As for the prosecutors, I'm reminded of "We're from the government, and we're here to help you." And that juror who was afraid of being a holdout, but didn't believe Paey was guilty of drug trafficing, what integrity and self-esteem!
1 posted on 04/23/2004 12:29:22 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fourdeuce82d; Travis McGee; El Gato; JudyB1938; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE; lepton; ...
PING
2 posted on 04/23/2004 12:30:14 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
:sigh: more happy news from the WOD front
3 posted on 04/23/2004 12:35:04 PM PDT by cyborg (The 9-11 commission members have penis envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
More fundamentally, he did not want to identify himself as a criminal when he believed he had done nothing wrong.

Note: if you've broken the law and get a deal that offers no jail time, take it.

4 posted on 04/23/2004 12:48:54 PM PDT by FormerLib (Feja e shqiptarit eshte terorizm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Note: if you've broken the law and get a deal that offers no jail time, take it.

There was a time when Rush Limbaugh might have believed that too.

5 posted on 04/23/2004 1:06:18 PM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Although prosecutors admitted Paey was not a drug trafficker, on April 16 he received a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for drug trafficking.

I suspect you think this is fine, good and well.

After all, he shouldn't have been violating the drug laws, right?

< /sarcasm>

6 posted on 04/23/2004 1:07:34 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (...and Freedom tastes of Reality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Although prosecutors admitted Paey was not a drug trafficker, on April 16 he received a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for drug trafficking.

Something is missing from this story. He wasn't charged with drug trafficking, so why did he get sentensed for drug trafficking. He apparently got the drugs illegally and had possession of them, but that is different than drug trafficking. I just don't get this story. Something does not make sense.

7 posted on 04/23/2004 1:21:31 PM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
I may get flamed for this, but .... this kind of story really irks me.

Why didn't the cops or whomever was investigating this guy bother to interview his doctors for verification of this man's medical condition prior to raking this man over the coals?

Why aren't the cops, or whomever is responsible for this idiocy, being admonished for wasting tax dollars to convict someone who was harmless just because he refused to play their legalese games?

I take it when a cop gets chronically injured, he takes no pain killers, and if he/she does, they are under immediate investigation for being drug pushers when a pharmacy calls downtown to let them know someone is picking up their regular scrip refill?

Why would not the pharmacy call the doctor who perscribed the pills to get verification of this man's conditon and persctription rather than the cops?

Why should any man admit guilt when he believes he is innocent, wrongly accused, and is not guilty?

Why would a juror believe the potential lies of a jury foreman and not vote based on a rationally correct decision?

Based on this legal charade, who is to say that if the guy pled guilty that he wouldn't be convicted anyway?

The bottom line is, this is what happens when officers get a TV cop mentality based on an erroneous lead. It's easier to hogtie an invalid than it is to investigate real criminals. If the drug cops in Florida, or anywhere else, really want to bust "pushers," they should first start with the porn-prozac-viagra-pain killer spammers who are constantly pushing something uninvited via everybody's email.


8 posted on 04/23/2004 2:20:02 PM PDT by tomball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tomball
The WOD is a failure.

Heroin and cocaine on the street is purer and cheaper than EVER. Statistics directly from DEA! This means only one thing: they can't stop the flow. Supply and demand dictate price and purity.

They've got to look like they are doing SOMETHING with all the tax money sent their way, so they go after the easy ones like this poor guy.

I don't use, or advocate the use of illegal drugs, but the whole police state WOD is a sham.
9 posted on 04/23/2004 4:44:21 PM PDT by EEDUDE (Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
Something does not make sense.

WOD does not make sense.

10 posted on 04/23/2004 9:59:52 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (...and Freedom tastes of Reality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: *Wod_list; Quick1; jmc813; headsonpikes; bassmaner; philman_36; steve-b; steve50; ...
ping
11 posted on 04/25/2004 1:27:08 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
Better watch out for those prescription narcotics! They're eeeeevil.
12 posted on 04/25/2004 1:47:28 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
At least now we know why Rush is fighting tooth and nail. 25 years mandatory minimum?!?!
13 posted on 04/26/2004 5:14:54 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
It serves him right. /pro-wod self righteousness
14 posted on 04/26/2004 6:19:45 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: EEDUDE
They've got to look like they are doing SOMETHING with all the tax money sent their way, so they go after the easy ones like this poor guy.

I hope this War On Sick People finally opens the public's eyes to what a travesty the WOD is.

15 posted on 04/26/2004 8:14:25 AM PDT by The kings dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RS
ping
16 posted on 05/09/2004 4:17:58 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
From http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0893/SEC135.HTM&Title=->2003->Ch0893->Section%20135

"(c)1. Any person who knowingly sells, purchases, manufactures, delivers, or brings into this state, or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of, 4 grams or more of any morphine, opium, oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, or any salt,"

4 grams is over 500 pills at one time ( 7.5 mg per ) - assuming Rush was gobbling down his pills, his Doctor-shopping records do not show him in possession of that many at one time.

.... BUT.... If he HAD been buying the drugs from his maid in the quantities that she said he did, he WOULD fall under that law.
17 posted on 05/09/2004 8:42:33 PM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

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