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

Skip to comments.

Prosecutor argues seizure of Rush Limbaugh's medical records fair
South Florid Sun-Sentinel / AP ^ | February 14 2005, 4:00 PM EST | Jill Barton

Posted on 02/14/2005 1:34:15 PM PST by rface

WEST PALM BEACH -- The prosecutor investigating whether Rush Limbaugh illegally purchased prescription painkillers told the Florida Supreme Court on Monday that investigators should be allowed to review the conservative radio commentator's medical records.

Assistant State Attorney James Martz said Limbaugh's argument that he should have been notified before the records were seized by investigators is equivalent to saying ``that law enforcement is never to be trusted.''

``Then search warrants should never be issued and law enforcement should never be permitted to investigate criminal activity for fear that they will abuse the power granted,'' Martz wrote in a brief filed with the Florida Supreme Court. ``Such reasoning would eviscerate law enforcement's ability to protect the public and enforce the law.''

Martz added that the 4th District Court of Appeal's ruling, which said Limbaugh's privacy rights were not violated when the records were seized in 2003, should be upheld.

``Privacy rights cannot operate as an impenetrable shield to conceal, camouflage, or secrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing,'' Martz wrote.

Limbaugh and his attorney, Roy Black, had no comment on Monday.

(Excerpt) Read more at sun-sentinel.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: hipa; limbaugh; medicalprivacy; medicalrecords; politicalhit; privacy; rush; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-270 next last
To: RushCrush
It doesn't matter what Rush thinks! It matters what WE think! :)

I know. I was using a bit of sarcasm. We determine whether he continues or not. And I don't see too many people jumping ship. How about you?

41 posted on 02/14/2005 2:02:53 PM PST by writer33 ("In Defense of Liberty," a political thriller, being released in March)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: writer33

I'm not jumping! he's the only one I learn anything from. I tell that to others as well.

Let me put it this way, I HATE football, yet I can happily listen to Rush talk about football.


42 posted on 02/14/2005 2:04:13 PM PST by RushCrush (If it takes a bloodbath, let's get it over with. No more appeasement. - Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

This is why he matters and why the left hates him so:



http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1329283/posts


43 posted on 02/14/2005 2:04:43 PM PST by writer33 ("In Defense of Liberty," a political thriller, being released in March)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rface; RS
``Privacy rights cannot operate as an impenetrable shield to conceal, camouflage, or secrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing,'' Martz wrote. Limbaugh and his attorney, Roy Black, had no comment on Monday.

Bump

44 posted on 02/14/2005 2:05:38 PM PST by ClintonBeGone (In politics, sometimes it's OK for even a Wolverine to root for a Buckeye win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sgt_Schultze

The interesting thing about this prosecutors statement is that he wants Rush to throw away his rights, just so he can find evidence he can use against him.

His 'privacy' statement is very telling in that, if he were prosecuting Al Capone during the prohibition years, he would have found out that 'privacy' triumphs over 'states rights'.

I can be the worst criminal in the world, but unless you have 'hard facts' based on solid evidence, my 'rights' will win out everytime.


45 posted on 02/14/2005 2:05:49 PM PST by Bigh4u2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RushCrush
Let me put it this way, I HATE football, yet I can happily listen to Rush talk about football.

Now you've completely lost my respect. :) Hehehehe! I'm only kidding!

And you're right on a serious note.

46 posted on 02/14/2005 2:06:23 PM PST by writer33 ("In Defense of Liberty," a political thriller, being released in March)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: CitizenHelper
Rush might have to swallow the bitter pill of irony.

Why do you say that? Rush has never been a JBT fanboy, unlike the Drug War cherleaders that sometimes show up here.

47 posted on 02/14/2005 2:06:45 PM PST by eno_ (Freedom Lite, it's almost worth defending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota
That's what I understood. That the prosecutors deliberately circumvented the statutory procedure to obtain the records before Rush or his lawyer knew about it.
48 posted on 02/14/2005 2:06:53 PM PST by colorado tanker (The People Have Spoken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota; RS
And your evidence that he was buying drugs illegally is what?

The list of drugs and the dates they were purchased was attached to the affidavit for the search warrant. The amounts and dates overlap and is prima facia evidence of doctor shopping, a crime under florida law.

49 posted on 02/14/2005 2:07:14 PM PST by ClintonBeGone (In politics, sometimes it's OK for even a Wolverine to root for a Buckeye win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Bigh4u2
The interesting thing about this prosecutors statement is that he wants Rush to throw away his rights, just so he can find evidence he can use against him.

Um, the prosecutor already found the evidence he needs, Rush and Roy Black are trying to keep it out of Rush's criminal trial.

50 posted on 02/14/2005 2:08:27 PM PST by ClintonBeGone (In politics, sometimes it's OK for even a Wolverine to root for a Buckeye win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: rface

On a side note...
Rush said that one thing they did in rehab was to prescribe Vioxx for his pain. Now that it's off the market I wonder what he's using.



51 posted on 02/14/2005 2:09:35 PM PST by Lx (Tuesday is Soylent green day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LauraleeBraswell

This is what 'liberalism' has come to these days for its stauchest adherents.

These Liberals need to take a good hard look at themselves...they have morphed into everything they once professed to hate.


52 posted on 02/14/2005 2:10:04 PM PST by Dat Mon (will work for clever tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: writer33

I don't think the issues are the same at all. The special privileges are generally creatures of state statutory or common law. In Rush's case, I believe the prosecutors did not follow the statutory notice requirements, and the issue is whether this procedure means anything.

In Roe, I do not think that there was a comparible issue involved. The court was looking at a different kind of privacy rights all together.


53 posted on 02/14/2005 2:10:09 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: eno_

I say that only becasue Rush has been so intolerant of drug addicts and he became one himself....ironic, yes?


54 posted on 02/14/2005 2:10:46 PM PST by CitizenHelper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: writer33

Hey, i'm a chick. We can get a pass on the football thing, right?

or should i say i'm a 'babe'?


55 posted on 02/14/2005 2:11:17 PM PST by RushCrush (If it takes a bloodbath, let's get it over with. No more appeasement. - Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone

It is not proven because the prosecution submits an affidavit. The defense gets to have an opportunity to explain the situation, including to deny athe allegations in the document supporting the warrant. The police offer is not the fact finder, the court is, after a contested hearing.


56 posted on 02/14/2005 2:11:57 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: camle
"Assistant State Attorney James Martz said Limbaugh's argument that he should have been notified before the records were seized by investigators is equivalent to saying ``that law enforcement is never to be trusted.''

In following this case, one of the things that has come out is that if law enforcement officials want medical records under Florida Law, they have to subpoena them. It is a requirement of Florida Law - not a requirement of Rush Limbaugh. Thus, the ASA's point is not valid. If they violated a statutory requirement to get the medical records, if they didn't follow black letter law, it is correct in this matter to assume that law enforcement was not to be trusted.

There must have been some legislative reason for the lawmakers to put this particular requirement into law regarding medical records. Perhaps, they too, have medical records, and would like to have a chance to have any such records sealed before people went rummaging through them before they could challenge the seizure in court. And remember, Limbaugh probably did not possess the records anyway, they were possessed by his doctors. There was little danger of the records being hidden or destroyed. Which, by the way, further erodes any given argument of the ASA about trust.

57 posted on 02/14/2005 2:12:29 PM PST by Enterprise ("Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moonlight" - Islam compels you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone

"Um, the prosecutor already found the evidence he needs,"

How so?

By looking at records they had to legal authority to do?

Or by the fact that Rush had two doctors who prescribed the same drugs?

How is that 'evidence of doctor shopping'?


If both doctors prescribed the drugs for differing symptoms, the it isn't.

I have two doctors who prescribe 'inhalers' that I have to use.

One is Atrovent, and the other it Albuterol.

Does that mean I am 'doctor' shopping to find relief?

Not likely.


58 posted on 02/14/2005 2:13:01 PM PST by Bigh4u2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: WindOracle
Doctor shopping in Florida was made a crime as a means to discourage the terrible scourge of illegal drug use in that state.

As for Rush, hiring Roy Black was his second error of judgement. The first being his abuse of painkillers.

59 posted on 02/14/2005 2:15:24 PM PST by OldFriend (America's glory is not dominion, but liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: WindOracle

Agree - great point!


60 posted on 02/14/2005 2:15:27 PM PST by Enterprise ("Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moonlight" - Islam compels you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-270 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