Posted on 04/29/2006 6:51:24 PM PDT by Imgr8t
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - After three years under suspicion, Rush Limbaugh can finally put behind him the investigation that exposed the conservative commentator's own drug problems, thrusting him into the spotlight for the very things he derided in others.
None of it affected his ratings for a radio talk show that airs weekdays on nearly 600 stations and draws about 20 million listeners a week, Limbaugh spokesman Tony Knight said.
"This investigation didn't have any impact on his audience or on his advertising," Knight said Saturday, a day after defense attorneys announced a deal with prosecutors. A single prescription fraud charge will be dismissed after 18 months if Limbaugh stays drug free and doesn't violate any laws.
Prosecutors launched their investigation in 2003 after Limbaugh's housekeeper alleged he abused OxyContin and other painkillers. He entered a five-week rehabilitation program and blamed his addiction on severe back pain.
Prosecutors seized Limbaugh's medical records after learning that he received about 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months.
The investigation was held up as prosecutors and Black battled in court over whether Limbaugh's constitutional right to privacy was violated when the records were seized, but the state prevailed.
Is the deal a victory for Limbaugh?
"This is a dismissal of the charge ... representing, in affect, a win for the defense," said Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. attorney and prominent Miami defense lawyer.
"Having said that, I wouldn't call this case a major defeat for the prosecution. They fought and won an important legal point in establishing that you can use a search warrant in Florida to secure medical records," Coffey added. "That's an important precedent for prosecutors around the state. This could be the rare situation where both sides made a deal and can walk away feeling some satisfaction."
The deal also allows Limbaugh "to save face," said Michael Seigel, a University of Florida law professor and former federal prosecutor.
"Given the high profile nature of this, it's an indication to me that if Rush Limbaugh thought he could win the case and be vindicated, he would go to trial," Seigel said. "He's not asking for his day in court."
The 55-year-old commentator surrendered Friday at the Palm Beach County jail on a warrant charging that in 2003, sought a prescription from a physician without revealing that he had received medications from another practitioner within 30 days. That charge, commonly referred to as doctor shopping, is a felony that could carry a sentence of up to 5 years in prison.
Limbaugh was booked, photographed and fingerprinted before being released on $3,000 bail. He has steadily maintained his innocence.
Black called the charge a formality to bring closure to the case, adding that Limbaugh has been drug free for 2 1/2 years.
A spokesman for the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office, Mike Edmondson, said the deal is typical in such cases.
"It's really standard for someone who is dealing with their addiction," Edmondson said Saturday. "It's a diversion specifically for first time offenders with no prior criminal history or arrest."
Before his own problems became public, Limbaugh had often argued that drug crimes deserve punishment, once saying on his short-lived television show in 1995 that users "ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."
The resolution of the case was applauded by Ethan Nadelmann, director of the nonprofit New York-based Drug Policy Alliance, which promotes treatment instead of incarceration for nonviolent drug offenders.
"Maybe this will soften up Rush Limbaugh a bit when he talks on the radio about the millions of other Americans who are suffering from drug problems," Nadelmann said.
Was that the purpose of this nonsense you creep?
Should we prosecute all the other "millions of other Americans suffering from drug problems" Mr. Nadelmann?
This kind of a-hole is a big problem in this country right now, they need to be taken down.
It's hard for me to understand how the prosecutor can claim victory when he spent three years investigating Limbaugh and came away with a deal that says that the charges against Limbaugh will be dropped in 18 months if he finishes detox treatment and pays $30,000. Limbaugh has probably paid his lawyer ten times that amount, and he's been going thru detox anyway. The prosecutor probably spent better than a million dollars of the taxpayers money chasing Limbaugh. And for what? Doctor shopping? Puleeeez!
This sounds like a gigantic amount when it's put that way, but it averages to only 11 per day. A person in acute chronic pain can easily take that many just for ordinary pain management.
Rush has softened up a little bit. I notice that when he makes his famous insult of calling someone a long haired, maggot infested, dope smoking, FM type, he now leaves out the phrase, dope smoking.
Just damn.
I think the Prosecutor is being allowed to save face.
I've listened to him for years and never have heard him go off on drug users. Most of the time he's talking politics, football and golf. Alas, I know I can't hear every word. I would not be surprised if he did. I'm not taking the AP's word for it.
If he did, does it make him look hypocritical? I'd say YEP. But his initial drug use was prescribed by a physician. Much different than shooting hiballs into your arm for fun.
I think anyone who has narcotics prescribed could potentially fall victim to drug abuse as he has. (See Adderall and ADD medicine for further info...)
My point of the article was not to bash or exonerate him. It was to point out the wording of the article and how it portrays a negative view of Limbaugh. It's blatant bias for a champion of a cause the writer doesn't believe in.
The prosecutor probably spent better than a million dollars of the taxpayers money chasing Limbaugh. And for what? Doctor shopping? Puleeeez!
------
This prosecutor is a liberal stooge, who was just trying to make a name for himself, at Rush's expense. There were/are probably 10,000 people in his jurisdiction that he could have pursued and obtained convictions against for the "crime" of doctor-shopping. But he was just trying to nail Rush. In my opinion, I would think George Soros and his filthy liberal ilk were putting alot of money this guys' way...
I agree. I remember after surgery, I was hooked to a PCA pump with morphine. I was pushing that button like crazy, many times with no effect.
The DR got worried about it, and switched me to Toradol. Good stuff, but nothing like morphine or versed. I also had another at-home pain killer, but man that stuff made me lose my mind. I couldn't tell what world I was in. I can't remember the name, but I quit taking it. ICK.
So, after proofreading this post, does this make me a drug abuser?? LOL
You're right. Three years later they reached the settlement that should have been reached the day Limbaugh left rehab.
In the words of another famous radio talk show host:"HOLY CRAP!"
Thats over 300 PER DAY. Rush had a serious problem. I hope he's done with it.
6 months * 30 days each = 180
2000 pain killers / 180 days = 11.1111 repeating.
Fuzzy math?
In hindsight... maybe that should read, "four different doctors"...
Err, your sixth grade math teacher is on the line. And she's not pleased.
LOL! That's gonna leave a mark.
Is this a lot for someone in chronic pain? NO. Was he in chronic pain? WE DO NOT KNOW. Was he addicted? PROBABLY YES. Was he doctor shopping? PROBABLY. Is he clean and straight today? FOR SURE! Did the prosecutor go after Rush much more aggressively than he would have done against some other perp that had no record and it was a victimless crime? WITHOUT ANY DAMN DOUBT THIS WAS A POLITICAL PERSECUTION. Prosecutors would be delighted if all their perps went into voluntary rehab, providing that it was a victimless crime.
Prof Seigel says the darnest things: "... if Rush Limbaugh thought he could win the case and be vindicated, he would go to trial. He's not asking for his day in court."
Prosecution agreed that he is not guilty and Rush needs to go to trial to win and to get vindicated!? Is it even possible to go to trial when there is no charge!?
And then AP just goes ahead and presents Seigel's quotes with all the pomp of a king with no clothes... Nice.
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.