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.
I can't remember the last time Rush said anything about others with drug problems.
Of course, I don't listen for 3 hours a day, everyday.
I never heard Rush talk about drugs before this incident.
The vast majority of the quotes are from the same show in October of 1995! This man has been on the radio for three hours a day, five days a week, since what - 1986? - and he is a hypocrite because he spoke out against drug abuse for a few minutes in some 23,000+ hours of air-time?
Lets be clear, he spoke out against marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and crack use. If he then turned out to be using any of those drugs, I'd be the first to label him a hypocrite. He had a legitimate reason for starting to use pain killers - he apparently wasn't using them for recreational purposes - and he got hooked. He possibly did some illegal things to obtain more because as you take pain killers over time, the relief they bring is lessened.
I don't see how you can honestly compare this behavior to the guy who shoots up with heroin or the woman who prostitutes herself to get another crack rock.
One other point, the VAST majority of the web sites that trumpet Rush's "hypocrisy" are either advocating drug use or are way left-wing.
Which are you?
I guess that would be a matter of degree.
I have known and interacted with people who were abusing pain medication and I never knew it until they told me about their problem.
On the other hand, I have known people who abused marijuana. I had a production manager who would get stoned over lunch and come back to work and be totally useless.
Rush was using/abusing pain killers for years and NO ONE COULD TELL. It took him losing his hearing, which may or may not have been related to his addiction, for the first warning flags to go up.
Now, understand, I am talking about people who use marijuana to excess: the guy who comes home from work and can't wait to light one up, the girl who has to sneak a toke or two on her lunch break, the kid who can't bring himself to go to class unless he is wasted. The drug is impairing them and keeping them from normal social life and relationships - unless, of course, their friends and coworkers all get stoned too...
I have been on pain meds myself and it was a bitch to stop using them. It hurts. Some people deal with it better than others. Some, with adequate funding and sources, find it easier to just keep taking them.
There is a world of difference between taking a drug to stop physical pain and taking a drug because you enjoy getting messed up.
Think Ronnie Earle and Tom DeLay. All part of the left's attempt to destroy and silence opposition leading up to '06 and '08.
They will also try to impeach Bush and Cheney if they win the house in '06 and complete the coup de tete. Why bother with elections if you can steal the Presidency another way?
They will have to work out some kind of deal to get Hillary in in '08.
They will have to work out some kind of deal to get Hillary in in '08.
------
Good points. But it may not be so hard, given the behavior of the Congressional Repubs, Bush and the arch libs of late. The fact they are willing to cram anything that suits their politics down the throats of the real citizens of America, basically says, expect anything to happen between now and November, 2008.
Yeah, we did. We printed t-shirts and one day he put the red ink where the black was supposed to go and the black where the red was supposed to go and didn't catch it until they had printed over 2000 shirts...
I just feel that if anyone is addicted to any kind of substance that they would be given rehab instead of jail even if the drug of choice is illegal.
What about those who sell illegal drugs? What about those who sell illegal drugs to minors? Decriminalization is a slippery slope...
Remember at one time in this great country of ours alcohol was illegal and pot and coke were legal.
And at one time they marketed cigarettes to pregnant women to keep them from eating too many sweets. From a health basis we've done a lot of stupid things. Doesn't mean we should go back and do them again. Alcohol has been mankind's drug of choice for several millennia. It is so easy to make and so pervasive in our culture that trying to outlaw it was like spitting into the wind. The prohibitionists did have some good points - it is bad for you, it does lead to broken families, it does cost millions if not billions in productivity, but alcohol was/is also so common, so cheap, and so ingrained (pardon the pun) into society that it turned the MAJORITY of Americans into law breakers and THEY overturned it. Remember, Americans voted in Prohibition and they voted it out. I don't see a majority of Americans voting for the legalization of pot and coke any time soon.
And if I withing next 18 month exceed a speed limit, I'll get a speeding ticket.
As pretty much everyone else.
Real settlements, as opposed to a goose egg on a prosecution face, include a guilty plea to a lesser charge plus a reduce sentence or probation...
"Real settlements, as opposed to a goose egg on a prosecution face, include a guilty plea to a lesser charge plus a reduce sentence or probation..."
So the thousands of Florida Drug addicts, INCLUDING many Democrats and celebrities who agreed to Pre-trial intervention and diversion were not "REAL settlements" ?
Not sure what your point is here -
You probably misunderstood a goose egg. Also, I don't care about "THOUSANDS"
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.