|
|
Posted on 12/12/2005 2:30:51 PM PST by M. Thatcher
MIAMI, Dec 12, 2005 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Roy Black, Rush Limbaugh's attorney, issued the following statement regarding Judge David F. Crow's decision today prohibiting prosecutors from asking the talk show host's doctors about his medical treatment and condition or information he shared with his doctors during his care and treatment.
Judge Crow's ruling upholds our argument that the State cannot breach doctor-patient confidentiality just because it has obtained some medical records, and thus the state cannot ask the doctors its questions posed to the court during the hearing.
Judge Crow's decision prohibits the State from questioning Mr. Limbaugh's physicians about "the medical condition of the patient and any information disclosed to the healthcare practitioner by the patient in the course of the care and treatment of the patient."
We are pleased with the court's ruling upholding the patient's statutory right of doctor-patient confidentiality. We've said from the start that there was no doctor shopping but Mr. Limbaugh should not have to give up his right to doctor-patient confidentiality to prove his innocence.
The medical records that the State has seized and reviewed now for nearly six months show that Mr. Limbaugh received legitimate medical treatment for legitimate medical reasons. Mr. Limbaugh has not been charged with a crime and he should not be charged.
SOURCE Roy Black
Tony Knight, or Tammy Taylor, both of Sitrick And Company, +1-310-788-2850, for Roy Black
http://www.prnewswire.com
Copyright (C) 2005 PR Newswire. All rights reserved.
What crime did Rush commit?
Even in Boston ...
I thought the alleged "clandestine" cigar box exchange at the gas station was a particularly amusing touch. Someone has been watching way too much TV to come up with that one.
I'm more prone to believe that the maid figured out that Rush was hooked and saw her chance to extort lot$ of ca$h.
He is no roll model.
You are right, I've desided to start WARSHIPPING you for your grate spelling!
Doofus, the dude has done more for conservatives than you could ever hope to do....deal with it...
It sure is...I am not surprised.
Sorry, but I tend to cut Rush some slack because of his back problems and the failed back surgeries. It's not like he set out to become addicted on purpose. I'm wondering how much culpability his doctor might have in this. Normally, physicians do whatever they can to control pain while avoiding the potential of addiction to powerful pain killers, which they know is a real possibility.
The only thing I wonder about is this: How the heck can he play golf with back pain?
Anyone who would worship anyone but GOD is a little flawed to begin with!
"Look at Bill O'Reilly. What a joke. He writes the O'Reilly factory about Kids, always spouting about family values, offended by Paris Hilton Commercial for Carl's Junior, and meanwhile he is harrassing his co-worker in most disgusting way."
We don't know for a fact that O'Reilly did this. We just know that he was accused of harrassment, and that the suit was settled out of court. That's the problem with giving someone money just to make a case "go away". The suspicion always lingers, whether or not the allegations are true. But O'Reilly made the choice to do settle out of court, ostensibly because he didn't want to have the thing in the news day after day after day. He wanted to put it behind him, but in the process, he maintained that his decision was NOT an admission of guilt. Actually, the woman involved DID have some motive to try to screw him over, and one of the $ide effect$ of having lot$ of money i$ that people are alway$ trying to get their hand$ in one'$ pocket$, one way or another.
|
|
"I've never seen a prosecutor go after any liberal Hollywood actor for being a drug addict..."
Robert Downey, Jr.
Actually you are not the only one. I don't like them any more than having one as a President of the United States.
But who bought drugs illegally and who sexually harassed somebody?
And please provide me a name of someone who was actually accused by reliable people who were not looking for money and who was found guilty of the crime.
Come on, big guy, give us some names.
Am I wrong? I don't think this is over yet from what this article says.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178512,00.html
Sounds like a Solomonesque ruling to me!!!
Oh I can figure all right ........envy and jelousy knows no polirtical persuasion.
It's over. How can you convict with no evidence?
Klinton Argument - We are all imperfect so whatever I did, No Biggie.
Your Dad owns it.
Learn to spell losers first, loser.
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.