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.
Count me out.
You mean there's an honest judge in Florida?
Isn't that a crime? And wouldn't they prosecute Rush if they had any evidence that he committed a crime? Aren't they so intent on convicting Rush that they took his medical documents for a fishing expedition because they didn't have any other evidence of a crime?
And yet he's not been charged with any crime, right?
So you are accusing him of something that the prosecution isn't charging him for because they don't have evidence.
Do you have evidence that this occured as you allege?
If not, then maybe you ought to watch how you spread gossip about other people.
I wonder where Bill "Sniff Sniff" Maher stands on this ruling...
Yeah, me too.
I can't throw any stones.
Confuscious say:
Man who live in glass house get dressed in basement.
That would be good news.
Apparently the maid story wasn't true. There's no such investigation going on. Find some other lie to bash Rush with while you spout of your moral superiority.
A judge uses his head and applies the law. Excellent! (for us all ;)
And if they do pursue them, they get ordered into treatment. Rush already did that - so unless there is something else here other than addiction, there is persecution, not prosecution, going on.
What a great Christmas present for Rush and all us Fans!
Was Dr. shopping the only charge?
Was there another drug charge involving his maid and her purchases?
Agreed, anyone who can't see that is plain ignorant.
What part of 'dealers' don't you understand?
The conservatives I know do not 'worship' Rush. Liberals 'worship' people and ideas.
Pain medication is necessary for millions of people who otherwise could not perform activities of daily living.
The War on Drugs is not the topic of this thread.
lets hope he can sue for civil rights violations
No they wouldn't. The fact is that most of O'Reilly's viewers don't give a damn about something that appeared to be extortion. He's still #1 in the cable ratings.
As for those conservative candidates, if they don't sit down with him, he'll rip 'em, and they'll have to live with the consequences.
I guess the tape-recorded converation between Bill O'Reilly and his victim, that I heard with my own ears was pure figment of my imagination. Of course they couldn't play the entire conversation on TV because the laws of decorum prohibit it.
By giving these creeps a break you hurt your own cause.
The stalinists are at least temporarily foiled! Yea Rushbo!
More reasonable. Now, if you don't mind, we will wait for a trial and conviction before we lock him up.
Although I think 10 years is a little harsh.
Nobody cares, TR. The woman got a wad of cash, which is what she was after in the first place (left, went to CNN, then came back after her CNN boss abused one of her cohorts. She saw how extortion worked.).
You may not like O'Reilly's numbers, but they're real.
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.