Limbaugh and Black get the Goods on Brischer

The Rush Limbaugh Website ^ | 1-26-04 | Rush Limbaugh

[ppaul]

If the SA had proof there would have been charges by now.

Yep.
Even if the "proof" was flimsy.
Anything to get a conviction!
That is the modus operendi of the modern prosecutor.

[thoughtomator]

But this nation has already decided that public officials can, without penalty, lie under oath to a court of law...

[xm177e2]

The case against Rush Limbaugh is a violation of the First Amendment, plain and simple. If the prosecutors went after all accused drug addicts with the same zeal, it would be perfectly legitimate (at least as far as the 1stA is concerned) to persecute Rush equally harshly.

But that is not the case. The prosecutors are singling Rush out because of his political views, and courts have in the past found this to be illegal.

Add to this that the prosecution is apparently breaking all sorts of rules, and Rush could nail them pretty hard if he so chose (but I don't think he wants to take the risk of launching a counter-attack, he wants this issue to disappear)

[SAJ]

Well, m'friend, I don't know how you think, but -- had some ''public official'' run this game on me -- I guarantee you on my life that he, she, or it would now be the respondent in EVERY civil action I and my attorney could concoct.

And, if said ''public official'' were also an elected official, said civil actions would be deliberately timed (with of course some PR assistance) to render him (or her, or it) utterly unelectable evermore.

Suum cuique, as they used to say in the Roman Republic.

-- Do not kill a corrupt and ambitious man, but do what is worse; learn his desires and deny him all at every turn. Let him live in his futility. Nemesis herself could not punish him so well. -- Publius Scaevola, Pontifex Maximus of Rome, 77 B.C.

[My Dog Likes Me]

Yes, I see your point.

But this isn't a perfect world, and as Rush dances on the roof of his SUV while his fans cheer, I, in a similar position, would be pleading on a nasty phone through plexiglass for my public defender not to leave me in the county lock-up for another month.

[NYCVirago]

I believe that is wrong. Rush is the first case I'm aware of in the US where they're going after a former user of prescription drugs. The goal has always been to get the person treatment more than punish (for 1st time offenders at least), and I challenge you to find a case in the US where a prosecuter has gone after someone who just went through treatment. Not to mention all the privacy violations and fishing they're doing by seizing his medical records.

And particularly a celebrity. Neither Darryl Strawberry nor Robert Downey Jr., to name two of the most egregious offenders, did any jail time until they had been caught several times; plus, they were on cocaine and heroin! And as for painkillers, Matthew Perry went through rehab twice for that, and never faced any charges.

[Lancey Howard]

I see a looming 42 USC 1983 suit against the prosecuting attorney's office, with a bucket of money at the end of it.

Yep. Or....
Maybe I see a suddenly more compassionate and reasonable prosecutor who would love to "put this all behind us".

[Fledermaus]

Well, m'friend, I don't know how you think, but -- had some ''public official'' run this game on me -- I guarantee you on my life that he, she, or it would now be the respondent in EVERY civil action I and my attorney could concoct.

Your are a more civil man than I my friend. I'd beat the public official to within an inch of their life and leave them for dead in some backwood area.

But that's just me! lol

[jimtorr]

They had a section of the hospital wired to allow patients to medicate themselves.

That was my experience, when I had abdominal surgery in Mountain View, CA, in '96.

I was given morphine for the first four days, intraveinously. I self-medicated as little as I could stand, to try and keep my vision from blurring so much. I was told that I never came close to the maximum allowed dose in an 8-hour period.

[TheConservator]

You, sir, are living in la-la land.

If this were you or me, the prosecutor would not be wasting any time trying to obtain medical records in the hope that they would contain evidence that might establish a crime had been committed. Even if the medical records flew out of the doctor's office and landed in the prosecutor's lap, the most you or I would get would be a quick agreement for treatment and pretrial diversion.

By the way, I hate dogs. :)

[Aracelis]

In my case I can vividly recall waiting for hours in agony between "pain shots" because the "prescribed dose period" had not yet expired.

Some years ago, a friend of mine (cardiology resident) discovered his fiance had terminal brain cancer. Two weeks before she died, "doctors" withdrew her morphine - because it was addictive. I will not describe the state she ultimately died in.

I have been disgusted with the medical profession ever since.

[DB]

"But this isn't a perfect world, and as Rush dances on the roof of his SUV while his fans cheer, I, in a similar position, would be pleading on a nasty phone through plexiglass for my public defender not to leave me in the county lock-up for another month."

Actually you wouldn't be.

I don't believe anyone in Florida has ever been convicted of this.

[FBD]

Welcome to FR,

My Dog Likes Me

"But this isn't a perfect world, and as Rush dances on the roof of his SUV while his fans cheer, I, in a similar position, would be pleading on a nasty phone through plexiglass for my public defender not to leave me in the county lock-up for another month."

Hoo-boy...you're not the person that your dog thinks you are, are ya??? :^D

[My Dog Likes Me]

I see your point, but I really don't know.

If it was me, I see myself on local news wearing an orange jumpsuit in a perp walk, chained to real hardcore criminals, climbing out of a Paddy wagon on the way to court to answer to my "illegal possession of prescription medication" charge.

You guys are letting Rush off easy. What has this rich man done for you? I will bet you that years ago he wanted to prosecute senior citizens who went to Mexico for cheaper prescription meds! I should research that one.

[archy]

Really? I see a looming 42 USC 1983 suit against the prosecuting attorney's office, with a bucket of money at the end of it.

Not necessarily. See also the following Florida state statute, which provides for the bringing of a possible state felony charge and disbarment:

Official misconduct, a violation of section 839.25, FloridaStatutes, is a third degree felony defined as follows:

(1) "Official misconduct" means the commission of thefollowing act by a public servant, with corrupt intentto obtain a benefit for himself or herself or anotheror to cause unlawful harm to another: knowinglyfalsifying, or causing another to falsify, anyofficial record or official document.

(2) "Corrupt" means done with knowledge that act iswrongful and with improper motives.

And under Floridas 1977 State racketeering act, triple damages can also be collected by a plaintiff victim of such continuing patterns of criminal activity, just as under the federal anti-racketeering laws...but to a lesser standard of proof:

The Florida RICO Act makes commission of a pattern of racketeering activity a felony of the first degree punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 30 years and/or a $10,000 fine. The state may bring a civil action for injunctive relief, treble damages, attorneys' fees, and costs. Florida Statutes, 1995, Chapter 895, Section 895.02, as amended by Laws of 1986, Chapter 86-277, approved July 9, 1986, effective October 1, 1986.

The Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act prohibits the acquisition or maintenance of an enterprise or real property through a pattern of criminal activity or the collection of an unlawful debt. The Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act provides aggrieved parties with a civil action for treble damages, attorneys' fees, and court costs. Florida Statutes, 1995, Chapter 772, Sections 772.101 through 772.19; added by Laws of 1986, Chapter 86-277, approved July 9, 1986, effective October 1, 1986.

See Chapters 837, 838, and 843....

And there's another potential problem awaiting the prosecutor:

918.13 Tampering with or fabricating physical evidence.--

(1) No person, knowing that a criminal trial or proceeding or an investigation by a duly constituted prosecuting authority, law enforcement agency, grand jury or legislative committee of this state is pending or is about to be instituted, shall:

(a) Alter, destroy, conceal, or remove any record, document, or thing with the purpose to impair its verity or availability in such proceeding or investigation; or

(b) Make, present, or use any record, document, or thing, knowing it to be false.

(2) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

[dsc]

"If it was me, I see myself on local news wearing an orange jumpsuit in a perp walk, chained to real hardcore criminals"

Well, if stubbornness were a crime...

"You guys are letting Rush off easy."

No, we're making vital distinctions. There is a great difference in what a person does to manage pain on the one hand, and engaging in the recreational use of drugs.

There, but for the Grace of God, goes any of us.

"What has this rich man done for you?"

More than I suspect you would be willing to understand.

"I will bet you that years ago he wanted to prosecute senior citizens who went to Mexico for cheaper prescription meds! I should research that one."

Yeah, do that. Really. See you when you find something. Bye, now.

[ch53gunner]

You tell 'em, Neil!

[backhoe]

I will bet you that years ago he wanted to prosecute senior citizens who went to Mexico for cheaper prescription meds! I should research that one.

Yes, you really ought to do that, and be sure to ping each of us you have chatted with when you get the results.

[ch53gunner]

Clinton was also 'disbarred' from the SCOTUS.