The Screamer
The DNC calling the shots.
Posted on 02/14/2005 1:34:15 PM PST by rface
WEST PALM BEACH -- The prosecutor investigating whether Rush Limbaugh illegally purchased prescription painkillers told the Florida Supreme Court on Monday that investigators should be allowed to review the conservative radio commentator's medical records.
Assistant State Attorney James Martz said Limbaugh's argument that he should have been notified before the records were seized by investigators is equivalent to saying ``that law enforcement is never to be trusted.''
``Then search warrants should never be issued and law enforcement should never be permitted to investigate criminal activity for fear that they will abuse the power granted,'' Martz wrote in a brief filed with the Florida Supreme Court. ``Such reasoning would eviscerate law enforcement's ability to protect the public and enforce the law.''
Martz added that the 4th District Court of Appeal's ruling, which said Limbaugh's privacy rights were not violated when the records were seized in 2003, should be upheld.
``Privacy rights cannot operate as an impenetrable shield to conceal, camouflage, or secrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing,'' Martz wrote.
Limbaugh and his attorney, Roy Black, had no comment on Monday.
(Excerpt) Read more at sun-sentinel.com ...
Police believe they are dealing with hardened criminals.
Rush might have to swallow the bitter pill of irony. (seocnd time today I used that line)
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- The prosecutor investigating whether Rush Limbaugh illegally purchased prescription painkillers told the Florida Supreme Court on Monday that investigators should be allowed to review the conservative radio commentator's medical records.
Assistant State Attorney James Martz was responding to arguments Limbaugh and his attorneys made asking that the records remain sealed. Martz said Limbaugh's argument that he should have been notified before the records were seized by investigators is equivalent to saying "that law enforcement is never to be trusted."
"Then search warrants should never be issued and law enforcement should never be permitted to investigate criminal activity for fear that they will abuse the power granted," Martz wrote in a brief filed with the Florida Supreme Court. "Such reasoning would eviscerate law enforcement's ability to protect the public and enforce the law."
Martz added that the 4th District Court of Appeal's ruling, which said Limbaugh's privacy rights were not violated when the records were seized in 2003, should be upheld.
"Privacy rights cannot operate as an impenetrable shield to conceal, camouflage, or secrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing," Martz wrote.
Limbaugh and his attorney, Roy Black, had no comment on Monday.
The court battle over Limbaugh's medical records has crippled the criminal investigation into his drug use for more than a year. Investigators seized the records after learning that Limbaugh received about 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months, at a pharmacy near his Palm Beach mansion. They contend that Limbaugh engaged in "doctor shopping," or illegally deceived multiple doctors to receive overlapping prescriptions.
Limbaugh has maintained his innocence throughout the investigation and argues that the case threatens the privacy rights of all Floridians - a point which has drawn the support of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Limbaugh has acknowledged he became addicted to pain medication, blaming it on severe back pain. In October 2003, he took a five-week leave from his afternoon radio show to enter a rehabilitation program.
--
On the Net:
and your point would be, mr prosecutor?
The first sentence tells you where the journalista stands.
It means prosecutors must follow the will of the people as expressed in the State Statutes. Of course, in adversary system,neither side should have to trust the other.
Prosecutors are looking for evidence of guilt, not evidence of innocence.
Rush had a legitimate medical problem for which he was prescribed pain medication.
"`Privacy rights cannot operate as an impenetrable shield to conceal, camouflage, or secrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing,'' Martz wrote."
BUT, the law must provide a court substantial PROOF that a crime has been committed.
The procecutor must, in all cases, show 'just cause' in asking for and receiving a search warrant.
Suspicion of a crime, based on 'gut feelings' is not enough.
The use of the word "illegally" is the only thing I need to see, to set he Journalista's point of view.
Good point!
The DNC calling the shots.
Yep. And still no charges have been filed.
And your point is?
``Privacy rights cannot operate as an impenetrable shield to conceal, camouflage, or secrete evidence of criminal wrongdoing,'' Martz wrote."
Seems to me the fonding fathers had a thing or two to say about the government authorities breaking down your door looking for evidence of some sort of crime...sorta like fishing for evidence.
Great article.
I've always said, you learn something new from Rush every day.
That can't be said from every talk show host. And was especially evident last week when Rush was gone. Some of his guest hosts left a LOT to be desired, IMO.
You are right.
The term 'self incrimination' comes to mind.
This prosecutor needs to go back to law school.
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.