Posted on 05/26/2005 7:09:27 AM PDT by rface
Prosecutors will have to wait until at least next week before finding out which medical records they may use in pursuing their criminal investigation against Rush Limbaugh.
Circuit Judge Jeffrey Winikoff postponed hearing arguments Monday when he did not receive copies of two defense motions even though Limbaugh's attorney Roy Black filed the papers Friday. Winikoff attributed the delay to security procedures put in place after 9/11, requiring paperwork to go through the clerk's office instead of directly to the judge. The hearing is reset for Tuesday.
"I think that the court handled this quite properly wanting to read all the pleadings and get up to speed on what all the parties have said before making any kind of a ruling," Black said after Monday's hearing.
Prosecutors want to use the medical records in pursuing allegations that the Palm Beach resident illegally stocked up on prescription painkillers. Limbaugh's medical records were seized from four doctors by search warrants on Nov. 25 and Dec. 4, 2003. Winikoff initially granted prosecutors access to the records, but sealed them 24 hours later pending the outcome of the appeals. Limbaugh, 54, has maintained his innocence and has been fighting to keep his medical records private.
Assistant State Attorney James Martz filed a motion Thursday asking for Limbaugh's seized medical records after appellate rulings upheld the legality of the seizures.
In his response, Black asked for a hearing in front of Circuit Judge Thomas Barkdull III, the judge who signed the search warrants. Citing a 4th District Court of Appeal ruling, Black wants Barkdull to privately review the records and return all documents "outside the scope of the search warrants, medical records irrelevant to the investigation and medical records that are privileged and confidential." He also seeks a protective order preventing the state from disclosing any information in Limbaugh's medical records.
"I was confident that you could not seize someone's medical records by sending police officers into your doctors' offices and obviously the courts disagreed with me on that," Black said. "But we are not giving up this fight and we're going to try to limit the production to those things ordered by the court and the highly personal things that are in my client's medical files we are hoping to keep confidential.
"Rush is a person who is very strong and believes in enforcing his rights and wants to continue litigating this matter and, of course, I'm going to do so," Black said.
Ping.
I suggested on a thread a while ago that Black was doing a poor job handling this case insofar as he hasn't educated the public about a.) what's at stake and b.) Florida's medical records privacy laws.
Here it looks like he's capitulated... and has resigned himself to letting a judge weed through these... anybody see it otherwise?
that's the way it looks to me - maybe he has no choice in the matter
Black is a liberal lawyer. Maybe he set Rush up through his incompetence.
Roy Black, be he liberal or otherwise, is one of the finest lawyers you will ever see. I would want this guy in my corner anyday of the week.
Look, it doesn't matter what Rush's medical records say or don't say. What you are seeing here is an example of what happens when a prosecutor has an agenda. The prosecutor has alrealdy decided that Rush is guilty and will be charged and prosecuted for Dr. Shopping. Regardless of what the actual evidence shows, the prosecutor is merely going to fashion a case in order to get Rush, someone he has made public statements about not liking.
Oh, and for those who dislike Rush just keep this in mind, IT COULD HAPPEN TO YOU. Thats right, anytime anyday the most trivial of things you do can be turned into a charge against you. From where you dump your grass clippings to how you park your car to where you buy your legal drugs. There is probably a law on the books somewhere and you are probably breaking it as we speak. So then, why aren't we all charged with something everyday, you may ask? Simply put, there are real criminals out there. But let what is happening to Rush be a lesson to you. Should you become an annoyance to someone in power, suddenly you could find yourself in a bit of trouble.
At this point he doesn't have much choice. What exactly would you suggest he do different from here out?
Apparently Florida has legislation dealing specifically with patient medical records and their sanctity; Black shouldn't let a word pass his lips without working that fact into every sound bite.
And he should find a way to have Limbaugh address this on his show, even if it's a statement he reads every single day, on the air pointing out that fact
Also (if it were me) I'd begin a campaign of leaks meant to embarass Limbaugh with all manner of scurrilous things supposedly pulled from his medical records, so that when the actual records were released everyone would say, in true Clintonian Chorus, "See?! We told you it was nothing!!"
I was talking about your comment regarding the judge, not the PR aspect.
I'm not a lawyer, but the Judge could dismiss the case, based on the fact that Limbaugh's being singled out, could he not?
He's obviously not going to do that.
Yea right. Rush's judgement was probably clouded by a drug induced haze when he engaged Mr. Black.
/sarcasm
... and if you are going to do something illegal, don't be so stupid as to be quoted saying -
"I took the drugs because I liked them and I found excuses to take them, so I'm not weaseling. "
If you use those excuses on your doctors to obtain the drugs that you like, that can be considered fraud ... doctor-shopping
"Black wants Barkdull to privately review the records and return all documents "outside the scope of the search warrants, medical records irrelevant to the investigation and medical records that are privileged and confidential."
LOL - Black still hasn't learned that medical records are NOT privileged and confidential when obtained by search warrant.
Hey RS, still beating the "Rush must do time" drum I see.
Look, if you don't see this as selective prosecution, I can't change your mind. But honestly, how many people have problems with drugs of abuse? I am willing to bet quite a few thousand in Florida (that is probably a low estimate). How many of them lie, cheat, and do whatever it takes to satisify their addiction? I would bet almost all of them. Now, how many are charged with Doctor Shopping? Oh sure, you cited me two (2) people who have been charged. Lets assume that there are more out there, say 100. Even 100 out of the the thousand(s) that have problems with drugs of abuse is not a very good percentage. Moreover, how many of those people who are charged have 1) their medical records seized, or are 2)prosecuted through to trial or 3)go to jail or 4)have a prosecutor make public statements at partisan rallies to the effect: "Don't worry about Limbaugh, we're going to get him!!" How many?
I am not saying that Rush should walk away as if nothing happened. But, it does bother me when DA's abuse their power to push a personal or political agenda. (See DeLay, Tom). This is selective and malicious prosecution plain and simple. It is designed to do one thing and one thing only, SILENCE RUSH. As I said above, it could happen to you, pray it doesn't.
A search warrant must be specific and cite the exact information/articles that are sought. Otherwise, I could get a search warrant today for your house and basically impound everything in it. Black is doing what a good lawyer should. He is ensuring that only those articles sought in the warrant are retained and reviewed by the prosecution.
Well, I want you to turn over all your medical records to the police, so they can see if you've violated any crime.
Then, you can turn over all your bank statements to the IRS, so they can see if you've deposited any "un-taxed" income.
"But honestly, how many people have problems with drugs of abuse?"
This case is not about the abuse of drugs, once he obtained them illegally it dosent matter if he ate them, sold them, or flushed them.
"Moreover, how many of those people who are charged have 1) their medical records seized, or are 2)prosecuted through to trial or 3)go to jail ..."
Most of them acknowledge that they have done something wrong and apply for intervention - Rush refuses to acknowledge he has broken the law ( or perhaps he feels it should simply not apply to him )
"...or 4)have a prosecutor make public statements at partisan rallies to the effect: "Don't worry about Limbaugh, we're going to get him!!" "
When you have to make things up your argument is lost...
I will say this one more time. Rush feels that he is being targeted for selective prosecution. It is his RIGHT to try and fight this.
As I stated in my last post the mere act of purchasing an illegal drug (which can also qualify as a drug of abuse) is a crime.
As for me making things up, nope, sorry I am not. But hey, whatever helps you win your personal vendetta against whatever it is to you Rush represents, and it does seem to me to be something personal.
There were two levels to Black's argument. The first was the propriety of the warrant. Black objected to the warrant being issued in the first place without notice being given to Limbaugh etc. He lost those issues, not suprisingly. Black, as any good defense attorney would do, is now making certain that the subject matter sought in the warrant, and yes it is spelled out, matches what the prosecutors will retain. Moreover, just because a warrant is obtained does not mean that what is found during that search can be disclosed to the public at large. Black is seeking a protective order to prevent that as well.
I am not saying Black is going to win, but he IS a defense attorney and does have a duty to protect his client to the full extent of the law.
"As for me making things up, nope, sorry I am not. "
"4)have a prosecutor make public statements at partisan rallies to the effect: "Don't worry about Limbaugh, we're going to get him!!"
When you say " to the effect" it says you do not have a real quote to supply, so you MADE UP something that sounds like what you had thought they might have said.
Florida proscutors hold "partisan rallies" to discuss ongoing investigations now ? This should be in the news - when and where ? Got Link ?
Black's duty appears to be to defend his client to the full extent of the clients pocketbook.
It seems as though he is attempting now to go back and fight the battles he should have fought before this same judge a year ago. After spending a year attacking the judges and the law, I don't know how much sympathy he will get for a "do-over".
Rush mentioned it on his show. Prosecutors are elected and do attend fund raisers etc. It wasn't a "get Rush" rally per se, it was more of a fundraiser where someone asked about the investigation into Limbaugh.
As I said above, its not a call for a "do over." There are different layers to fighting a search warrant. First off, there are restrictions (albeit increasingly shrinking onv's) to when law enforcement officials can obtain a warrant or to what procedures they must follow before executing it. Black fought that battle first and lost. Next, the warrant must state what is being sought and describe the premises, which this warrant does. What Black is doing now is making certain that only the subject matter described in the warrant is being turned over to the prosecutors. To do anything less would be malpractice.
I am going to assume the Roy Black is every bit the attorney he is supposed to be. Assuming that and knowing how the other Dr. Shopping cases have turned out (drug intervention) I have to wonder if Black did not try to get some plea agreement from the prosecutor. As you will recall, the rumor was floating out there that Rush was trying to reach a plea deal. The fact that Black is fighting this so hard tells me that the Prosecutor said "no deal" or wanted Rush to do prison time (read, silence Rush).
I think where we differ, and I know you will correct me if I am wrong, is in how Rush got to where he is now. You seem to be saying that the only reason the prosecutor is coming after Rush this hard is because he made public statements and fought this so hard. I will admit you could be correct. But, I am of the opinion that Black is too smart to shoot first and ask questions later. I think he tried to find a way out of this (as any good lawyer would) and came to realize that the prosecutor had already made up his mind that Rush was going down. That is why Rush was saying that this prosecution was and is politically motivated.
Finally, if you look at what is being done to Tom DeLay in Texas, it is somewhat similar. There seems to be a lack of evidence that Tom Delay did anything wrong other than not having brains enough to avoid associating with the wrong PAC or being too arrogant to think he had to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Yet, you have an elected democrat prosecutor who is out there making statements at fundraisers etc. about an ongoing investigation, something that is a violation of the code of ethics, not to mention showing a bias that a prosecutor is not supposed to have.
I am somewhat of a conspiracy theorist on this but I believe the dems are attemtping to undo at the local levels, results they don't like, i.e. loss of the media monopoly and loss of elections. Locally elected prosecutors provide the perfect cog in the political machine to accomplish those objectives.
Absolutely right, every word.
I wonder if he's thinking about pulling a Marc Rich / Bobby Fischer and taking off to some island nation with no extradition treaty if it looks like serious jail time is coming down the pike. He certainly has the money and political connections to pull it off...
"Rush mentioned it on his show."
LOL - Now THERE'S an objective source about matters regarding this !
True, but at the time he was reading from the Palm Beach Post. Is there a way to search for it?
Your tagline should be "The devil made me post it!"
"As you will recall, the rumor was floating out there that Rush was trying to reach a plea deal. "
No rumor, Black got all bent out of shape when the details of this came out due to a "Sunshine Law" request by one of Rushs' "supporters".
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4037128/
As you can see from the actual letters -
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/rushletters1.html
On Dec 11 Black requested diversion, the DA countered with one guilty plea, 3 years probation, fines and community service, but Black told him to shove it, that Rush had done NOTHING illegal, that he was simply an addict.
On Dec 22 though, Black flatly denied that negotiations were taking place - but his letter says that these are part of "settlement negotiations"
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/12/23/94929.shtml
Then on Feb 4 2004 Black gets on with Blitzer, ignoring the past lies he's told-
http://www.royblack.com/notable_cases/rush/wolf_feb04_04.html
"You seem to be saying that the only reason the prosecutor is coming after Rush this hard is because he made public statements and fought this so hard."
Basically yes, once the ball was rolling, via the Enquirer article opening up to the public the situation they had known about for a year, they really didn't have much of a choice. When Rush's lawyer made the choice NOT to simply have his doctors explain the pharmacy records, did you expect them to simply give up, and let Rush chew them up even more on his program ?
Well, I have the opposite opinion. I believe that Black tried to make a deal and was rebuffed. The Enquirer article opened this up and a politically motivated prosecutor smelled blood in the water. I think Black felt that cooperating would only feed the beast and work against his client.
"I think Black felt that cooperating would only feed the beast and work against his client."
Yep - providing proof that you are innocent is always a bad idea when your other option is to attempt to cut a plea bargain.
To a prosecutor, there is no such thing as proof that your client is innocent. Only proof that you are not looking at the evidence in the right way.
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.