Post by: Ron on April 28, 2006, 02:09:24 PM
Quote
Limbaugh Arrested in Fla. on Drug Charges
40 minutes ago
Rush Limbaugh was arrested Friday on prescription drug charges, law enforcement officials said.
Limbaugh turned himself in to authorities on a warrant issued by the state attorney's office, said agency spokeswoman Teri Barbera.
The conservative radio commentator came into the jail at about 4 p.m. with his attorney Roy Black and was released an hour later on $3,000 bail, Barbera said.
The warrant was for fraud to conceal information to obtain prescription, Barbera said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060428/ap_on_re_us/limbaugh_painkillers_2&printer=1;_ylt=Ast77i5SMGwnaUYshh8Uk0BH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
40 minutes ago
Rush Limbaugh was arrested Friday on prescription drug charges, law enforcement officials said.
Limbaugh turned himself in to authorities on a warrant issued by the state attorney's office, said agency spokeswoman Teri Barbera.
The conservative radio commentator came into the jail at about 4 p.m. with his attorney Roy Black and was released an hour later on $3,000 bail, Barbera said.
The warrant was for fraud to conceal information to obtain prescription, Barbera said.
Post by: Ron on April 28, 2006, 03:01:50 PM
Quote
Yahoo! News
Limbaugh Reaches Settlement in Drug Case
By BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago
Rush Limbaugh and prosecutors in the long-running prescription drug case against him reached a deal Friday calling for the only charge against the conservative commentator to be dropped without a guilty plea if he continues treatment.
Limbaugh turned himself in to authorities on a warrant filed Friday charging him with fraud to conceal information to obtain prescriptions, said Teri Barbera, a spokeswoman for the Palm Beach County Jail. He and his attorney Roy Black left about an hour later, after Limbaugh was photographed and fingerprinted and he posted $3,000 bail, Barbera said.
Prosecutors' three-year investigation of Limbaugh began after he publicly acknowledged being addicted to pain medication and entered a rehabilitation program. They accused Limbaugh of "doctor shopping," or illegally deceiving multiple doctors to receive overlapping prescriptions, after learning that he received about 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months, at a pharmacy near his Palm Beach mansion.
Limbaugh, who pleaded not guilty Friday, has steadfastly denied doctor shopping. Black said the charge will be dismissed in 18 months if Limbaugh complies with court guidelines.
"Mr. Limbaugh and I have maintained from the start that there was no doctor shopping, and we continue to hold this position," Black said in an e-mailed statement.
As a primary condition of the dismissal, Limbaugh must continue to seek treatment from the doctor he has seen for the past 2 1/2 years, Black said. Among other provisions, he also has agreed to pay the state $30,000 to defray its investigative costs, Black said.
Prosecutors did not immediately return a call for comment.
They began investigating Limbaugh in 2003 after the National Enquirer reported his housekeeper's allegations that he had abused OxyContin and other painkillers. He soon took a five-week leave from his radio show to enter a rehabilitation program and acknowledged he had become addicted to pain medication. He blamed it on severe back pain.
Before his own problems became public, Limbaugh had decried drug use and abuse and mocked President Clinton for saying he had not inhaled when he tried marijuana. He often made the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.
"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.
Prosecutors seized Limbaugh's medical records after learning about the painkillers he had received at the Palm Beach pharmacy. The investigation was held up as the prosecutors and Black battled in court over whether the records were properly seized.
Limbaugh reported five years ago that he had lost most of his hearing because of an autoimmune inner-ear disease. He had surgery to have an electronic device placed in his skull to restore his hearing. But research shows that abusing opiate-based painkillers also can cause profound hearing loss.
Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback
Limbaugh Reaches Settlement in Drug Case
By BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago
Rush Limbaugh and prosecutors in the long-running prescription drug case against him reached a deal Friday calling for the only charge against the conservative commentator to be dropped without a guilty plea if he continues treatment.
Limbaugh turned himself in to authorities on a warrant filed Friday charging him with fraud to conceal information to obtain prescriptions, said Teri Barbera, a spokeswoman for the Palm Beach County Jail. He and his attorney Roy Black left about an hour later, after Limbaugh was photographed and fingerprinted and he posted $3,000 bail, Barbera said.
Prosecutors' three-year investigation of Limbaugh began after he publicly acknowledged being addicted to pain medication and entered a rehabilitation program. They accused Limbaugh of "doctor shopping," or illegally deceiving multiple doctors to receive overlapping prescriptions, after learning that he received about 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months, at a pharmacy near his Palm Beach mansion.
Limbaugh, who pleaded not guilty Friday, has steadfastly denied doctor shopping. Black said the charge will be dismissed in 18 months if Limbaugh complies with court guidelines.
"Mr. Limbaugh and I have maintained from the start that there was no doctor shopping, and we continue to hold this position," Black said in an e-mailed statement.
As a primary condition of the dismissal, Limbaugh must continue to seek treatment from the doctor he has seen for the past 2 1/2 years, Black said. Among other provisions, he also has agreed to pay the state $30,000 to defray its investigative costs, Black said.
Prosecutors did not immediately return a call for comment.
They began investigating Limbaugh in 2003 after the National Enquirer reported his housekeeper's allegations that he had abused OxyContin and other painkillers. He soon took a five-week leave from his radio show to enter a rehabilitation program and acknowledged he had become addicted to pain medication. He blamed it on severe back pain.
Before his own problems became public, Limbaugh had decried drug use and abuse and mocked President Clinton for saying he had not inhaled when he tried marijuana. He often made the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.
"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.
Prosecutors seized Limbaugh's medical records after learning about the painkillers he had received at the Palm Beach pharmacy. The investigation was held up as the prosecutors and Black battled in court over whether the records were properly seized.
Limbaugh reported five years ago that he had lost most of his hearing because of an autoimmune inner-ear disease. He had surgery to have an electronic device placed in his skull to restore his hearing. But research shows that abusing opiate-based painkillers also can cause profound hearing loss.
Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback
Post by: grampster on April 28, 2006, 03:13:59 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on April 28, 2006, 06:36:39 PM
Quote
Before his own problems became public, Limbaugh had decried drug use and abuse and mocked President Clinton for saying he had not inhaled when he tried marijuana. He often made the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.
"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.
Who didn't mock Clinton for his "I didn't inhale" nonsense? Every druggie who heard that must have laughed pretty hard. Limbaugh admitted that his pain medication had become an addiction, admitted he was wrong, and took steps to stop it. No crime could be proven, so Rush turned himself in, pleaded innocent and agreed to jump through some hoops to avoid further legal action.
"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.
Post by: DJJ on April 28, 2006, 06:40:47 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on April 28, 2006, 06:53:20 PM
Quote from: DJJ
I wonder if he'll have the courage to admit that he has forfeit the right to call for any tougher treatment for any other illegal drug user.
Huh? He was not found guilty. Even if he is guilty of doctor shopping, he still didn't rob people for drug money, or neglect his kids for his drug habit (his wife, maybe), etc. Even a baseball player who does steroids is more morally culpable, as he is giving himself an illegitimate edge over his peers. As if you cared.
Post by: DJJ on April 29, 2006, 05:23:00 AM
Post by: El Tejon on April 29, 2006, 05:51:34 AM
Deal was probably struck 2 or 3 months ago. Prosecutors needed their "perp walk" and it was scheduled for a Friday as usual.
Post by: garrettwc on April 29, 2006, 06:15:35 AM
Post by: m1911owner on April 29, 2006, 07:06:04 AM
The DA offered to go away for $30,000. Rush took the deal. If the DA really had any evidence of a crime, he would not have done a deal with a "not guilty" plea. $30,000 to Rush is like a couple hundred dollars to me--would I pay $200 (legal and above-board--not a bribe) to make the Spanish Inquisition go away? Absolutely!
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on April 29, 2006, 07:19:13 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
So, how many people are going to rabidly defend Limbaugh using the logic of 'he wasn't harming anyone / making any negative effect on society' while still also supporting the war on drugs because everyone knows that drugs turn people into white-woman-raping, home-robbing, street-sleeping goodfornothins'?
Only you would expect such a thing to happen.
Post by: Winston Smith on April 29, 2006, 08:14:43 AM
Post by: Ron on April 29, 2006, 08:30:49 AM
Quote
Fistful, nope, you can't have it both ways. He broke the law. The law is the law. If you don't like the law, work to get it changed.
As stated above he has not been found guilty of anything.He became addicted while under his doctors care. He went into a program and now he is clean.
Case closed.
Post by: Guest on April 29, 2006, 09:18:05 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
So, how many people are going to rabidly defend Limbaugh using the logic of 'he wasn't harming anyone / making any negative effect on society' while still also supporting the war on drugs because everyone knows that drugs turn people into white-woman-raping, home-robbing, street-sleeping goodfornothins'?
A lot, I'm afraid; they already are. I am with you on this one, B. I am totally against the war on drugs but since some, including loudmouth Limbaugh, are for it, I wish he would hang.
Post by: Guest on April 29, 2006, 09:20:17 AM
Quote from: DJJ
I wonder if he'll have the courage to admit that he has forfeit the right to call for any tougher treatment for any other illegal drug user.
He should, but won't.
Post by: m1911owner on April 29, 2006, 09:36:37 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
So, how many people are going to rabidly defend Limbaugh using the logic of 'he wasn't harming anyone / making any negative effect on society' while still also supporting the war on drugs because everyone knows that drugs turn people into white-woman-raping, home-robbing, street-sleeping goodfornothins'?
Quote from: DJJ
I wonder if he'll have the courage to admit that he has forfeit the right to call for any tougher treatment for any other illegal drug user.
OK, let's try logic one more time...He wasn't buying illegal crack cocaine or heroin from pushers so that he could get high. He was using legal medications, legally prescribed by his doctors in the usual, customary and reasonable treatment of a medical condition. Does anyone see any moral, ethical, or legal distinctions between these two situations?
Post by: Ron on April 29, 2006, 10:00:57 AM
Quote
He wasn't buying illegal crack cocaine or heroin from pushers so that he could get high. He was using legal medications, legally prescribed by his doctors in the usual, customary and reasonable treatment of a medical condition. Does anyone see any moral, ethical, or legal distinctions between these two situations?
No, because it doesn't fit the template they view everything through.Conservatives are held to higher standards than liberal politicians/pundits. I would include libertarian politicians but they haven't figured out how to get elected in the free market of ideas.
Post by: Guest on April 29, 2006, 10:04:43 AM
Quote from: m1911owner
Quote from: Blackburn
So, how many people are going to rabidly defend Limbaugh using the logic of 'he wasn't harming anyone / making any negative effect on society' while still also supporting the war on drugs because everyone knows that drugs turn people into white-woman-raping, home-robbing, street-sleeping goodfornothins'?
Quote from: DJJ
I wonder if he'll have the courage to admit that he has forfeit the right to call for any tougher treatment for any other illegal drug user.
OK, let's try logic one more time...He wasn't buying illegal crack cocaine or heroin from pushers so that he could get high. He was using legal medications, legally prescribed by his doctors in the usual, customary and reasonable treatment of a medical condition. Does anyone see any moral, ethical, or legal distinctions between these two situations?
Until all drugs are sold over-the-counter, I want all drug warriors to be eaten by alligators.
Post by: Art Eatman on April 29, 2006, 10:09:45 AM
So, literally, closed.
As far as his notions about illegal drugs, who better than an ex-junkie to speak against something that is quite regularly detrimental to users?
Art
Post by: Chuck Dye on April 29, 2006, 11:56:23 AM
At least Betty Ford got us a useful, if all too exclusive and expensive, clinic. All the Baron of Bombast is likely to do is generate ever more noise.
Post by: Justin on April 29, 2006, 09:02:55 PM
Quote
As far as his notions about illegal drugs, who better than an ex-junkie to speak against something that is quite regularly detrimental to users?
Perhaps he has credibility to talk about the ills of drug abuse, but I don't see how he can continue to call for throwing the book at drug users after landing on his feet from a legal standpoint.
Post by: stevelyn on April 30, 2006, 03:59:49 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
So, how many people are going to rabidly defend Limbaugh using the logic of 'he wasn't harming anyone / making any negative effect on society' while still also supporting the war on drugs because everyone knows that drugs turn people into white-woman-raping, home-robbing, street-sleeping goodfornothins'?
I don't see where Limbaugh was harming anyone but himself and that's his right. However, I can't defend his hypocrisy calling for the harsh treatment of drug abusers while at the same time being one himself or for supporting the War on (some) Drugs.
Post by: doczinn on April 30, 2006, 04:18:30 PM
Quote
I would include libertarian politicians but they haven't figured out how to get elected in the free market of ideas.
Free market of ideas? You really think that's what we have here?
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 01, 2006, 08:39:21 AM
Quote from: DJJ
Fistful, nope, you can't have it both ways. He broke the law. The law is the law. If you don't like the law, work to get it changed.
Where did I ask to have it both ways? If the man broke the law, I'm sure the state of Florida would love to see your proof. Where did Limbaugh complain about the laws he was charged with breaking? Quote from: DJJ
I wonder if he'll have the courage to admit that he has forfeit the right to call for any tougher treatment for any other illegal drug user.
So he's no better than the guy who kills or robs for drug money? He's no better than the mother so wacked-out on drugs that she can't care for her children? Where are the people dying when condoms full of pain pills burst in thier stomachs as they cross the border?Where did Limbaugh say that anyone addicted to any drug should be jailed, killed, beaten or charged with a crime?
Post by: roo_ster on May 01, 2006, 08:42:46 AM
1. The drugs he obtained are currently legal
2. The prosecutor couldn't come up with the eveidence that he got them illegally or there would have been no or a less favorable deal
3. Mr. Ditto claims innocence and will not be convicted of diddly if he keeps his nose clean for a couple years.
He can continue his bombast against illegal drugs without a trace of hypocracy, from his viewpoint.
The most important point in the whole case, to me, was the prosecutor's demands for Ditto's med records. I thought that to be serious overreaching and dangerous to our privacy interests.
Quote from: GoRon
Quote
He wasn't buying illegal crack cocaine or heroin from pushers so that he could get high. He was using legal medications, legally prescribed by his doctors in the usual, customary and reasonable treatment of a medical condition. Does anyone see any moral, ethical, or legal distinctions between these two situations?
No, because it doesn't fit the template they view everything through.Conservatives are held to higher standards than liberal politicians/pundits. I would include libertarian politicians but they haven't figured out how to get elected in the free market of ideas.
Post by: richyoung on May 02, 2006, 07:08:06 AM
Post by: Guest on May 02, 2006, 10:44:27 AM
Post by: richyoung on May 02, 2006, 11:01:13 AM
Quote from: mercedesrules
I don't care how many he took. He broke drug laws.
I'm sorry - I didn't know you had a law degree AND worked for the DA that cahrged him UNSUCCESSFULLY. WHAT drug laws did HE, (as opposed to his physicians, perhaps...) break, and if he did, WHY wasn't he taken to trial by an obvoiously politicised and publicity hungry D.A.?Quote
He preaches stringing up drug abusers. Hasn't he been eaten by aligators yet??? What a dangerous fiend! I hope someone throws a pie in his face.
He is right - there are only two options, either out-right prohibition for ILLEGAL drugs, (the option he supports), or complete legalization. What we have now is the fact that rich people, minority politicians, and most white people, can get away with it without jail time, whereas poor people, and non-politician minorities go into an increasingly privatized jail system. What we do now is unsuistainable in the long run. Again, I want you to tell me what ILLEGAL drug he took, as opposed to MULTIPLE incidents involving cocaine and the Kennedy family, for example...
Post by: Ron on May 02, 2006, 01:21:20 PM
Quote
He preaches stringing up drug abusers. Hasn't he been eaten by aligators yet??? What a dangerous fiend! I hope someone throws a pie in his face.
One quote in all his years on the air is all ya got mercedesrules. He wasn't a drug warrior by any stretch.And as has been mentioned, he pleaded not guilty to doctor shopping. No evidence was obviously found, he is a big fish and they would have hung him if they could.
As far as the government is concerned he is NOT GUILTY.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 02, 2006, 02:15:25 PM
Quote from: mercedesrules
I don't care how many he took. He broke drug laws. He preaches stringing up drug abusers. Hasn't he been eaten by aligators yet??? What a dangerous fiend! I hope someone throws a pie in his face.
I heard what your lips just uttered, and I'm wondering what drugs you're on. Where did Rush call for stringing up drug abusers?
GoRon, do you mean the quotation in the article? Comfused.
Post by: Ron on May 02, 2006, 02:44:40 PM
Quote
Where did Rush call for stringing up drug abusers?
GoRon, do you mean the quotation in the article? Comfused.
The media keeps bringing up the same one or two quotes to show what a hypocrite Rush is. In all the years he has been on the air they have one or two anti drug references and that makes him a hypocrite?
GoRon, do you mean the quotation in the article? Comfused.
Post by: Gewehr98 on May 02, 2006, 04:57:12 PM
That while he wasn't found guilty, and paid the DA $30K to go away, he also forfeited his gun-owning rights?
Hmmm...
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060502/NEWS06/605020435/1012
Quote
Limbaugh, prosecutors sign deal to end case
West Palm Beach, Fla. -- Rush Limbaugh declared victory Monday after signing a deal with prosecutors that will dismiss a prescription fraud charge in 18 months if he complies with its terms.
Under the deal, Limbaugh cannot own a gun, must submit to random drug tests and has to continue treatment for his acknowledged addiction to painkillers. But he did not have to admit guilt, and he continued to proclaim his innocence on his radio show.
The 55-year-old conservative commentator pleaded not guilty Friday to seeking a prescription from a physician in 2003 without revealing that he had received medications from another practitioner within 30 days.
So if he's not guilty, why can't he have guns?
West Palm Beach, Fla. -- Rush Limbaugh declared victory Monday after signing a deal with prosecutors that will dismiss a prescription fraud charge in 18 months if he complies with its terms.
Under the deal, Limbaugh cannot own a gun, must submit to random drug tests and has to continue treatment for his acknowledged addiction to painkillers. But he did not have to admit guilt, and he continued to proclaim his innocence on his radio show.
The 55-year-old conservative commentator pleaded not guilty Friday to seeking a prescription from a physician in 2003 without revealing that he had received medications from another practitioner within 30 days.
Post by: Ron on May 02, 2006, 05:01:19 PM
Quote
So if he's not guilty, why can't he have guns?
Because he admitted to being addicted to narcotics.
Post by: Gewehr98 on May 02, 2006, 05:07:11 PM
He admitted to doing something that took away his gun-owning rights, but he's technically not guilty. Subjective enforcement, if ever there was, because technically he'd be a felon in possession of firearms otherwise, no? Kinda like those ex-post facto misdemeanor domestic violence rulings (Lautenberg) that took guns away from people long after the fact.
Post by: Ron on May 02, 2006, 05:15:17 PM
The DA wasn't after him for being addicted he was after him for the doctor shopping.
Guilty of becoming dependent on pain meds, not guilty of doctor shopping.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 02, 2006, 05:22:39 PM
He also said he doesn't have guns and "I don't need one where I live."
Post by: publius on May 03, 2006, 07:12:48 AM
Post by: richyoung on May 03, 2006, 09:14:15 AM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on May 03, 2006, 05:27:12 PM
It reeks of a shakedown, but even so I'd say it was money well-spent. I'd have done the same thing (assuming I was filthy rich and could afford to).
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 03, 2006, 05:57:28 PM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on May 03, 2006, 06:42:30 PM
Hmm... trying to find that article again... not so easy to find, what with all them other hatchet job pieces about Limbaughbeing arrested for drug abuse (sic)....
Yup, you're right, Limbaugh's personal contribution was *only* $250,000. Which is still enough money to dwarf the fee he paid to the DA. That $15 million number I remembered was the total amount that Limbaugh has raised over the years.
Sorry for the error, folks.