PDA

View Full Version : OxyContin Sentencing (Limbaugh's drug of choice) 72yr old man faces up to 30yrs for distribution.. should Rush do time?


dahunan
10-22-2003, 11:48 PM
Rush Limbaugh vs. Oxycontin Sentences
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/10/con03221.html
A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY

Buzz,

In response this letter, in the 10-21-03 Mailbag:

Perhaps someone with the know-how can do this. Track down the sentence given to average people who have done what limbaugh has. In the unlikely event he gets taken to court we can compare the treatment. So far it looks like he won't be charged at all. I'd like to hear what has happened to others in his shoes.

Phil Rowland
South Pasadena, CA

I just did a Google search for "sentenced possession oxycontin" -- you might be surprised to see some of these sentences (many are both for possession and "with intent to distribute," which is a common charge when large amounts of contraband are found. Certainly dealing in "thousands of pills, over several years," like Rush did, would involve this charge, as well as simple possession): [Google Search Link]

Just a few, from "about 1,210" search results:

"BROOKS and RUSSELL each face a statutory maximum sentence of 60 years imprisonment, and a fine of up to $6,000,000. They are scheduled to be sentenced on November 25, 2003 at 2:30 p.m. at the federal courthouse in Abingdon." [LINK]

"BARTON faces a statutory mandatory minimum penalty of 80 years in prison up to a maximum penalty of life in prison and fines of up to $3 million when he is sentenced November 10. ALALUSI faces a statutory maximum penalty of up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $1 million when she is sentenced November 3."
[LINK]

"He also was sentenced to 21 years and 10 months in prison for illegal acquisition and distribution of OxyContin." [LINK] Tuesday, September 2, 2003

"A federal jury Thursday convicted Lockwood resident Jack Glendale Standley on two charges that he distributed OxyContin, a strong prescription painkiller, but acquitted him of two other drug counts. Standley, 72, faces up to 30 years in prison and a $2 million fine on the distribution convictions." [LINK]

Any bets on what Rush will get (besides truckloads of "sympathy and compassion")? HAH!!

daniel1113
10-23-2003, 12:08 AM
It sounds like all of those people are convicted distributors, not users. Therefore, the charges would be much different. Correct me if I am wrong...

Zebo
10-23-2003, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by: daniel1113
It sounds like all of those people are convicted distributors, not users. Therefore, the charges would be much different. Correct me if I am wrong...

Quanity usually determins the crimminals status not intent. Rush is said to have had over 2500 pills certainly seems possible to be charged with distribution.

digitalsm
10-23-2003, 01:00 AM
Its going to be extremely impossible to charge Rush, for any crimes. The emails, tape recordings are NOT admissible in court, infact the tape recordings are ILLEGAL under Florida law. They also did not catch him with thousands of pills, so it would be impossible to charge Rush with distribution, they cant even bust him for possesion, because they have never caught him with OxyContin. The best they can try and tag him with it conspiracy, but thats a long stretch.

Rush wont be charged, and its not because of his name or anything. He wont be charged because they dont have sufficent evidence to charge him, if they did he would have been charged two years ago, or when the distributors were busted by the investigation.

All they have is his public admission to his addiction to perscription medication, which isnt admitting he committed any crimes people have alleged, and inadmissble evidence(alleged emails, and illegal tape recordings). Not enough for an indictment let alone a conviction.

digitalsm
10-23-2003, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: daniel1113
It sounds like all of those people are convicted distributors, not users. Therefore, the charges would be much different. Correct me if I am wrong...

Quanity usually determins the crimminals status not intent. Rush is said to have had over 2500 pills certainly seems possible to be charged with distribution.

Yes but in order to be charged with distribution, they have catch you with those 2500 pills. They have never caught Rush with 1 illegal pill let alone 2500. All they have are two illegal tape recordings and alleged emails, both of which are not admissible in court.

Unless they catch Rush with OxyContin they cant charge him with possession OR distribution. Its that simple. The best they can try and get him with is conspiracy, and thats a bit of a stretch. The investigation has allegedly been ongoing for 2 years, they caught the distributors, hell his maid committed more crimes than Rush did.

His maid committed, based on her statements

Several counts of having perscription drugs without a perscription
Several counts of Distribution, she admitted to buying and selling the drugs to Rush
Two counts of illegally recording conversations

Rush hasnt admitted guilt in anything.

To take Rush down, and not the maid is quite a stupid notion.

Best guess is, neither the maid nor Rush are ever charged with anything. They got the people behind the drug ring, thats all the really matters.

Zebo
10-23-2003, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Its going to be extremely impossible to charge Rush, for any crimes. The emails, tape recordings are NOT admissible in court, infact the tape recordings are ILLEGAL under Florida law. They also did not catch him with thousands of pills, so it would be impossible to charge Rush with distribution, they cant even bust him for possesion, because they have never caught him with OxyContin. The best they can try and tag him with it conspiracy, but thats a long stretch.

Rush wont be charged, and its not because of his name or anything. He wont be charged because they dont have sufficent evidence to charge him, if they did he would have been charged two years ago, or when the distributors were busted by the investigation.

All they have is his public admission to his addiction to perscription medication, and inadmissble evidence(alleged emails, and illegal tape recordings). Not enough for an indictment let alone a conviction.

Florida is a very good state to be a crimminal. No property seizures allowed (OJ moved there to protect his assests) very restrictive entrapment clauses etc... I agree no way Rush will do time. I hope no one should have to though for drugs. Makes the dealers rich and the tax payers poor.

chess9
10-23-2003, 05:55 AM
I don't care for Rush's politics or his approach, but drug addicts need treatment not incarceration. Perhaps one of the unintended side effects of this will be a softening in attitudes about what to do about illegal drug usage. Our federal and state prisons are full of users, not the big boys, who usually escape. Our national drug policy is terrible, IMHO.

-Robert

CADsortaGUY
10-23-2003, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by: chess9
Our federal and state prisons are full of users, not the big boys, who usually escape. Our national drug policy is terrible, IMHO.

-Robert

Ditto

:D:P

CkG

rudder
10-23-2003, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: daniel1113
It sounds like all of those people are convicted distributors, not users. Therefore, the charges would be much different. Correct me if I am wrong...

Quanity usually determins the crimminals status not intent. Rush is said to have had over 2500 pills certainly seems possible to be charged with distribution.

"Said to have" is very different from being busted "with."

Hayabusa Rider
10-23-2003, 02:17 PM
IMO, from the very incomplete information out there, Rushs greatest problem is that he may have paid a domestic to get them for him. If true, that would be a felony. Those sorts of charges are most likely to bring the harshest penalties. Most likely a judge would not take a positive view of an employeer who used a hired worker to commit an illegal act in order to avoid exposure. Again, this has yet to be demonstrated, but damning if true.

digitalsm
10-23-2003, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
IMO, from the very incomplete information out there, Rushs greatest problem is that he may have paid a domestic to get them for him. If true, that would be a felony. Those sorts of charges are most likely to bring the harshest penalties. Most likely a judge would not take a positive view of an employeer who used a hired worker to commit an illegal act in order to avoid exposure. Again, this has yet to be demonstrated, but damning if true.

They dont have enough proof thats admissable in court.

Hayabusa Rider
10-23-2003, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
IMO, from the very incomplete information out there, Rushs greatest problem is that he may have paid a domestic to get them for him. If true, that would be a felony. Those sorts of charges are most likely to bring the harshest penalties. Most likely a judge would not take a positive view of an employeer who used a hired worker to commit an illegal act in order to avoid exposure. Again, this has yet to be demonstrated, but damning if true.

They dont have enough proof thats admissable in court.

Neither you nor I know that. It remains to been seen.

Horsep0wer
10-23-2003, 06:01 PM
they didnt catch him with it, so he cant go to jail.

Hayabusa Rider
10-23-2003, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by: Horsep0wer
they didnt catch him with it, so he cant go to jail.

So if you shoot someone, they cant convict you if you do not have the gun?

Aegion
10-23-2003, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by: digitalsm
They dont have enough proof thats admissable in court.
We'll see about that, they certainly do have the domestic servant's potential testimony in court at the very least. There certainly could be additional evidence that the domestic servant kept that is both admissible in court and incriminating. Obviously we don't know what addtional evidence investigators could have gathered.

BaliBabyDoc
10-23-2003, 06:33 PM
Obviously Rush would take the 5th in court but the maid has records (beyond her recordings) that are admissible in court. In addition, there's her testimony. It's not exactly a she-said, he-said b/c her records would back her up plus who ya gonna believe . . . loyal domestic or drug addict (thrice failed rehab)?

As for our criminal justice system, it sux. Our jails are filled with low level criminals while "tough on crime" idiots in government (and on the radio) talk about the deterrent effect of "truth in sentencing". If they really believe it maybe Rush should be put away for 5-10.

DealMonkey
10-23-2003, 06:59 PM
They should make an example outta the fat bastard. :)

digitalsm
10-23-2003, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by: Aegion

Originally posted by: digitalsm
They dont have enough proof thats admissable in court.
We'll see about that, they certainly do have the domestic servant's potential testimony in court at the very least. There certainly could be additional evidence that the domestic servant kept that is both admissible in court and incriminating. Obviously we don't know what addtional evidence investigators could have gathered.

Yes and the severant its a good witness. Not quite. She may have gotten immunity for the illegal actions she took by buying and selling drugs. She will however have to face charges on two counts of felony for the illegal recordings she made.

What I am saying is they DO NOT have the proof of distribution. They would actually have to prove he was distributing. And that they can not. They have no proof of possesion.

You can prove distribution without possession, however its alot more difficult to prove possession. You can say he was distributing because he allegedly bought 10000 pills, even with proof he bought 10000+ pills, they would need to have proof he sold them to someone else because they dont have said pills.

Its been over 2 years, according to all reports, its highly unlikely the servent still has other evidence. Its also highly unlikely they will bring charges against either.

Hes not going to get charged. Face it you lefties, theres no actual proof of him having the drugs since they did not catch him withit nor did they catch it in his system. They have his maid words, alleged emails, and two tape recordings. The maids testimony would be torn to shreds, and the emails and tape recordings would be ruled inadmissible. Unless they have more, which isnt likely, hes not going to be convicted. Not once did they search his house. Something you would think they'd do in 2+ years of "investigating" him. Oh thats right they were really investigating him, they were investigating the drug ring.

digitalsm
10-23-2003, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Obviously Rush would take the 5th in court but the maid has records (beyond her recordings) that are admissible in court. In addition, there's her testimony. It's not exactly a she-said, he-said b/c her records would back her up plus who ya gonna believe . . . loyal domestic or drug addict (thrice failed rehab)?

As for our criminal justice system, it sux. Our jails are filled with low level criminals while "tough on crime" idiots in government (and on the radio) talk about the deterrent effect of "truth in sentencing". If they really believe it maybe Rush should be put away for 5-10.

Actually no the emails would not be inadmissible, and she should be a convicted felon for the two illegal recordings. They arent going after Rush because

1. shes not a good witness
2. her records are hearsay
3. the recordings are illegal
4. the emails are inadmissible
5. When it comes down to it, it is he said she said. Shes says he forced her buy the drugs for him. Thats going to be hard to prove, and if they dont, they have no evidence.

They never ONCE raided his house.
They have no proof of distribution, there is no proof of possession, and its going to be extremely hard to prove conspiracy to buy and sell narcotics.

Someone made an anology to murder. This is a bit different. Actually a lot different. There is no phsyical evidence in this case, all they have is circumstantial and inadmissible evidence, and a less than credible witness. In a murder cases where there are convictions 99% of them have physical evidence. And since they never raided his house, there is no physical proof of possesion or distribution.

Hes not going to be charged.