Tale of Two Sentences

E

Eghad

New member
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...baugh,0,783429.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

"He was quickly released after posting $3,000 bond, jail officials said. Prosecutors alleged that Limbaugh violated the state's "doctor shopping" law by getting four doctors to write overlapping prescriptions and failing to tell them about each other. Limbaugh, who pleaded not guilty, struck an agreement with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office that calls for the charge to be dropped in 18 months provided that Limbaugh continues to seek treatment from the doctor he has seen for the past 2 1/2 years and must refrain from breaking the law during that period, Limbaugh's attorney, Roy Black, said in a statement."

http://www.november.org/thewall/cases/paey-r/paey-r.html

"Although prosecutors admitted Paey was not a drug trafficker, on April 16 he received a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for drug trafficking. That jaw-dropping outcome illustrates two sadly familiar side effects of the war on drugs: the injustice caused by mandatory minimum sentences and the suffering caused by the government's interference with pain treatment

Paey, a 45-year-old father of three, is disabled as a result of a 1985 car accident, failed back surgery, and multiple sclerosis. Today, as he sits in jail in his wheelchair, a subdermal pump delivers a steady, programmed dose of morphine to his spine"

Both of these guys deserve a large part of the blame for what happened to them. I am not making any excuses for either of them. Just interesting the way things worked out.
 
I can understand how Limbaugh broke the law and is to blame for his troubles; doctor shopping is very detrimental to the medical profession. But I don't see how the guy in the second story - assuming it's all true - holds any blame whatsoever. Even if he did fake his scripts does 25 years sound right?
 
Even if he did fake his scripts does 25 years sound right?
Click to expand...
One of the many problems with the War on Some Drugs is that it takes the Judge completely out of the sentencing process. Note the Judge gave Paey the "minimum" and he's in for 25 years.

Here's how it works: In a Federal Drug Crime, the prosecutor adds a total from a scale of "points" for whatever "crimes" he chooses to charge. If the Jury finds the defendant guilty, the Judge is constrained to sentence no less than the minimum number of years indicated by that number of "points".

I once sat in a Courtroom where the defendant pled guilty to Conspiracy in a drug sting. The Judge found the DEA's behavior in enticing this guy to enter the conspiracy outrageous and said as much, pre-sentence. The Federal Prosecutor turned to His Honor and stated, "Your Honor, there is only one person in this Court Room who can change Mr. X's sentence; and that person is not you." The defendant did 6 years. His crime? He showed up at a Meth cook that was thought up, set up, arranged and stocked by the DEA after they solicited him to be involved to help out a buddy who was in prison. He brought a scale and some tin foil.

Turns out the "Buddy" was not in prison at all; he'd been released from charges of Manufacture (not conspiracy to) in return for a list of names...he gave them any names he could think of and was later re-arrested and sentenced in a second crime...you guessed it: Manufacture and Distribution of Methamphetamine. By the way, the "Buddy" in prison? At the time he "co-operated" he'd been picked up during a period in Witness Protection....this was the second time he'd been arrested and the second time he got out in return for "co-operation". The guy who got the six years? He refused to snitch.

In other words, forget about throwing yourself "on the mercy of the Court", should the Prosecutor be wishing to use you to advance his political career (eg: you refuse to be a snitch; they pile on the Points). Mercy is a legal anachronism today.

Welcome to the War on Some Drugs.
Rich
 
Prohibition II is up to us. All we have to do is stop believing the crapola and vote to end it as part of a program to bring back the constitution.
 
We should be able to give Judges some latitudes in situation like this. I agree Mr Paey really didnt deserve a 25 year sentence. He had had three trials and two of them ended in his favor. The jury got confused by some guy who didnt have his facts right.
Sometimes I wonder what these Prosecuters think. Lets keep fishing until we get the verdict we want. Justice is about a punishment appropriate to the crime. Mr Paey was in a lot of pain, he wasnt doing it to enrich himself, nor to distribute it.
Justice would have been the Judge being able to give him probation and ensure that he was enrolled in a responsible pain managment program, where he could get help. Instead he is now in Prison attached to a morphine pump. How is that justice? Living in the kind of pain Mr Paey is in is already a life sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top