Search Results:

“Given the sweeping nature of the subpoenas here, their chilling effect on First Amendment rights, and the circumstances under which they were obtained – a frustrated prosecutor seeking to silence a dissenting advocate – this Court should quash the subpoenas as an unjustified infringement on Ms. Reynolds’ and PRN’s First Amendment rights,” the ACLU wrote in its pleading.

“I will not be intimidated and I will not be silenced,” said Reynolds, who founded PRN… “As I testified before Congress, an obsession with prescription drug abuse has resulted in the gross under-treatment of pain in this country. We have turned honest physicians and desperate patients into criminals, and policymakers and the public need to hear about it…”

These subpoenas constitute an abuse of the grand jury process… Because [Treadway's obstruction of justice] investigation lacks any good faith basis, Ms. Reynolds does not claim a Fifth Amendment privilege with respect to any of the materials sought by the subpoena.(1) Ms. Reynolds maintains that she has committed no crime and that there is nothing in the requested materials that could inculpate her in the obstruction of justice, witness tampering or jury tampering. For all of these reasons, this Court should quash the March 10 subpoenas issued to Siobhan Reynolds and PRN.

We keep hearing about how the War on Drugs has failed. But the truth is, the War on Drugs has been tremendously successful, that is if you wanted your country to be a police state, your Congress completely unresponsive to the needs of the people, and your doctors letting you and your loved ones live and die in unnecessary pain.

AUSA Treadway wants to drag Ms. Reynolds before a Grand Jury for, get this, obstruction of justice! in the case of U.S. v Dr. Schneider. If we were not talking about the mockery of American justice Bush appointees routinely make in cases like Schneider and Shaygan this would be really funny. Siobhan Reynolds is obstructing justice? Utter nonsense. It is prosecutor Treadway for the USA who, if not obstructing justice in this case, is surely doing everything she can to delay it.

Shaygan’s attorney Markus discovered that govt prosecutors authorized two witnesses to surreptitiously record conversations with the defense team and attempt to bribe Markus, and failed to disclose that the witnesses were paid, confidential informants for the DEA. U.S. District Judge Gold said there were “flagrant violations” of basic rules by Shaygan’s prosecutors, and that “important safeguards were not met.” An order from Gold is expected in a few weeks.

Excerpt: “Dr. Mangino has been unjustly prosecuted and convicted in Pennsylvania. His case is unusual. He is currently incarcerated at SCI-Cresson… Essentially, in PA and nationwide, if this conviction is allowed to stand on the grounds presented by prosecution, then any single opioid prescription can be deemed illegal.” — Dr. Mangino

Many physicians are concerned that prescribing opioid analgesics in chronic pain treatment is accompanied by an unacceptable risk of unwarranted prosecution. The validity of this fear is evaluated by examining the standards through which physicians are targeted and prosecuted. Prohibition law is identified as an error in social policy that distorts medical standards.

I am very glad to see physicians, who have themselves been savaged by the government, publishing their stories. Consider Dr. Jackson’s article, Conviction without a Crime, to be a companion piece to Dr. Rottschaefer’s article discussed in the previous item here, The Criminal Criminal Justice System. Together these two articles will give the reader a good sense, I think, of the utter breakdown of professional ethics, common sense, and fairness in any case involving controlled substances.

I came across the article linked to: “Third Circuit Gives New Meaning to Term ‘Criminal Justice System’”, by Dr. Bernard Rottschaefer, himself the victim of federal prosecutor Mary Beth Buchanan in what Radley Balko, who wrote “Sex, Drugs and a Federal Prosecution – The Shabby Case Against Dr. Rottschaefer,” calls “Buchanan’s most outrageous case.” Balko writes: “Since Rottschaefer’s conviction, Buchanan’s case has fallen to pieces, as each of the five witnesses who testified to getting illegal prescriptions from Rottschaefer have since been shown to have lied. Buchanan refuses to reopen the case.”

criticisms and description of federal prosecutorial behavior rings true to me from my experience and knowledge of war on docs/pain crisis cases. Our justice system is withering, ‘the drugs exception to the Bill of Rights’ has gone from being a tragic lawyers joke to business as usual, and we now routinely apply asset forfeiture and RICO laws, intended by Congress to combat drug cartels, to individual pain-treating physicians. Doctors and sick people are easy, profitable prey for law enforcement and federal prosecutors pandering to the electorate through a media willing to be exploited for their share of the spoils.

There are so many who need opioid pain medications and can not get them… These people have their lives destroyed every day as they drag themselves from doctor to doctor being lied to, verbally and sometimes physically abused, forced into unnecessary rounds of expensive testing… They are sneered at by pharmacists, called addicts by doctors, drug tested, called “frequent-flyers” and other derogatory names by emergency room nurses and doctors, denied reimbursement…

Update on the case of USA v Dr. Martinez in Washington state. Martinez has been acquitted of all drug crime charges. The fraud charges remaining after her 2007 fed trial have also been dismissed, but the govt can bring the fraud charges anew. Also examined is a recent Yakima Herald article announcing “new” charges that are not, in any reality-based sense, “new” at all.

Excerpt: “As usual, the academics ignore the elephant in the living room. Regarding review articles that wring their hands about the lack of long term evidence of the safety and efficacy of opioid analgesic therapy, they never discuss the impossibility of measuring the efficacy and safety of a therapy that almost no physician is comfortable doing properly. For an excellent analysis of what we might call the “new academic opiophobia,” see the Pain Relief Network’s 2008 “WA State Tort Claim” pages 34 – 37.”

A federal judge on Thursday denied the government\’s efforts to gag defense attorneys, family and supporters of a Kansas doctor accused of unlawfully prescribing medication. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Monti Belot said the government had not shown a compelling government interest in restraining speech.