Free Richard Paey

Jacob Sullum | September 30, 2005

I recently received a letter from Richard Paey, who is serving a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence in a Florida prison on drug trafficking charges, despite the fact that no believes he ever engaged in drug trafficking. As I explained after he was sentenced last year, Paey was accused of improperly obtaining painkillers by forging prescriptions from his doctor. He says the prescriptions were authorized, which his doctor (who faced possible charges himself) denied. But no one disputes that the drugs were for his own use: Paey, who uses a wheelchair, has long suffered from pain associated with a back injury, more recently compounded by multiple sclerosis. He was not accused of selling the narcotics. But because the amount of drugs involved exceeded an arbitrary threshold of 28 grams, he was found guilty of trafficking, which triggered the draconian sentence.

Prosecutors showed they did not believe Paey deserved such punishment by offering him a plea deal under which he could have avoided prison. Their position now seems to be that he deserves to spend a quarter century in prison for being too stubborn to accept that deal. Paey asked me to help spread the word about a campaign by the Pain Relief Network and November Coalition urging Gov. Jeb Bush to pardon him. Whatever your views on drug prohibition generally or its impact on pain treatment specifically, this is a case of obvious injustice that cries out for the governor's intervention.

Comments

|9.30.05 @ 12:04PM|#

Pill head deserves what he gets. Today it prescription painkillers, tomorrw he'll be doing wheelchair drive-bys. Think of the children.

MP|9.30.05 @ 12:23PM|#

The jury deserves some blame here. Either they are ignorant of their right to Jury Nullification (ignorance is no excuse) or they are simply rat bastards.

|9.30.05 @ 12:26PM|#

Apalling. I just forwarded this story along to a news producer in FL.

Thanks for your posting, Jacob.

I've been diagnosed with a number of medical conditions. I live in chronic pain. Prescription drugs (and one particular non-prescription drug) are my lifeline. Without the pills and pot, I'd be unable to function, unable to work.

I have a lot of friends who are pharmacists, for I used to work in a pharmaceutical company (until I was fired for being a "liability" due to my medical ailments). My pharmacist friends told me when they worked shifts at pharmacies, they'd frequently flat-out lie to patients seeking narcotics, telling them that the pharmacy doesn't have the drug in stock because filling a narcotics script is risky due to liability.

Just a few months ago I was turned away by my local pharmacist when I went to fill a narcotic. "We ran out of that drug," said the pharmacist. After my inquisition and persistence, and practical begging for her to relieve me of my pain (I could barely drive to the pharmacy due to pain), she finally caved in and filled it.

Long story short, what's going on in this country is sick. I feel Richard Paey's pain.

|9.30.05 @ 12:33PM|#

Concerning jury nullification, they might very well have not heard of it; it's not like it's that common a subject in the popular consciousness (at least, it doesn't seem so to me).

I think the question is, did Paey's lawyer mention it to the jury, or did the judge (as I believe happens sometimes) bar him from doing so? Jury nullification seems like a good way to combat this drug-war silliness, especially in a case as absurd as this. 'Course, there is that reason article linked to:

A juror later told the St. Petersburg Times he did not really think Paey was guilty of trafficking, since the prosecution made it clear from the outset that he didn't sell any pills. The juror said he voted guilty to avoid being the lone holdout. He suggested that other jurors might have voted differently if the foreman had not assured them Paey would get probation.

The prosecutors, who finally obtained the draconian sentence that even they concede Paey does not deserve, say it's his fault for insisting on his innocence. "It's unfortunate that anyone has to go to prison, but he's got no one to blame but Richard Paey," Assistant State Attorney Mike Halkitis told the St. Petersburg Times. "All we wanted to do was get him help."

Seems a tad bit dishonest, no?

Larry A|9.30.05 @ 12:38PM|#

So the main crime Mr. Paey committed was POC. Pissing Off the Cops.

Remember when it used to be "Protect and Serve?"

|9.30.05 @ 12:43PM|#

If there's a more terrifying phrase than "judged by a jury of your peers", I can't think what it would be.

Rich Ard|9.30.05 @ 12:51PM|#

How about "judged by an unseen cabal"?

|9.30.05 @ 12:52PM|#

I thought judges are supposed to tell the jury what their job is before the trial starts, which I would think includes jury nullification. I'm wrong assuming that the law requires the jdge to explain the the role of a jury and what they can do?

|9.30.05 @ 12:54PM|#

Rich Ard-Of course. "Judged by a Star Chamber" is also scary. I was really just being hyperbolic to try to make a point about the jury system-namely, that there's no real reason to expect a jury to exercise better judgement than a small mob.

|9.30.05 @ 12:56PM|#

Well, pissing off the prosecutors.
Perhaps this is a good point to address the perverse incentives and pressures faced by prosecutors...indulge me.
An aspiring prosecutor graduates from law school with a mountian of debt and enters a position that pays less than an armed mall cop gets. The only way to move up the pay scale is by getting plenty of convictions; preferably of the right kind. (OK, political connections help too)
A drug kingpin conviction is a great way to pump up a resume. Of course, actually convicting a drug kingpin entails a great deal of time, effort and risk. However, the drug laws allow prosecutors to get the credit for nailing a drug kingpin by nailing someone like Paey.
So consider the incentives to the system: prosecutors get free-lunch convictions, courts and police get statistic pumping wins and the law-makers get to show they are tough on crime. Is it any wonder this just keep getting worse?

|9.30.05 @ 12:59PM|#

Mike- As I recall, in some cases the law forbids the judge to mention jury nullification. In many others, the lawyers are prohibited from mentioning it. While I don't have hard information, I would bet a fair amount of money that no judge in the US is required to mention that juries can choose not to enforce a given law.
I used to be a member of a group trying to push jury nullification called the Fully Informed Jury Association. I'm not sure whatever happened to them, but a google seach might get you to the right place.

theOneState|9.30.05 @ 1:07PM|#

What's the deal, are you guys not gonna post another entry until Paey is free?

|9.30.05 @ 1:13PM|#

"The jury deserves some blame here. Either they are ignorant of their right to Jury Nullification (ignorance is no excuse) or they are simply rat bastards."

Amen.

The Jury, the prosecuter, and the Judges. May they some day need pain medication, and not be able to get it, that they may think about what they did to this man.

|9.30.05 @ 1:17PM|#

The juror said he voted guilty to avoid being the lone holdout.

What a fucking coward. This illustrates why I will not try to get out of the misery of jury duty if called. I would want to be there so I could be the lone holdout on a case like this, if needed. There is simply no drug possession case (not involving direct physical harm to others) where I would ever vote guilty, regardless of the facts.

|9.30.05 @ 1:26PM|#

I used to be a member of a group trying to push jury nullification called the Fully Informed Jury Association. I'm not sure whatever happened to them, but a google seach might get you to the right place.

They're still around.

http://www.fija.org/

However judges and prosecutors take a dim view of jury nullification and will tell you it's not allowed. I recall a case a few years ago where a juror in Colorado was jailed for contempt for voting to aquit in a MJ possession case. Really sick, but it happened.

|9.30.05 @ 1:27PM|#

On topic.

I don't expect this to get any action from Jeb. I'm pretty sure he'd think it would send the wrong message to the children.

|9.30.05 @ 1:30PM|#

I doubt that Gov. Jeb Bush will pardon him, the Gov. will probably hide behind the "seperation of powers" argument. I also doubt that this will get any major media attention, and Gov. Bush probaly thinks that a pardon could ruin his chances of becoming a future President.

Akira MacKenzie|9.30.05 @ 2:21PM|#

Paey asked me to help spread the word about a campaign by the Pain Relief Network and November Coalition urging Gov. Jeb Bush to pardon him... this is a case of obvious injustice that cries out for the governor's intervention.

Be careful, old Jeb might unleash his invisible, conservative, warrior Chiang on you.

MP|9.30.05 @ 2:56PM|#

Isaac,

I don't know if this is the case you were refering to, but I agree that this is "really sick".

The lesson to be learned is, if you are ever in a position to take the Brian Courts "lone holdout" approach (which I would love to be in a position to do), don't state your reasons why, just do it.

|9.30.05 @ 3:17PM|#

Is Richard Paey the guy who went to prison for obtaining too many prescription drugs and then, once in prison, actually got all the drugs he needed? On the tax payers' dime? If so, how ironic. If this is the same case I heard of, the deal the Prosecutors offered was for him to stop using certain narcotic pain killers and enter a drug treatment program. Its no wonder he refused.

I deal with chronic (and acute) pain sufferers frequently. The honest ones derive very little pleasure from taking doses of Oxycontin that would put you or I into a coma. What the law is doing to these people is sick. Still, I get very upset when I hear about some junkie drug seeker who abuses the health care system just to get high. I don't care if people get high on opiates. I do care if their actions negatively effect people like Richard Paey who is now paying the price for an irrational, authoritarian drug crackdown combined with irresponsible, selfish drug thieves.

|9.30.05 @ 3:20PM|#

That's the one. I was mistaken, it was a meth case, not MJ.

This was the outcome:

http://www.levellers.org/jrp/acquit.rmn.htm

|9.30.05 @ 3:25PM|#

I do care if their actions negatively effect people like Richard Paey...

It is not their actions negatively effecting Richard Paey. It is the actions of the self-righteous busybodies who support and run the War on Drugs.

|9.30.05 @ 4:38PM|#

This brings me to the question. How many grams are in 10,000 pills of Oxycontin? I would imagine that the weight would go beyond the threshold for major drug kingpin status. This is the amount that Rush (Fat Bastard) Limbaugh allegedly had in his possession. It has been at least a year since he was busted, yet he is still flapping his yap on the radio and he has his lawyers (liars) spinning to confuse and befuddle the investigators. Why isn't his gigantic fat ass being tapped by Bubba in the joint?

|9.30.05 @ 4:39PM|#

I'm pretty sure that a judge's instructions to the jury would make you think that there is no such thing as jury nullification. I think the judge says something along the lines of "you may only deliberate on the facts presented in the case" or something similar. If you hear that, how could you possibly believe you had the right to say the law was unjust and vote 'not guilty'?

These sonofabitches should have a spot reserved in the lowest circle of hell, if there is such a place. "We just wanted to get him help" my ass. He was helping himself, you little fuckers. The dishonesty is terrible. I think that if you're in obvious pain or have a terminal disease you should be able to do any goddamn thing you want to yourself, even if it leads to your death. Of course, I think that anyone should have that right, but at the very least, sick people should have that right.

The fact it's even an issue simply astonishes me.

|9.30.05 @ 6:18PM|#

Ron Jeremy,
Why are you mad at the guy that managed to escape victimization from an overzealous prosecutor?

Tune into another radio station if you don't like his show. Don't give power to the state to silence something you don't like. You don't like drugs? Don't do them. You don't like a radio station? Don't listen to it.

Don't send people who disagree with your views to get raped. That is not right.

SteveInClearwater|9.30.05 @ 8:27PM|#

MATTC, yes, Paey is and will be receiving a steady supply of morphine via a morphine pump, for the duration of his 25 years.

JEB! is not likely to give him any slack since his first name does not rhyme with Jo-elle.

You wanna see one sick bastard, watch the prosecutor in the Dateline piece that featured Paey. The smuggest, most sanctimonious piece of shit I've seen and that includes John Walters and Jim McDonough lying their azz of the public about drugs and drug policy.

(paraphrasing) "We give Mr. Paey a chance to plea to a six month sentence and he rejected it, so we just STUCK 25 YEARS up his ass."

Fuck the DEA and all their types that have made average chronic pain patients felons worthy of decades-long sentences.

|9.30.05 @ 8:30PM|#

I live in Vietnam. The funny thing is that while the government here is illiberal and authoritarian, in many ways they either can't afford to enforce their wishes, or just don't care about the nitpicky details American government obsesses over.

Example: Pharmacies here will supply just about any drug they have in stock if they think you really need it. It's the "behind the counter" idea. Foreigners always get the benefit of the doubt. I had some bad back pain, so I went to the pharmacy looking for any opiate I could find.

"Do you have Tylenol 3, codeine, or Percaset/Percadan?"

"Yes, we do! How much do you want?" They then produced many BOTTLES of liquid painkiller, Percadan, I think.

Uh...no thanks! They didn't have anything non-injectable. But the thing is they were perfectly willing to supply me with whatever I needed. If I went and killed myself with the stuff, that was my problem, not theirs.

America's problem with all these rules is that America has too much money. I'm sure Vietnam would like to enforce all manner of crazy regulations, but they simply can't afford to. America CAN afford to enforce them, and does so with enthusiasm.

|10.1.05 @ 5:34AM|#

Kwais, while I can't speak for ron jeremy, I think the point he was trying to make was, why is this rich man who is a political ally of the current administration not getting into the same kind of trouble this other guy is? (And I'm pretty sure the answer is in the question) I suspect you knew that, but I don't know fer sure

tomWright|10.1.05 @ 11:59AM|#

FIJA is only semi-active right now, but there is still good info at the website mentioned above

Talk about synchronicity. I wrote about using nullification and a Massachusettes case last night, and another aspect of the W.o.D. that caused a flashback to reading Animal Farm.

The anti-drug-warriors need to look at nullification more closely. It came in handy during the years of the undergound railroad and fugitive slaves, it could be useful now.

|10.1.05 @ 1:58PM|#

This is a terrible injustice. I have multiple schlerosis and fibermyalgia. The problem of getting medication is a fight every month. The pain is real and our medication is the only way to relate person to person without thinking about pain. I think the court system needs to be informed of the pain and trying to rule out all other modes of treatment you come to medication as the ultimate answer. We are not drug addicts. This helps us to feel normal.

|10.1.05 @ 4:20PM|#

Pain control is such a touchy subject, because those who are enduring it often can't demonstrate it to someone else. Pain tolerance varies from individual to individual and doctors have to accept the amount pain a patient is reporting. On the other hand, there are also people who like to recreationally use pain killers for recreational use (see War on Some Drugs). This is where, as George Costanza so aptly put it, Worlds Collide! Doctors are so afraid of losing thier livlihood, they treat pain sufferers with a certain amount of ambivalence. Are they wrong for ignoring the Hypocratic Oath and not treating the patient the patient fairly? I say yes, but it is the same thought process that people in Nazi Germany used when confronted with protecting a Jew, by helping or hiding him or her, or compacently allowing those persons to be rounded up, by turning a blind eye. The pain is ultimately transferred to another poor soul to endure instead of drawing a line in the sand and saying, no more cooperation with the prohibitionist / pharmaceutical industrial complex. Maybe the War in Iraq, and all of the disasters our country is enduring will defund the prohibitionists and decriminalization / legalisation taxation will occur to everyone's benifit.

|10.1.05 @ 4:21PM|#

Sorry Hypocratic = Hippocratic

M. Simon|10.2.05 @ 3:20AM|#

A Doctor talks about self medication

Basically the doctor thinks that "recreational" users are self medicating for pain/anxiety.

i.e. the War on Drugs is a war on people in pain.

The Payey case is not an abberation. It is the desired result.

|10.2.05 @ 6:13PM|#

No matter how libertarian, I thought most people believed property rights are dependent upon a healthy criminal justice system. I think the jury nullification crowd is wrong because it will get even harder to convict violent criminals and those who threaten our property. Does the name "O.J. Simpson" mean anything to you? Moreover, the beef here is not with prosecutors but rather with legislative policy makers.

There is a lot wrong with drug policy in this country, and the folks who make policy do not seem to understand the basic concepts of free-market economics. However,the anger these comments direct at prosecutors in general, and the motivations attributed to prosecutors here, are simplistic and unfair. Spoken, I admit, as a prosecutor.

Do I understand the case in question correctly? Do libertarians feel forgery is alright?