Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
I've Got Nothing Here
This story is so bizarre and outrageous, I can hardly believe it's true.
Tampa's Mark O'Hara was released from prison this week. He was serving a 25-year sentence for possession of 58 Vicodin tablets. Prosecutors acknowledge he wasn't selling the drug. They acknowledge that he had a prescription for it. At his trial, two doctors testified they'd been treating O'Hara since the early 1990s for pain related to gout and an automobile accident.
But prosecutors inexplicably brought drug trafficking charges anyway, because as the article explains, "Under the law, simply possessing the quantity of pills he had constitutes trafficking."
This is simply stunning. The man was sentenced to 25 years for possessing 58 pills for which he had a legal prescription.
Prosecutors then argued—and the trial court agreed—that the jury was not allowed to consider the fact that O'Hara had a prescription because Florida statutes governing painkillers don't allow for a "prescription defense," as if that rather crucial fact were some mere technicality those ACLU-types are always using to get criminals off the hook.
I suppose we should expect little from the state that put Richard Paey away for 25 years. But this is insanity. My guess is that O'Hara's prior drug conviction (in the 1980s) and the small amount of pot also found in his truck blinded the prosecutors' and judge's discretion. Gotta' get this guy for something, right?
O'Hara is free after an appellate court rightly deemed the trial "absurd" and tossed out the verdict. Prosecutors are apparently still considering what to do next.
Given the way they've wasted taxpayer money and court time and needlessly harassed Mr. O'Hara, in a just world their "next step" would be submitting their own letters of resignation.
VM|7.27.07 @ 10:15AM|#
BITE IT, PROGLIB and JimmyDAGEEK!
SEE - TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA!!! NOT JUST CHICAGO!!!
humperdink.
pttttttfffffffff.....
D. Greene|7.27.07 @ 10:16AM|#
Those prosecutors should be charged with misconduct, and sent to fucking jail.
x,y|7.27.07 @ 10:16AM|#
You nailed it Radley:
1. Unjust prosecution.
2. Unjust sentence.
3. Waste of court time.
4. Waste of taxpayer money.
|7.27.07 @ 10:19AM|#
Why send this guy to jail? All he did was pay for the baggie
handed him by the pharmacist. The pharmacist is the real evil-doer
here. Somebody send the SWAT team to Walgreens, quick!
I'm just glad the apellate court did the right thing.
|7.27.07 @ 10:20AM|#
I'm pretty cynical about the government as a rule anyway, but this is just absolutely unbelieveable. Where's the state bar in all of this?
Billy Bob Smith|7.27.07 @ 10:21AM|#
"Under the law, simply possessing the quantity of pills he
had constitutes trafficking."
If that is waht the law says it has to be enforced.
Prosecutors then argued-and the trial court agreed-that the
jury was not allowed to consider the fact that O'Hara had a
prescription because Florida statutes governing painkillers don't
allow for a "prescription defense," as if that rather crucial fact
were some mere technicality those ACLU-types are always using to
get criminals off the hook.
Agreed, it is a mere tecnicality, nobody needs that much
drugs.
They need to also file charges cause they found him with the weeds.
Drug addicts are not allowed painkiller prescriptions by law. I
think the purpose of this is to trump up the weed charges. Because
of the pot and the past conviction, he needs some good 'ole
fashioned SEVERE PUNISHMENT, including prison and rape in prison,
perhaps death for his crimes against society.
|7.27.07 @ 10:22AM|#
While I agree that the whole thing is pretty absurd, can
somebody explain why the prosecutors are guilty of misconduct and
should resign?
Prosecutors don't write the laws, and their job is to represent the
wishes of the people in a criminal case against an individual.
Well, it seems that the people generally want really harsh drug
laws, and unless some ethics rules were broken or what not it's
hard to see what the prosecutors did wrong here.
|7.27.07 @ 10:22AM|#
This is the sort of situation where I would, Honest-to-You-Know-Who, like to see the prosecutor seized in his office on live television and dragged in handcuffs to the state penitentiary, and made to serve the balance of O'Hara's sentence
|7.27.07 @ 10:25AM|#
Of course the jury would come back with a guilty verdict because
they were told, almost flat out, that they could not consider all
the things that a reasonable person would have to consider.
Hi, are you an obedient sheep?
Yes
Welcome to the jury!
|7.27.07 @ 10:26AM|#
Radley,
I think the 'just world' scenario would either involve tarring
& feathering, pistols at dawn with Mr. O'Hara, or (my
favorite,) firing squad.
ktc2|7.27.07 @ 10:26AM|#
So long as prosecutors have prosecutorial discretion "I was just enforcing the law." is even less an excuse than "I was just obeying orders."
|7.27.07 @ 10:28AM|#
Neidermann,
The prosecutors are guilty of misconduct because they charged a man
with committing a crime (possessing 58 Vicodin) when they knew that
no crime had been committed (he had a prescription). The fact that
the judge was incompentent enough to exclude that fact from the
jury is beside the point, they knowingly prosecuted a man for a
non-criminal act. Actually, the judge's decision probably isn't
beside the point. Whoever presided over that trial certainly
deserves to have his job performance closely reviewed as well.
|7.27.07 @ 10:33AM|#
The prosecutors are guilty of misconduct because they
charged a man with committing a crime (possessing 58 Vicodin) when
they knew that no crime had been committed (he had a
prescription).
It is a crime because Florida law does not allow a 'Prescription
Defense'. It may seem unfair but the fact is he had pot and this
was probably a way to increse the charges.
Regardless if he was innocent, he seems like a low life dirtbag and
there needs to be some way to get these types into prison.
D. Greene|7.27.07 @ 10:36AM|#
Regardless if he was innocent, he seems like a low life
dirtbag and there needs to be some way to get these types into
prison.
LOLOLOlOLOLOL. That had me actually laughing out loud.
|7.27.07 @ 10:36AM|#
Regardless if he was innocent, he seems like a low life
dirtbag and there needs to be some way to get these types into
prison.
DRINK!
(is this an appropriate time? I never knew how this game
worked...)
|7.27.07 @ 10:38AM|#
So, will Mr. O'Hara be reimbursed by the state for the
possessions he had to liquidate? What's the typical
procedure/outcome for something like that?
While the prosecutors for this case are clearly asshats, so are the
jurors.
|7.27.07 @ 10:38AM|#
UCrawford: thanks.
What I'm still unclear about is this - when it's said that Florida
does not have a "prescription defense" I took it to mean that if
you have an excessive amount of the drug in question, the fact that
you had a prescription does not get you off the hook. Am I wrong
about that?
Also it's worth noting that O'Hara is a convicted coke dealer and
frankly carrying around 58 vicodins on your person does raise the
possibility that he was selling them.
|7.27.07 @ 10:41AM|#
AP: Mayors from Chicago and Tampa met this week to discuss their options for dealing with the onerous "Civil Rights" defence.
jimmydageek|7.27.07 @ 10:43AM|#
VM | July 27, 2007, 10:15am | #
BITE IT, PROGLIB and JimmyDAGEEK!
SEE - TAMPA TAMPA TAMPA!!! NOT JUST CHICAGO!!!
humperdink.
pttttttfffffffff.....
That's just childish and petty, VM. You better send a case of fried
haggis to The
Urkobold&trade immediately, lest your taint be withered by
a pack of rabid
squirrel minions.
SIV|7.27.07 @ 10:43AM|#
Prosecutors then argued-and the trial court agreed-that the
jury was not allowed to consider the fact that O'Hara had a
prescription because Florida statutes governing painkillers don't
allow for a "prescription defense," as if that rather crucial fact
were some mere technicality those ACLU-types are always using to
get criminals off the hook.
Perhaps it is in the article I'm too lazy to read but was the jury
unaware he had a prescription or were they aware and told to
disreard it as part of their instructions?
|7.27.07 @ 10:46AM|#
"Agreed, it is a mere tecnicality, nobody needs that much
drugs."
You can get a better deal on prescriptions through your insurance
company if you do mail order. Many times, you will get a 90-day
supply for the same co-pay one would pay at a regular pharmacy. So,
your "nobody needs that much drugs" is somewhat incorrect.
|7.27.07 @ 10:46AM|#
Neidermann,
Apparently the appeals court said that this wasn't the case, since
they called the prosecution's reasoning "absurd". So I take that
and the overturned sentence to mean that their tactic was not in
compliance with Florida drug law.
As for his past conviction, it's irrelevant. He had a prescription
for the Vicodin and the prosecution had no proof that he was
dealing drugs. The law is designed to prosecute people for crimes
we have reasonable proof they committed, not for unsubstantiated
suspicions of crimes that it's possible they committed. Hell, if
the cops followed that approach they'd never have cold cases. They
could just prosecute whoever they didn't like in any given week,
regardless of whether they had any evidence or not or whether the
person was actually guilty or not.
|7.27.07 @ 10:48AM|#
"""Regardless if he was innocent, he seems like a low life
dirtbag and there needs to be some way to get these types into
prison."""
So you want to send people to prison because they seem like a dirt
bag? innocent or not?
|7.27.07 @ 10:48AM|#
You know those machines that take old cars and crush them into amusing cubes? We need one of those, but for bad judges/prosecutors/cops. We can call it "The Balkonator."
|7.27.07 @ 10:48AM|#
DRINK!
(is this an appropriate time? I never knew how this game
worked...)
Sarcasm and/or parody doesn't count.
|7.27.07 @ 10:49AM|#
If that's the case...shouldn't that big hypocritical idiot blow-hard Rush Limbaugh be doing life in FL as we speak?
|7.27.07 @ 10:52AM|#
Agreed, it is a mere technicality, nobody needs that much
drugs.
How helpful of the good prosecutor to tell Mr. O'Hara how much of
his prescription he actually "needs," seeing as the prosecutor is
apparently a qualified pharmacist.
Oh, wait a sec...
|7.27.07 @ 10:52AM|#
DRINK!
(is this an appropriate time? I never knew how this game
worked...)
Sarcasm and/or parody doesn't count.
Awwwwww :(
|7.27.07 @ 10:53AM|#
Neidermann,
Apparently the appeals court said that this wasn't the case, since
they called the prosecution's reasoning "absurd". So I take that
and the overturned sentence to mean that their tactic was not in
compliance with Florida drug law.
Sounds like that's the case, I agree.
Although I still can't help but think that I could not legally walk
around with 10,000 Vicodin pills in a suitcase just because I found
a doctor who would prescribe me that many.
SIV|7.27.07 @ 10:54AM|#
Jurors weren't told that it is legal to possess the drug
with a prescription, which he had.
Sounds like they weren't told he had a prescription. Bizarre.The
State can prevent a defendant from defending
himself.
That is far worse than instructing the jury to disregard facts not
relevant under the law.
|7.27.07 @ 10:56AM|#
VM,
At least we can eat foie gras here. By the ocean. Mmmm,
suffering goose with a side of fresh grouper. I understand that
Chicago is banning sausage next.
If he's a criminal, then what about the doctor and the pharmacy?
This goes all the way to the top of CVS!
ed|7.27.07 @ 10:56AM|#
"O'Hara is free after an appellate court rightly deemed the trial "absurd" and tossed out the verdict."
|7.27.07 @ 10:59AM|#
Who is it that gets to determine what sort of defense that you
have?
Is there any limitation to this?
If there are no limits, why can't they take away the "I'm not
guilty" defense?
Oh, and as far as how much drugs I need, I think that is between me
and my doctor and the Pigs shouldn't have anything to say about
it.
|7.27.07 @ 10:59AM|#
Theresa, some people just don't do the math. If the guy got a
thirty day supply of something he has to take 2x a day, that 60
tablets. Getting a 30 day supply is not uncommon.
The problem with this situation is the law. They are barred from
using the truth (that it's a prescription) by law. That is
unreasonable, but on the books none the less. In reality, if he was
trafficking, the doctor should be arrested too. The whole thing is
BS. Just another reason not to move to Florida.
|7.27.07 @ 11:00AM|#
Neidermann,
And if the prosecution had evidence that you were selling those
pills illegally, or that the prescription was bogus, or that the
doctor was somehow involved in trafficking with you, you'd probably
be right. But in this case, the prosecution didn't have that kind
of proof, they frivolously prosecuted this guy for legally having
58 Vicodin because they couldn't nail him for anything else. And
that is abhorrent.
|7.27.07 @ 11:01AM|#
I still can't help but think that I could not legally walk
around with 10,000 Vicodin pills in a suitcase just because I found
a doctor who would prescribe me that many.
The legality of this would be something the jury should
decide.
The problem arose when the prosecutor decided it was his job to
decided whether or not the case was legal, then withholding
evidence to support his decision.
|7.27.07 @ 11:02AM|#
"...their job is to represent the wishes of the people in a
criminal case against an individual."
Which people?
Yeah, that trick always works.
jimmydageek|7.27.07 @ 11:02AM|#
At least we can eat foie gras here. By the ocean. Mmmm,
suffering goose with a side of fresh grouper. I understand that
Chicago is banning sausage next.
And, we can also do REAL deep sea fishing, not the lake type!!
D. Greene|7.27.07 @ 11:04AM|#
Would they have been allowed to call the prescribing doctor in
as a witness and let the jury use their powers of deduction to
figure it out?
This was a prosecutorial hit job because he refused their generous
plea bargain.
jimmydageek|7.27.07 @ 11:06AM|#
lunchstealer | July 27, 2007, 11:03am | #
joe, was somebody spoofing you in the 10:33 post?
The email used above was joelboyle as opposed to joepboyle...could
be a typo, but i assume it was a spoof.
|7.27.07 @ 11:06AM|#
Tampa was also the place where the local DA put up the names of men caught soliciting hookers on billboards. I don't remember if I saw Dondero up there or not.
|7.27.07 @ 11:09AM|#
And, we can also do REAL deep sea fishing, not the lake
type!!
In addition, in South Florida, you can pretty much get away with
whatever if you're not a complete idiot.
The cops here are probably on twice the drugs you are...
SIV|7.27.07 @ 11:12AM|#
"...their job is to represent the wishes of the
people STATE in a criminal case
against an individual."
fixed
|7.27.07 @ 11:12AM|#
Tampa airport police arrested O'Hara in August 2004 after
they found the hydrocodone and a small amount of marijuana in his
illegally parked and unattended bread truck.
Why not use the mj offense as the basis of prosecution?
Odd.
SIV|7.27.07 @ 11:14AM|#
Tampa was also the place where the local DA put up the names
of men caught soliciting hookers on billboards.
Mississippi has mugshot billboards for statutory
rape offenders. The catchphrase is "15 will get you 20"
|7.27.07 @ 11:17AM|#
Why not use the mj offense as the basis of
prosecution?
Because he didn't possess enough MJ to be convicted under the
distribution statute.
|7.27.07 @ 11:18AM|#
Tampa was also the place where the local DA put up the names
of men caught soliciting hookers on billboards.
This sounds like a very libertarian thing to do.
Public shame/shunning is supposed to be the preferred tool for
behavior the community doesn't sanction. If you aren't embarrassed
about you solicitation, you won't care. If you are, then you
shouldn't have been soliciting.
VM|7.27.07 @ 11:18AM|#
I sorry Mr. DaGeek.
Have sent canned haggis fritters straight away!
SIV - so they're advocating gambling?
[ducks]
dhex|7.27.07 @ 11:20AM|#
man, it's like florida's prosecution system was reading all the
wacky totalitarian routines about freeland and interzone in naked
lunch and said "hey, this is an awesome idea!"
the patriot act has that whiff too, not just because of the stupid
name.
|7.27.07 @ 11:22AM|#
Why not use the mj offense as the basis of
prosecution?
Because he didn't possess enough MJ to be convicted under the
distribution statute.
Last I checked, Florida has a mandatory 1 year/$1000 fine for the
1st-Time possession. You'd think these fascists would be happy to
settle for that...
Tampa City Commission|7.27.07 @ 11:22AM|#
At least he was more than six feet away from any nude dancers.
|7.27.07 @ 11:26AM|#
This sounds like a very libertarian thing to do.
Because clearly libertarians have a complete disregard for privacy
rights.
|7.27.07 @ 11:29AM|#
That "prescription defense" concept is strange. I doubt Florida's murder statute expressly permits an "I wasn't there" defense to a murder charge, yet defendants are still allowed to use that defense in a murder trial. Unless Florida's drug statutes expressly *prohibit* "I have a prescription" as a defense the prosecutor's reasoning, as the appellate court thankfully found, is absurd. Any defense should be permitted unless expressly prohibited by statute.
|7.27.07 @ 11:31AM|#
Actually NM, the "libertarian" thing to do would be to say "who gives a s*** that he solicited a hooker" and move on with your lives.
|7.27.07 @ 11:32AM|#
"Prosecutor Darrell Dirks acknowledged that the state erred
in leaving out a jury instruction regarding
prescriptions."
No, Darrell, "erring" is when you do it unintentionally.
Inigo Montoya|7.27.07 @ 11:34AM|#
"This sounds like a very libertarian thing to do. "
You keep saying that word. It does not mean what you think it
means.
Anonymo the Anonymous|7.27.07 @ 11:35AM|#
Prosecutor Darrell Dirks? Wasn't he an extra in Boogie Nights?
ktc2|7.27.07 @ 11:38AM|#
58 Vicodin is NOT a lot. Would be less than 30 supply at 2 a day which is not at all uncommon, in fact below the norm.
|7.27.07 @ 11:38AM|#
Prosecutor Darrell Dirks? Wasn't he an extra in Boogie
Nights?
No, you're thinking of Logjammin'
|7.27.07 @ 11:39AM|#
Why not use the mj offense as the basis of
prosecution?
It is a lesser charge, because of his past they want to get him
away for good.
This was a prosecutorial hit job because he refused their
generous plea bargain.
That is the way it is designed to work, a prosecuters job is NOT to
get justice, it is to get convictions. You have the right to defend
yourself, but the odds are you'll lose and you best take the plea
and give the prosecutor his conviction.
Who is it that gets to determine what sort of defense that you
have?
The prosecuter instructs the judge.
Is there any limitation to this?
No, if a defense is likely to get the defendant off, it can be
excluded to assure a conviction. Again, yo should take the pleaa if
you are innocent.
It is not about justice or fairness, it is about a game the
lawyrers play to get the most convictions, your defense is to take
the plea.
Frank|7.27.07 @ 11:40AM|#
Any defense should be permitted unless expressly prohibited
by statute.
What if the defense will prevent the prosecuter from getting a
conviction in a case where the defendant is likely guilty?
|7.27.07 @ 11:41AM|#
"Last I checked, Florida has a mandatory 1 year/$1000 fine for
the 1st-Time possession. You'd think these fascists would be happy
to settle for that..."
Clearly you have not been to prosecutor school. I learned from the
best. To get leverage, find ways to increase the sentence range. If
they call your bluff, throw the book at 'em. My instructor's motto:
"probation is for the innocent."
immoral IMO
|7.27.07 @ 11:51AM|#
Unless your name is Mike Nifong, prosecutors are never held responsible for anything they do. Gee we are really sorry we ruined your life.
|7.27.07 @ 11:58AM|#
Tommy_Grand,
Are you being snide or is your story true? If true, that's frickin'
chilling. Authoritarians will be the death of this country.
|7.27.07 @ 12:01PM|#
Really, when you get down to it this case is the fault of the
original trial judge for disallowing the prescription
defense.
Which is why we have appeals.
|7.27.07 @ 12:04PM|#
nobody needs that much drugs.
Try breaking your leg and then tell me you don't need that many
pills.
|7.27.07 @ 12:06PM|#
"probation is for the innocent"
About sums up every prosecutor I've met. I put them next to John
Edwards-style ambulance chasers on the list of really shitty things
to do with your life.
|7.27.07 @ 12:06PM|#
Regardless if he was innocent, he seems like a low life dirtbag and there needs to be some way to get these types into prison.
This kind of statement seems a little too extreme, even for joe. Is
this someone imitating joe? Or is this satire that went over my
head?
|7.27.07 @ 12:07PM|#
I have migraines and carry pain meds for emergencies. My mother is from that state but doubt I will ever vacation there again.
|7.27.07 @ 12:18PM|#
NEVER, ever, consent to a search of your person, vehicle or
property. Never. Not even if you "know" you've done nothing
wrong.
Make the police work for every injustice they try. Remember Officer
Friendly, isn't.
Episiarch|7.27.07 @ 12:18PM|#
"probation is for the innocent"
Chilling indeed. Every prosecutor I've ever dealt with (and it's
been a few >:-0 ) has been a fucking asshole without a shred of
decency or pity. I even had one bring up an erased conviction even
though it was supposed to be, well, erased.
I have also noticed frequent Napolean complexes in prosecutors
(male ones, anyway).
Timothy|7.27.07 @ 12:21PM|#
What if the defense will prevent the prosecuter from getting
a conviction in a case where the defendant is likely
guilty?
Who the fuck cares?
|7.27.07 @ 12:22PM|#
You can tell that the folks who wrote the law know how awesome a Vicodin buzz can be.
|7.27.07 @ 12:24PM|#
MP, Reinmoose, Inigo,
I am not talking about whether or not soliciting a hooker should be
sanctioned by the community or not, just what kinds of sanctions
the community should use.
Compare and contrast publicizing those who break community taboo,
to locking them up.
Which is the more libertarian choice?
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 12:25PM|#
Prosecutors then argued-and the trial court agreed-that the
jury was not allowed to consider the fact that O'Hara had a
prescription because Florida statutes governing painkillers don't
allow for a "prescription defense,"
HOW is that even LEGAL? Seriously: that's like saying if I'm on
trial for murder because I shot a would-be rapist who broke into my
home at three a.m., state statutes don't allow for a "self-defense
defense."
How is it legal to make a law stating "you can't mention TRUE FACTS
in a criminal trial?" What. The. Fuck?!
|7.27.07 @ 12:33PM|#
Jennifer,
I assume it's because they want to be able to prosecute someone
with an out-of-state presciption for medical MJ.
|7.27.07 @ 12:37PM|#
A CATO discussion on the utility of shaming.
http://www.cato.org/dailys/02-16-00.html
|7.27.07 @ 12:37PM|#
That's just weird.
Is it possible, Mr. Balko, that you're leaving out part of the
story?
|7.27.07 @ 12:42PM|#
Well, if O'Hara is freed that could affect the price of Vicodin
in neighboring Georgia because O'Hara is likely to travel to
Georgia and while he is there he won't buy any Vicodin because he
already has a substantial stash. The commerce clause clearly allows
the government to intervene here.
I have no idea what I just said, but the conclusion is valid; the
commerce clause clearly allows the government to rule here.
|7.27.07 @ 12:46PM|#
MP, Reinmoose, Inigo,
Please couch your response in terms of the non-aggression
principles central to libertarian thought on justice.
Scooby|7.27.07 @ 12:48PM|#
Really, when you get down to it this case is the fault of the original trial judge for disallowing the prescription defense.
Which is why we have appeals.
All well and good, except for a mostly innocent person sitting
in the clink while the slow-ass appeals process grinds.
Maybe the judges and prosecutors need some skin in the game.
Judicial and Prosecutorial malfeasance that results in deprivation
of liberty should be a criminal offense.
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 12:48PM|#
Neu Mejican, there is a huge difference between individuals in a
community deciding that certain behaviors are shameful, versus the
government making that decision.
Embrace this difference. Learn to recognize it.
|7.27.07 @ 12:50PM|#
Community law X is broken.
Choice. a) Put law breaker in prison or b) publicize that they
broke the law.
Which is a greater threat to liberty? a or b?
Choice c, of course, is to repeal law X...but that just avoids the
question.
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 12:53PM|#
Which is a greater threat to liberty? a or b?
That would be "D," the Dolt who thinks that since choice B is less
odious than choice A, that means choice B exemplifies the
Libertarian Way.
|7.27.07 @ 12:55PM|#
Jennifer,
Learn to recognize when your points are vacuous.
"...government of the people, by the people, for the people..."
Robert|7.27.07 @ 12:56PM|#
What about the "that wasn't me" defense? Or the "those aren't Vicodin" defense?
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 12:56PM|#
Learn to recognize when your points are vacuous.
"...government of the people, by the people, for the
people..."
Learn to recognize when pretty phrases don't accurately reflect
reality.
|7.27.07 @ 12:58PM|#
The State, that is the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly,
also, it lies, and the lie that creeps from its mouth is this: "I,
the State, am the People."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
|7.27.07 @ 1:00PM|#
Nietzche's very eloquent.
The state, however, is a process of human interaction, not an
anthropomorphic entity.
|7.27.07 @ 1:03PM|#
Actually, a prosecutor's job IS to get justice, not simply get
convictions by any means. It is one of the few jobs a lawyer can do
where they have to consider more than winning for their client and
the basic rules of ethics.
Furthermore, all lawyers have an ethical duty to not make a claim
when they know it has no basis in fact. (you can stop laughing now,
I'm actually being serious) In addition matters of professional
ethics and integrity, simple human decency requires that a
prosecutor forgo a charge of intent to distribute when they know
damn well that there was no intent to distribute.
|7.27.07 @ 1:05PM|#
The state, however, is a process of human interaction, not
an anthropomorphic entity.
Then you of course realize that the word people in
"...government of the people, by the people, for the
people..." refers to three different and only mildly
intersecting sets of people.
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 1:07PM|#
Neu Mejican, I am pointing out that your false dichotomy is, in fact, false. First you're saying that the government shaming people out of behaviors it doesn't like is no different from the ideal libertarian solution of the community spontaneously using shame to convince people to avoid certain behaviors; then you pretended that the lesser of two government evils must be synonymous with the libertarian ideal. No: the lesser of two evils is still evil.
|7.27.07 @ 1:09PM|#
This case is so bogus on its face, I can't believe it could have
been honestly brought. Both the DA and judge must have criminal
motives that haven't come to light yet.
This illustrates why victims desperately need the power to
prosecute crimes themselves. Those two scum-with-badges, and plenty
more like them, will continue persecuting innocent people until
somebody is allowed to prosecute them.
|7.27.07 @ 1:12PM|#
The state, however, is a process of human interaction, not
an anthropomorphic entity.
Actually, I'd call it an "anthropophagic entity".
Another Phil|7.27.07 @ 1:14PM|#
This sounds like a very libertarian thing to do.
Not if it's done by government officials.
jimmydageek|7.27.07 @ 1:15PM|#
bigbigslacker | July 27, 2007, 1:06pm | #
I hope someone kills the prosecutor. Is it ok to say
that?
I think it is. Either way, I'll be joining a group of cyclists in
Tampa tonight. Maybe if we spot him we can all shove our
dérailleurs up his ass...
|7.27.07 @ 1:21PM|#
58 Vicodin is NOT a lot. Would be less than 30 supply at 2 a
day which is not at all uncommon, in fact below the
norm.
I'll second this.
Post knee surgery, I had my Hyrdocodone (which pills with me. I was
taking 1-2 pills every 4-6 hours and I was explicitly instructed
not to tough it out, because if the pain gets out of control it
will be that much harder to get it back under control.
2 pills every 6 hours (lets assume the max) would be 8 pills a day.
One week alone would be 56 pills. Even in smaller doses, 1 pill a
day every 6 hours -- 58 pills would would be 15 days worth of
dosage.
Granted the dosages could be different, but either way, that is
still not excessive.
|7.27.07 @ 1:28PM|#
I seem to remember something about ...
our system of law not utilizing cruel or
unusual punishment.. How can our famous actors, actresses, and
politicians sons go free, or hit rehab, yet this man has 25 years
of jail.. What about Rush Limbaugh?
|7.27.07 @ 1:44PM|#
Good thing Mr O'hara wasn't caught cuffin' his carrot, as well. Good bye, daylight.
update|7.27.07 @ 1:49PM|#
http://www.sptimes.com/2007/07/26/Hillsborough/Freed_man_still_in_li.shtml
Mark A. Ober|7.27.07 @ 1:52PM|#
Mark A. Ober is the State Attorney for the Thirteenth Judicial
Circuit of Florida. He was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in
English from the University of Florida in 1973. He earned his Juris
Doctor degree from the South Texas College of Law and was admitted
to the Florida Bar in 1977, when he began a career as an assistant
state attorney. In that capacity, he worked his way through the
ranks to become Felony Bureau Chief, Chief of the Major Crimes
Division, Chief of the Career Criminal Division and Chief of the
Homicide Division.
Mr. Ober entered private practice in 1987 and specialized in
criminal defense law until his election to the office of State
Attorney in November 2000, by the largest margin seen in over a
decade for that office. He is recognized in the legal community as
a top criminal attorney, having personally chaired over 250
criminal jury trials, including over 40 first degree murder
convictions.
Gideoon\'s Trumpet|7.27.07 @ 1:53PM|#
The prosecution should be allowed to spend no more on a case
than the defendant spends on defense. The prosecutor should be
allowed to put no more atty-hours in on a case than the defendant
puts in on defense.
That would not solve just this case. Rather, this proposal would
solve the rampant, systemic injustice that will just pop up in
another part of the system even if they did fix the pill law.
Prosecutors will start having discretion when we incentivize them
in that matter. By giving defendant's better lawyers we incentivize
prosecutors to drop the stoopid cases (like this one), and to focus
more on the one where defense lawyers will not help.
The problem isn't prosecutorial discretion. Rather it is imbalance
in the socialized funding of legal services. Prosecutors get my tax
money. Defense lawyers much less so.
Urkobold™|7.27.07 @ 1:54PM|#
OBER. OBER. ISN'T THAT WHAT THE URKOBOLD'S GOOD FRIEND DARTH
VADER IS ALWAYS SAYING?
OBER. OBER.
Robert|7.27.07 @ 2:07PM|#
The fact that the light was green is no "defense" against your
ticket for not having stopped at the intersection, I guess. The
fact of your having a license is no defense against the charge of
your having practiced medicine. The fact that you live there is no
defense against a trespassing charge.
It's easy when you have to prove only one fact.
They went thru the intersection without stopping, practiced
medicine, and were on the premises.
Carina|7.27.07 @ 2:19PM|#
A quote from the same prosecutor, different case (Darryl
Strawberry's probation violation):
"He didn't like someone telling him what to do," Dirks told the
judge. "At some point he should be punished for that."
|7.27.07 @ 2:25PM|#
MikeP,
Yes. Although I would disagree with the characterization of the
intersection as "only mildly."
Jennifer.
The false dichotomy you are pointing out exists only in your
interpretation of what I wrote.
I never suggested the black and white reading you seem to have made
of my comment.
I am not pretending anything about "ideal" or "synonymous" in my
comment. Simply that publicizing rather than prison is the more
libertarian choice. A libertarian minded government that chose a
over b would be acting in a way closer to the libertarian
ideal...not, as in all things in the world, perfectly in line with
that ideal.
|7.27.07 @ 2:29PM|#
Jennifer,
Here is where the conflict between what I said and what you read
occurs...
First you're saying that the government shaming people out of
behaviors it doesn't like is no different from the
ideal libertarian solution of the community spontaneously using
shame
I never said there was no difference between the two situations. My
comments were restricted to characterizing the governments actions
in contrast to other actions by the government.
ktc2|7.27.07 @ 2:31PM|#
Prosecutors in this country are in need of a serious legal smack down. It needs to be made clear their job is to see that the truth comes out so that justice can be done, not to get convictions.
ktc2|7.27.07 @ 2:33PM|#
Perhaps if a prosecutors "success", reputation and advancement were calculated by how FEW innocents they've sent to jail.
|7.27.07 @ 2:36PM|#
And Jennifer,
I would like to point out the community spontaneously using
shame might involve banding together to buy a billboard. One
possible mechanism for this community action might be referred to
as...the government.
Others exist, of course.
Government is in a very real sense just a formalized incidence of
spontaneous community actions.
|7.27.07 @ 2:41PM|#
Jennifer,
What does this mean?
the government shaming people out of behaviors
it doesn't like
When you use the term government here, how is it distinct from
"community" used later in your statement?
Governments don't "like" or "dislike" things.
The need for an anthropomorphic characterization of government
seriously confuses discussions of policy.
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 2:49PM|#
When you use the term government here, how is it distinct
from "community" used later in your statement?
The government has the power to confiscate your property, put you
in jail or even kill you, if it wants. The community does not.
|7.27.07 @ 2:51PM|#
On to an even more obtuse tangent of the "community/government"
dichotomy...
Compare and contrast--
Individuals have the right to assemble.
Members of a community have the right to assemble.
Communities have the right to assemble.
Government cannot restrict the right of assembly.
What relationship to the community does this imply for
government?
At this point I am just avoiding work, of course.
Jennifer|7.27.07 @ 2:51PM|#
The need for an anthropomorphic characterization of
government seriously confuses discussions of policy.
Only if you focus on semantics rather than reality. If I say "The
government dislikes cocaine users so much it imprisons them,"
nothing is clarified or accomplished by you saying "The government
doesn't 'like' or 'dislike' things." Unless you think changing the
subject is an accomplishment.
|7.27.07 @ 2:52PM|#
Jennifer,
The government has the power to confiscate your property, put
you in jail or even kill you, if it wants. The community does
not.
A long history of lynchings in the US would say that you are wrong
on this point.
|7.27.07 @ 2:53PM|#
semantics rather than reality
Semantics = meaning
Focusing on the meaning of propositions is essential for clear
discussion of policy issues.
|7.27.07 @ 2:54PM|#
I believe, Jennifer, that our main disagreement is about where the source of government power lies/ flows from.
|7.27.07 @ 2:55PM|#
I was on Vicodon when I got out of the hospital. 58 tablets is a couple of weeks' supply for a chronic pain patient on only a moderate amount, which is hardly that unreasonable of an amount to have. Hell, I had almost that many on me at one point when I left my pills at my dad's so I had to get my refill early. I guess I'm a drug dealer!
|7.27.07 @ 3:02PM|#
Jennifer,
To wit:
If I say "The government dislikes cocaine users so much it
imprisons them," nothing is clarified
Let me clarify... The government does not like or dislike things.
Rather, the community develops a process by which members who use
cocaine can be imprisoned. The community designates certain
individuals to carry out that process, and others to oversee that
process to assure that it is in line with the wishes of the
community members. When these agents of the community (aka
government officials) act in opposition to the wishes of the
community, it can withdraw that agent from service and replace with
another with a better understanding of the process the community
has developed.
Semantics.
|7.27.07 @ 3:05PM|#
It is because this process of designating agents to carry out the wishes of the community members in reality gives those agents power over other members of the community, that the government agents role needs to be specified and limited, with clear procedures for taking away that power when it is abused.
|7.27.07 @ 3:05PM|#
What if the defense will prevent the prosecutor from getting a conviction in a case where the defendant is likely guilty?
Why is the prosecutor bringing a case that's so weak they can't
break the defense? "Likely" isn't good enough. If, for example, the
defendant claims "I wasn't there and have witnesses to prove it",
prove the witnesses are lying or set the defendant free. The
prosecutor's "gut instincts" about the issue are irrelevant and
prejudicial.
By the way, no criminal statute permits an "I wasn't there"
defense. That's because it's assumed that a defendant may present
any material fact in defense of the charges. Since the law can't
know in advance what facts may be material, it doesn't say what
facts may be presented in defense. If mere possession of a
substance is a crime, a license to possess it e.g. a prescription
would seem to be a material fact, would it not? That's why this
prosecutor's conduct is so reprehensible; he tried to keep material
facts from the jury.
|7.27.07 @ 3:08PM|#
One option that a community might use to limit the power than
government agents have over community members is to develop a
process whereby crimes are punished not with prison, but with a
public shaming... using, let's say, a billboard that simply
identifies members acting in a way that goes against standards the
community has agreed upon and formalized at some previous point in
its history.
This mechanism will automatically adjust to community standards as
behaviors that are codified, but no longer important to the
community will not result in negative consequences for the
individual.
I am, of course, speaking very schematically here.
|7.27.07 @ 3:13PM|#
"The state, however, is a process of human interaction, not an
anthropomorphic entity."
Can you prove that?
Seriously though, in criminal law there are Statutory Defenses to
many crimes (such as self-defense). Statutory Defenses have
specific requirements for exculpation. I realize this is semantic,
but it is not considered a Defense (big D) to say "It wasn't me."
The state has the burden to prove it was you; that fact is an
element of the offense. If they fail to prove it, you walk. You are
not required to disprove it (often a logical impossibility). An
'Affirmative Defense' is something which (if you can prove it)
exculpates you even though the state successfully proved each
element of the offense as defined under the relevant penal
code.
So, anyway, there is a difference in this context between what
people usually mean by "defense" and statutory Defense.
|7.27.07 @ 3:23PM|#
Except for a few comments, it doesn't seem to be recognized that it's also (1) the voting public who select legislators who (2) enact laws like this who have a significant share in the blame also. Everyone in Florida who wanted "tough on crime" legislators/governors, judges and prosecutors who won't let criminals "get off on technicalities" and voted accordingly has a share of responsibility.
|7.27.07 @ 3:28PM|#
If mere possession of a substance is a crime, a license to
possess it e.g. a prescription would seem to be a material fact,
would it not? That's why this prosecutor's conduct is so
reprehensible; he tried to keep material facts from the
jury.
What do we do in cases where the material fact will prevent the
government from getting the conviction. Sometimes the prosecuter
may not be able to prove guilt but the 'feel' that the defendant is
guilty so they need to be able to exclude facts to get the
case.
|7.27.07 @ 3:32PM|#
Also, what do we do in the cas of someone who isn't guilty of anything, but they are just a dirtbag who belongs in prison? The prosecutor needs some way of getting these convictions. If you are innocent, take the plea.
|7.27.07 @ 3:37PM|#
The community designates certain individuals to carry out
that process, and others to oversee that process to assure that it
is in line with the wishes of the community members.
All you are doing is defining "community" as "those members of the
community who direct and/or support the government".
In effect, you are defining away the elements of "community" that
distinguish it from "government" in the eyes of libertarians.
Semantics.
|7.27.07 @ 3:39PM|#
It's a shame that ALL lawyers (prosecuting or defense) and judges can't be held to the same accountability that we hold Doctors to. But it's not surprising since the lawyers are usually the ones who end up being elected to public office and making the laws regarding the conduct of their own profession. Maybe we should just have a "lawyer season" for 1 or 2 weeks every year to thin the herd. I'd vote for it.
|7.27.07 @ 3:50PM|#
Mother Farker,
Hey, now. There were other states that voted Bush. Just 'cause it
was close here doesn't make Florida responsible.
|7.27.07 @ 3:55PM|#
58 pills? Hell, I was prescribed 24 of vicodin then told to follow up in two days for a minor back injury, much less long term treatment.
|7.27.07 @ 3:56PM|#
I like how all the ACLU types (read communists) think laws like
this are just fine and acceptable when people like Rush Limbaugh
are having legal issues..
But the moment it might hurt somebody who shares their world view,
it becomes "bad" and "wrong".
Geotpf|7.27.07 @ 4:01PM|#
Ted R-The ACLU filed a "friend-of-court" motion on Rush
Limbaugh's behalf. You moron.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108140,00.html
|7.27.07 @ 4:01PM|#
"I like how all the ACLU types (read communists) think laws like
this are just fine and acceptable when people like Rush Limbaugh
are having legal issues.."
Not being an ACLU type (read communist) myself...I think it's ALL
ridiculous. But Rush's problem is hypocrisy which I'm sure is why
people (including myself) gloated over his being publicly revealed
for the hypocrite he is. If he were NOT a hypocrite...he should
have held up his hand with it's formerly nicotine stained fingers
and demanded to be locked away for life or executed as he has
publicly said on his radio show should happen to drug users and
addicts. ; )
|7.27.07 @ 4:01PM|#
The
court's opinion is online. The real facts are even more bizarre
than they first appear. Florida explicitly has a prescription
defense, set forth in the possession section. The State argued that
while this applied to those charged with possession, it didn't
apply to possessing trafficable quantities. That is what the Court
says was absurd. Because it is.
What's even worse is the way Florida defines trafficable
quantities. The quantity of the controlled substance is deemed to
be the total weight of the pill, so you combine the 5 mg of
hydrocodone with the 500 mg of acetaminophen in the Vicodin for a
total of 505 mg per pill. So O'Hara didn't need to have 58 pills to
face 25 years. He only needed 8.
|7.27.07 @ 4:12PM|#
I see. I typically get a 2 month prescription for amphetamine
(aka Adderall) for ADD.
Does this mean I can be arrested and convicted on drug charges in
Florida for my perfectly legitimate medical prescription too.
To the morons who think the DA did an OK thing, just wait until
it's *your meds*.
Further the DA has plenty of discretion on who they prosecute and
what charges they file. They ARE NOT EXCUSED from responsibility
simply "because the law says so". There are plenty of laws on the
books that aren't routinely enforced simply because the prosecutor
decides not to.
|7.27.07 @ 4:16PM|#
MikeP,
All you are doing is defining "community" as "those members of
the community who direct and/or support the government".
I don't think a was careful enough in my definition of community to
have done this, but I believe it would be more accurate to say
"those members of the community with the right to direct and/or
support the government." Disengagement is always an option, of
course, but disengagement does not negate your right to participate
in the process when it impacts your life.
In effect, you are defining away the elements of "community"
that distinguish it from "government" in the eyes of
libertarians.
Could you be more specific?
I am saying that government and community are entities of a
different order... communities are groups of people (defining
membership is, of course the tricky part), governments are
(something like) formalized interactions of community members
within their realm of influence.
|7.27.07 @ 4:20PM|#
A sloppy analogy:
Community = people who speak English.
Government = grammar of English.
Maybe not so sloppy, actually.
|7.27.07 @ 4:25PM|#
Charge him for the pot. The rest is just bullsh-t. Florida can't get wiped out by a tsunami fast enough.
David|7.27.07 @ 4:30PM|#
"Again, yo should take the pleaa if you are innocent."
Now that is downright scary. Let's say, for example, someone who I
happen to hate does something stupid like sticks a fork in an
electric socket and dies. I am at the time at a dinner party. My
GF, several friends, the waiter, and since I happen to have paid my
signature and the date and time on the bill (I paid by credit card)
all prove that I was there. In fact, I am even visible on the
restaurant's security video. But for some reason I end up charged
with the crime. It's a murder, so the plea bargain deal is 25 years
instead of life. I should spend 25 years in prison for a crime of
which I am absolutely innocent? What kind of thinking is that?
|7.27.07 @ 4:35PM|#
if the guy did not carry all of the pills in the pill bottle but rather in a baggy they would have said that he was selling pills. If they would have taken the bottle and there were only two and the rest were at his house, they would have claimed he sold them. the fact is these prosecuters jump at any chance to flex their little muscles and are corrupt. if this guy was a wealthy person he would not have faced this rap. Our legal system is corrupt and its based on money. Two guys get a DUI. One cannot afford an attorney and he gets pegged. The other can afford the best attorney and gets wreckless driving. One is just as guilty as the other however money gets the affluent guy off. This is corruption in my opinion
|7.27.07 @ 4:40PM|#
Disengagement is always an option, of course, but
disengagement does not negate your right to participate in the
process when it impacts your life.
I vote in every election I can. No candidate I have ever voted for
has ever won office. In what sense can you say I am part of the
community that, in your words, "designates certain individuals to
carry out that process, and others to oversee that process to
assure that it is in line with the wishes of the community
members"?
mark|7.27.07 @ 4:42PM|#
So, possession of 58 Vicodin is illegal?
Why haven't the police arrested every pharmacist and drug supplier
in the state? On top of that, they can then get the prescription
records, and arrest every citizen in the state who has a current
prescription.
|7.27.07 @ 4:43PM|#
MikeP,
You participated in the process that the community designed to make
that decision, so you are part of the community. Or do you somehow
think that the factions within a community that disagree cease to
be members of that community?
That wouldn't make sense to me.
|7.27.07 @ 4:47PM|#
That's why this prosecutor's conduct is so reprehensible; he
tried to keep material facts from the jury.
I understand the prosecutors motivation, but why did a judge allow
this? Prosecutors don't get to hide facts, they need the judge to
agree to hide them.
What do we do in cases where the material fact will prevent the
government from getting the conviction. Sometimes the prosecuter
may not be able to prove guilt but the 'feel' that the defendant is
guilty so they need to be able to exclude facts to get the
case.
So you want a system where guilt doesn't have to be proven and
people are convicted not based on facts and data but rather on the
feelings of politically motivated prosecutors (like NC's
Nifong)?
I would rather live in a system where it's more likely that the
guilty go free rather than one where it's more likely that
innocents rot in jail
Also, what do we do in the cas of someone who isn't guilty of
anything, but they are just a dirtbag who belongs in prison? The
prosecutor needs some way of getting these convictions. If you are
innocent, take the plea.
Uhmm...we do nothing? If this "dirtbag" who "belongs in prison" did
nothing, what makes him a dirt bag and why does he belong in
prison?
What kind of stupid fucking questions are these?
Or is my sarcasm meter out of whack?
|7.27.07 @ 4:48PM|#
MikeP,
I hear that argument frequently on these boards.
It is, in my view, an empty argument.
The question of consent of the individual regarding community level
actions is more complicated than the argument implies, it seems to
me. Your individual rights help to define the allowable actions the
community can take interactions with you. Your membership in the
community gives you additional rights beyond those that are basic
to all humans. It doesn't however, give you veto rights over the
results of the process that has been set up for decision making
(beyond those veto rights that are basic to all humans).
|7.27.07 @ 4:56PM|#
This is why I could never serve on a jury. I believe in jury
nullification, and would literally never convict someone under
conditions like this.
If you think that I would be going beyond what a juror is supposed
to do, I recommend reading up on your civic rights. The jury
members who sent this man away, in my opinion, have a non-trivial
share of the blame for this needless waste of my countries
resources.
|7.27.07 @ 4:56PM|#
Ray Nifong isn't doing anything at the moment. Maybe he can get new charges brought against this guy.
|7.27.07 @ 4:58PM|#
CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS?? MAN, I JUST CHECKED MY KIDS LITHIUM SCRIPT' SAYS SHE GETS 120 TABS PER RE-FILL. I GUESS THAT BOTTLE SHOULD BE LOCKED AWAY FROM SITE, HUH?
|7.27.07 @ 5:01PM|#
Neu Mejican,
This all started because Jennifer -- rightfully -- distinguished
the actions of individuals in a community from the actions of
agents of a government. You went on to conflate community and
government. You are still conflating them, citing the less
interesting dichotomy of which are voters and which are
agents.
Let's say that some members of the community buy a billboard and,
every month, go down to the courthouse, run through the public
record of convictions and find the ten they most dislike, and posts
those people's names and their crimes on the billboard.
Now let's say that the city government finds this a disgusting
practice and makes it illegal.
Who is community? Who is government? Why do you seem to be unable
to view government and community as potentially at odds?
|7.27.07 @ 5:02PM|#
nobody needs that much drugs.
Try breaking your leg and then tell me you don't need that many
pills.
I have experience in this area. I broke my ankle heroically
[sarcasm/] pulling a child from my swimming pool in February.
Got three prescriptions for hydrocodone, the same drug as Mr.
O'Hara. That would be 90 of them. Took every one of 'em, too.
|7.27.07 @ 5:03PM|#
you bunch of pussys , a convicted coke dealer from 20 plus years ago who has a script for vico's , no matter how many , shouldnt be put in prison for this . they forgot to mention this guy is in a fuking wheel chair also ...and 58 pills is intent to sell !?!?!? most docs give you a script for the month ...i have friends with serious back injurys who get 120 pills a month . and vicoden is a weak ass drug to begin with ...you fuking make me sick bjtches !!
|7.27.07 @ 5:04PM|#
Oh, and I checked the Florida DOC website. O'Hara did 21 months for this before his appeal was successful.
|7.27.07 @ 5:07PM|#
Why isn't Florida raiding pharmacies all across the State?
If mere possession is enough, and a prescription defence is not
allowed... why aren't Pharmacists looking at some convict-cuddling
time in the pokey?
Also, why not sent in drug-sniffing dogs into the area Hospitals?
Taser a few of them surgeons who won't drop the scalpel in time...
best part is, cops won't need to plant evidence if they shoot
someone.
|7.27.07 @ 5:11PM|#
Just more proof that Florida is a complete joke. The state is
pathetic, the government there (from the troopers to the governor)
are completely worthless.
Too bad that 90% of the voters are over 65 and don't care what
happens as long as they get their Social Security check.
Florida is a nursing home that has an infestation of citizens under
60.
|7.27.07 @ 5:18PM|#
You guys wanna come on over to Texas? Our cops rip off the front
license plate of cars to manufacture "probable cause" in order to
stop someone. And DEFEND the practise as good police work.
Some day, this country is going to wake up from it's stuper, and
demand accountability in its leaders. And its laws. If it isn't
some assinine arrest like this (and how does this guy get his life
back after all this?), its emminent domain stealing our property so
it can be handed over to Wal Mart.
What will it take for people to understand that the "system is
broken". The question is what does it take to fix it?
|7.27.07 @ 5:19PM|#
Doctors could make some easy money from the Crimestoppers
program, where they pay people for tips that lead to
convictions.
Step 1: Doctor prescribes medication.
Step 2: Doctor phones in a tip to Crimestoppers that addict is
going to for a buy.
Step 3: Doctor gets free money for successful conviction of drug
dealer
Step 4: Youtube videos of wheelchair bound patient in pain being
tasered and pepper-sprayed by police during prescription raid are
posted.
|7.27.07 @ 5:22PM|#
MikeP,
You went on to conflate community and government. You are still
conflating them, citing the less interesting dichotomy of which are
voters and which are agents.
Actually I specifically de-conflated government and community by
specifying that they are of different types. Of course the process
that a community sets up can be at odds with its wishes. Most
processes are imperfect. The problem in thinking is one in which
you treat the government as if it were a community at odds with the
larger community, rather than a process undertaken by the larger
community, implemented by a subset of its members.
The community of agents within the government may have interests at
odds with the larger community, but the government itself, i.e.,
the formalized process, does not have interests, as such. The
larger community which sets up that process and empowers the
sub-community of government agents has an interest in setting
boundaries for those agents...it does this be making changes to the
process, and replacing agents that act in cross purpose to the
goals of the community served by the process.
|7.27.07 @ 5:26PM|#
MikeP,
In other words, the dichotomy between government and the community
is not well constructed. The relationship is more of a
meronymy.
|7.27.07 @ 5:38PM|#
The appellate court does a nice job on the opinion. Thanks for posting the link. Sucks for that dude who did 21 months....and still faces retrial.
Another Government Employee|7.27.07 @ 5:41PM|#
May I ask a question? Were the vicodin in prescription bottle? If not, that is where the original charges stemmed from. I am not familiar with Florida law, but that could be either a misdemeanor (valid Rx) or a felony (no valid Rx) in Georgia. Sonce the pills fetch about $5.00 per on the street. The charges my be worth pursuing.
|7.27.07 @ 5:44PM|#
Okay, Neu Mejican,
How about using "individuals in a community" in place of
"community"?
Anything to avoid the monolithic nature you are according to
community...
libertreee|7.27.07 @ 6:11PM|#
Nietzche's very eloquent.
The state, however, is a process of human interaction, not an
anthropomorphic entity.Neu Mejican
Well said, to a point. We are not Marxists, saying that history is
governed by unstoppable forces. History, at least at times, takes
its cue from individuals.
One man conceived and lobbied for the original drug war resulting
in the Harrison Act.
Woodrow Wilson was a egotistical, self righteous Anglophile A**hole
who created the conditions for the 20 centuries bloodbaths.
But the institution of the state, qua state, sets limits to its
existence that in themselves validate Nietzsche.
As a monopoly power over a given geographical area claiming the
right to raise revenues for its monopoly on the justifiable use of
force, it is bound by the rules of a public monopoly, and cannot
escape being the coldest of cold entities, all the while claiming
to be a benevolent member of the community.
|7.27.07 @ 6:29PM|#
MikeP,
How about using "individuals in a community" in place of
"community"?
That makes sense in some situations.
If we go back to the comment which started all of this, however,
that was not my point. I was referring to how a particular decision
by a particular community to use a particular government response
(publicizing) to a particular type of behavior was more libertarian
than a different government response (e.g., prison). In this
context, discussions about the actions of individual community
members isn't really cogent, imho.
This doesn't mean that there aren't even better solutions along the
continuum towards "True Liberty," just that one type of government
actions is better than another. The comment was about how a
community had decided to structure their government as compared to
another specified option.
Somehow, this was taken to mean that I didn't understand the
distinctions that have been brought up. Instead, I reject them as
ill formed propositions based on applying my comment to a context
beyond that of which it was meant to apply.
My fault of course, since I did not elaborate beyond two quick
sentences.
Jennifer's response, however, remained vacuous nonetheless.
The phrase, "...of the people, by the people, for the people..."
does a better job of characterizing the meronymy involved, in my
view. Setting up some anthropomorphic battle of wills between the
community and the government doesn't move the policy debate towards
better solutions.
|7.27.07 @ 6:34PM|#
Billy Bob Smith, only dumb rednecks think like you. Luckily you people have a low enough IQ that you're not a true threat. Which is also the reason why you redneck simpletons are the only dipshits left who still support Bushco. Stick to what you morons are good at: watching Blue Collar comedy, talk NASCAR, and bang anyone in your bloodline. Leave the serious debates to those of us who actually use our brains.
|7.27.07 @ 6:34PM|#
libertree,
I don't, I think, disagree with anything you say in your comments
(even if they endorse, tacitly, the anthropomorphic view of
government having a personality).
Although, your examples would not have come about without the
sanctioning, at some level, of the larger community (either through
apathy or direct endorsement).
BruceM|7.27.07 @ 6:41PM|#
I'm a criminal defense lawyer and I didn't believe this story could possibly be accurate, it's worse than Richard Paey, there's just no way they would put someone KNOWN to have a legit prescription in prison for an hour. I checked out the appellate court decision on Westlaw and sure enough, this is really what happened. These prosecutors should all be disbarred IMMEDIATELY and thrown in prison for blatant criminal civil rights violations. Most disgusting thing I've ever read in my entire life. I'm literally sick. And I guarantee you ever one of these prosecutors has had a Rx for over 10 vicodin (enough to equal "trafficking" under FL law) in their miserable lives, so they should all be held in contempt for a 25 year mandatory minimum.
|7.27.07 @ 6:49PM|#
Damn hippy druggie... Doesnt he know he should just suck up the
pain? Don't need no stickin hippy Vics. haha.
What a waste of time and money, poor guy. At least they threw it
out.
|7.27.07 @ 7:02PM|#
MikeP,
Anything to avoid the monolithic nature you are according to
community...
What about avoiding the monolithic nature you are according to
government?
The acts of these individual agents of the government do not, by
your logic, represent the will of the government any more than they
represent the will of the larger community.
If you want to maintain your dichotomy between community and
government, you can't fractionalize one and not the other.
|7.27.07 @ 7:06PM|#
NNNIIIIIIIIIIIIIII-FFFFFFFOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNG!!!
(Sorry we are so late to this thread.)
I hope someone kills the prosecutor. Is it ok to say
that?
No, no, no, no, no. That would be very naughty.
And it would be a shame if the bottom of the prosecutor's bathtub
were to somehow become coated with a very slippery substance, like
soap or shampoo or baby oil. Let's all hope this doesn't
happen.
|7.27.07 @ 7:16PM|#
What about avoiding the monolithic nature you are according
to government?
Fair enough. The government is a collection of individuals. Some
agents of the government are good natured and act as well as they
can in the public interest. Some are outright thugs who under color
of authority take the power of the government to mandate, imprison,
or kill in the name of the people to the worst possible ends.
Yeah. That's a workable definition of government.
Geotpf|7.27.07 @ 7:19PM|#
Another Government Employee-Why would it matter what container the pills were in? You mean having Vicodin in a prescription bottle is legal, but if you throw away the bottle and put them in a baggie, it becomes a crime? WTF?
|7.27.07 @ 7:20PM|#
While I wouldn't do anything to the prosecutor, I might hesitate
a moment if I saw him about to step into the path of a speeding
tractor-trailer.
"Uh....er..."
SPLAT! [Squishing sound as 18 wheels roll through the goo.]
"..watch out, sir."
"Oops. Too late."
|7.27.07 @ 7:28PM|#
And MikeP,
That is why I was advocating that the government not be given the
right to imprison someone for a non-violent act that the community
(for some unknown reason) feels it would prefer its members not
engage in.
If the worst thing the government agents can do in that
circumstance is put you on a billboard, then they have less ability
to abuse their power. It also, as I said earlier, automatically
adjusts the sanction to fit the priorities of the community. If the
individual community members don't care what you did, then the
billboard won't be much of a sanction. If you don't care what the
community members think, again, not much of a sanction.
|7.27.07 @ 7:29PM|#
in the above comment, "government" is metonymy for "agents of
the community empowered to carry out the processes of
government..."
;^)
|7.27.07 @ 7:56PM|#
Neu Mejican,
While your proposal sounds at first like it may be workable, one
should consider the second-order consequences. In particular, if it
is perceived to be easier and less painful to punish those who
deviate from the standards of the community, then more deviations
from the standards of the community will be turned into
crimes.
Paging Hester Prynne... Hester Prynne... you have a call on the
scarlet courtesy phone...
|7.27.07 @ 7:57PM|#
MikeP,
If taken to the extreme all proposals breakdown.
The devil is always in the details.
|7.27.07 @ 8:00PM|#
A portion of the continuum of justice from HS
literature...
Man in the Iron Mask
Scarlett Letter
If I had to choose, I would pick Hester's punishment, and move to a
new community.
Severian the Journeyman|7.27.07 @ 9:27PM|#
The son of a bitch who prosecuted this case should be disbarred.
Chavez is a thug|7.27.07 @ 9:38PM|#
What is so amazing about this case is that they actually considered 58 Vicodin to be an excessive amount. Vicodin (and most drugs containing hydrocodone) are fairly weak painkillers, as far as narcotics go. That amount of pills would barely last the guy 2 weeks, assuming the prescription instructed him to take a pill every 6 hours, which is generally most common with Vicodin.
|7.27.07 @ 10:28PM|#
Oh the land of the free.
And the home of the brave...
Yet another abuse of the system.
Act now!
Stop this blatant rape of our freedom!
|7.27.07 @ 10:49PM|#
MikeP,
In particular, if it is perceived to be easier and less painful
to punish those who deviate from the standards of the community,
then more deviations from the standards of the community will be
turned into crimes.
Of course, because these punishment are less onerous, it will
matter less whether something is considered a crime of this type.
Over use of these kinds of punishments will only diminish there
impact.
|7.27.07 @ 10:49PM|#
The only difference between this and an average case before the
American miscarriage of justice system is that this miscarriage of
justice was eventually SOMEWHAT rectified. Think about this judge's
and these prosecutors' hundreds/thousands of other cases.
But what do you expect from a society that has the highest total
AND per capita prison population in the entire world? Freedom?
Civil liberties? Hahaha.
|7.27.07 @ 10:52PM|#
To Billy Bob. The law cannot rightfully define one as a drug addict. I went to rehab and was in N.A. as well as A.A. and was still prescribed vicodin after my cesarean. Be informed that my doctor was aware of my history with drugs. They need to figure out a way to work around that law because I take a medicine for A.D.D which is an amphetamine, my doctor writes the prescription for 30 pills for 30 days but I don't take it everyday and I have to pick up my new prescription within 7 days or they have to by law get rid of it. So should I be locked away for having extra pills around?
|7.27.07 @ 11:14PM|#
Drug dealers should be punished to fullest extent of the law. I
addition, I support stronger measures, including mandatory life
sentences for recidivism...
That said, as citizens of a democratic, free thinking society,
stories of officer and judicial abuse such as these should horrify
us all. Legal technicalities used as weapons of retribution and
revenge towards citizens are the tools of oligarchies and
despots.
The waste of taxpayer resources alone constitutes a maleficence
that demands explanation.....
|7.28.07 @ 2:47AM|#
damn happy I don't live in Florida. I've been rx'd 180 vicodin xs at a time, and stronger. Ridiculous.
|7.28.07 @ 6:43AM|#
Jury nullification should have been applied. Of course the judge and prosecutor are going to say they have no choice. When a jury has no choice, it is no longer a jury.
|7.28.07 @ 8:54AM|#
He sold two condos, his car and his bread business to pay for the appeal. But the state took the proceeds, according to family friend Eric Mastro, to pay toward the $500,000 fine that came with his conviction.
|7.28.07 @ 10:38AM|#
This drug dealing scum of a GUY O'hara is a convicted DRUG
DEALER. And the doctor testified only that he at one time HAD a
prescription for vicodin. in 1981 and 1982, he served eight months
of a one-year prison sentence for possession of hallucinogenic
drugs. In 1986 through 1988, he served two years of a five-year
prison sentence for trafficking in cocaine and dissuading a
witness.
In August 2004, O'Hara was at Tampa International Airport driving a
bakery delivery truck. His attorney, Tom Wadley, said O'Hara
repeatedly drove through the arrival and departure areas, drawing
the attention of Tampa Airport Police.
After several trips through the areas, O'Hara stopped the truck,
got out and left it along the curbside, Wadley said. Leaving
unattended vehicles is not allowed at the airport, so police walked
up to the truck to investigate.
O'Hara, Wadley said, had left a lit marijuana cigarette in the cab
of the truck.
The marijuana allowed police to search O'Hara. They found a
prescription bottle without a label filled with Vicodin.
O'Hara told the officers that he had a prescription and gave them
the phone number of his doctor. When the officers could not reach
the doctor, they arrested him. Without a prescription, 58 tablets
of Vicodin - which contains the powerful painkiller hydrocodone -
is enough to warrant a trafficking charge.
jomama|7.28.07 @ 11:08AM|#
Absolutely fucking insane.
When one sees more insanity every day what can
one conclude?
|7.28.07 @ 11:35AM|#
"which contains the powerful painkiller hydrocodone"
LMAO...yep...it's right up there. Having been prescribed
hydrocodone before, I can tell you that it's about 2 steps above an
asprin. It's too bad that some people speak so loudly and long on
subjects they have NO clue about.
|7.28.07 @ 11:56AM|#
The prosecutors should resign. That much is clear. I read a
response from someone that asked why? Simple, even my three year
old nephew has more sense than the prosecutors in this case.
Instead of going after a real criminal, the prosecutors used a
technicallity to argue for an unjust conviction. The appeals court,
who seems to understand the intent of the law, correctly fixed this
absurd conviction. Why not lock someone up for taking the tag off a
mattress while they are at it?
In other cases, I have witnessed prosecutors and investigators
outright tamper and conceal exculpatory evidence that supports
defendents because of similar misplaced intentions. These
prosecutors wrongly believe and argue that anyone dispensing pain
medications must be a drug dealer and anyone using them must be a
drug addict. This type of belief must be stopped, and these
illogical medical opinions by untrained lay prosecutors and
investigators must stop.
Just as the DOJ, DEA, and State's argue that locking up individuals
such as Richard Paey, Dr. William Hurwitz, Dr. Bernard
Rottschaefer, Dr. McIver, etc. is necessary to send a message to
others out there, these prosecutors in this case need to be fired,
disbarred, and probably put in jail for a time to send a message
that this type of abuse of the legal system is not to be tolerated
to others.
|7.28.07 @ 12:28PM|#
I continue to lower my standards and expectations not only of people in this country but the country itself, with special emphasis for florida. But they keep lowering the bar, what to do.
poco|7.28.07 @ 12:36PM|#
This drug dealing scum of a GUY O'hara is a convicted DRUG
DEALER. And the doctor testified only that he at one time HAD a
prescription for vicodin. in 1981 and 1982, he served eight months
of a one-year prison sentence for possession of hallucinogenic
drugs. In 1986 through 1988, he served two years of a five-year
prison sentence for trafficking in cocaine and dissuading a
witness.
So fucking what? You won't get much any sympathy for
the Drugs Are Bad Mmmkay viewpoint around here, Bigboy.
|7.28.07 @ 1:27PM|#
jack (11:14pm) and bigboy (10:38am) have bumper stickers that
say-
"I'm a SELF-RIGHTEOUS BUSYBODY - and I vote"
And thanks to them and the SELF-RIGHTEOUS BUSYBODY majority we now
have for all practical purposes a police state.
So, bigboy, the fact that Mark O'Hara was unjustly imprisoned twice
before is proof that he needs to be unjustly imprisoned again, is
it?
|7.28.07 @ 8:32PM|#
OHMYGOD!! I've got two old bottles of blood-pressure pills
somewhere! OH!!! I can hear the helicopters!
Relax, my darlings, pretty soon we'll all be gobbling THX-1138
happifiers and swooning over the Bush twins being sworn in as
Co-Presidents.
|7.29.07 @ 1:28AM|#
This is not unusual for Hillsborough County Prosecutors.
They will attack and prosecute a man for a misdomeanor accusation
but won't prosecute the man's ex-wife who was charged by deputies
of aggravated stalking.
|7.29.07 @ 4:31AM|#
While most comments here are correctly outraged, there seems to be a bunch of real wingnuts that see merit in the governments case. I shook my head at the first, and whackiest, but kept finding more and more. We should regress the laws till they were as they were up until the 1930s and foolish jerks like Henry Anslinger came onto the scene. The guy should be able to buy all the damn Vicoden he wants and shouldn't need a doctors prescription or societys permission to medicate himself. "Pursuit of happiness" is good enough for me. Until the government got into the picture you could buy heroin, cocaine, morphine and any other drug over the counter and there was no "drug problem". Like abortion, it's nobodys damn business what drug someone chooses for themselves. For such a nation of pill poppers it not only reeks of hypocracy but social engineering by the people absolutely the least qualified to undertake such a foolish, undemocratic scheme. You want the government to wipe your ass for you too? Probably a lot of people would back laws governing that too. Pathetic.
|7.29.07 @ 11:17AM|#
For those of you talking "jury nullification," the jury did not
know that he had a prescription. Remember, that was kept from them.
When all mitigating circumstances are kept from the jury, it's not
hard to crush reasonable doubt. That's why the judge in this case
is an idiot.
If the jury had known he had a perfectly legal prescription and all
relevant information, I don't see how they could have convicted
him.
|7.29.07 @ 3:51PM|#
The drug warriors have established that having a prescription or
medical need is not a valid defense to drug possession. As in the
case of Dr. Hurwitz and many others, the medical opinions of
legislators, prosecutors, judges and DEA take precedence over the
opinions of your doctor (backed by science) and the laws of your
state (In medical marijuana states where the "community" has tried
to assert some power over the gov't that supposedly works FOR them,
a doctor's prescription for Cannabis is not allowed as a defense).
While the medical marijuana community in CA has worked tirelessly
for years against the Fascists just to get back their
constitutional rights to medicate their own bodies, most of America
has turned a blind, uninterested eye. Now anyone with a pain issue
or even an addiction issue (you don't need to be a "dirt-bag" to
get addicted to prescription pain pills, you just have to take
them, the addictive properties of the drug do the rest) is subject
to being thrown in a cage and tortured. You can be addicted to and
use the once-illegal dangerous drug alcohol and drink yourself to
death legally. Most people I know who drink, drive impaired at
least once in a while. We sanction public drug dens and drug use at
public events like fairs and football games, so people have to get
home after drinking. Yet, someone who takes a different drug (from
marijuana which is pharmacologically much safer than alcohol to
prescribed oxycontin to heroin) in private, harming nobody else,
should be in prison for 25 years? At least there are plenty of
thieves, rapists, child molesters, etc that can go free or stay
free while our officials go after the weak, sick easy targets to
make their conviction stats look good.
Most in the gov't work for their own interests, not the people's.
They constantly lie and put out propaganda (like the recycled BS
trotted out the other day about how smoking pot causes psychosis)
to keep the sheep following them. The MSM is the ONDCP's
mouthpiece, never questioning their warped "facts", while ignoring
stories like this. Most people will never see this story or Richard
Paey's story, etc. That's how these people stay in power.
|7.30.07 @ 12:07AM|#
Clearly you would not be amazed at the injustice this man
experienced if only you have been through America's Family
Courts.
H. Beatty Chadwick was arrested on April 5, 1995, and has remained
in jail ever since. Chadwick has not been convicted of anything; in
fact, he has not even been charged with a crime.
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/settlements/02572/chadwich.html
Criminalized for marrying an American woman.
|7.30.07 @ 4:29PM|#
did you use the word "harassed" for a man that was serving a
sentence already? That's not just an understatement, but an insult
to an innocent man having to serve time in a prison system that
rapes the soul, the mind, and oh... quite literally the body.
I hope this man sues for millions and is awarded the absolute
maximum.
I hope all involved who did not use common sense, and just
"followed the letter of the law" all develop the worst kind of ass
cancer an angry god can create.
I hope to god that someone can fix this horrible country.
sesquiculous|7.31.07 @ 8:26PM|#
My favorite prosecutorial motto "It is easy to convict the guilty. When you convict the innocent you have really accomplished something..."
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245