Licensed to Lie is an accounting of the attack by the federal government on Enron in the early 2000s, and unjust attacks on other companies associated with them just doing their job with no criminal intent. Companies were destroyed. Hundreds of thousands of jobs lost. How did they do it? Though the creation of non-existent laws and stating in court that acts were unlawful when they actually weren’t. Sound familiar? That is what is happening today in the courts when a doctor is charged criminally using Title 21. And no one in the Department of Justice is willing to bring this injustice to light and stop these illegal attacks. It is up to us, the American people, to see that the government wheel of injustice is broken. The powers of justice in America today are corrupt.
I don’t know if the Enron fiasco was the beginning of the evil in the DOJ, or if it started before that. But once the door was opened, more unscrupulous people corrupted this arm of the government. And the corruption has moved into all three arms, as we’ve seen. “The greatest human ideal of Justice is only as good as the character of those who administer it, existing only if its guardians are devotees to intergrity and fairness.” Michael Adams, PhD.
The characters of the individuals who have been administering the laws over the last 15 years have definitely been lacking. They found out they could get away with doing illegal things to convict a target and get promoted in their field.
Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit states in the forward:
“Prosecutors have a particularly strong duty to act fairly because, as the Supreme Court has explained, they are the representatives ‘not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that is shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.’”
“if the government is not honest, it can trump even the best efforts of those of us who work in the system.”
“Prosecutors are subjected to a variety of powerful incentives that serve to reward zealous advocacy: favorable media coverage, career promotions, appointment to judgeships, and the allure of high political office.”
For that reason, prosecutors MUST be of the highest moral principles. And there’s the rub. We have lost morality in this country.
Judge Kozinski goes on to say that there is a growing practice among prosecutors of over-charging, particularly with crimes of dubious validity.
“One of the bedrock principles of our criminal law is that citizens are entitled to fair notice of what is criminal and what is legal. People can then avoid prosecution by engaging in lawful activities. The right to do what the law does not prohibit, without fear of harassment or punishment, is one of the hallmarks of a free society.
“One of the fundamental responsibilities of a prosecutor is to charge defendants only with conduct that is clearly criminal. And yet, time and again, the US DOJ charged multiple defendants with crimes that simply weren’t crimes.”
In my case, I wrote repeatedly to the DEA stating what we were doing in the office with another doctor taking care of the pain management patients, and they refused to answer. Here is an example of what I wrote to DEA agent Steven Tomaziefski after being frustrated by his stonewalling:
“To demonstrate my attempts to be law-abiding, I will explain to you my program. Again, I reiterate, my attempt is to help the patients that you have thrown to the streets in search of pain management. I am in no way doing any unlawful act knowingly. If in the explanation of my program, you identify an action that the government would interpret as illegal, it is your responsibility to inform me of that. If you do not, I hold you and the DEA, and ultimately the United States Government, accountable. For if someone knows an illegality is occurring and does nothing, are they not therefore responsible? If you then later charge me with breaking the law, of which I know nothing but you do, are you not guilty of contributing to the act?”
Judge Kozinski continues in the forward: “Another problem is that these innocent people are forced to start serving their time behind bars even as they appeal their conviction.”
An example of that is Dr. Jeffrey Bado, convicted Dec 8 and immediately incarcerated, even before sentencing.
Now the reason for that is that the Appeals Courts usually support the conviction. Especially if the defendant can’t afford to hire a big name attorney like Ms. Powell. Since doctors have all their possessions, savings, cars, and even their homes forfeited by the government through the Controlled Substance Act, they have no chance at appeal. Examples of that are Drs. Cynthia Cadet and Dr. Castronuovo.
Judge Kozinski wrote:
“Another important responsibility of prosecutors is to disclose to the defense any exculpatory information of which the government is aware. This is a constitutional requirement per the 1963 Supreme Court case of Brady v. Maryland.”
“Most fundamental is the fact that the government is not an ordinary litigant whose interest lies in convicting only those defendants who are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
But instead of being a litigant for justice, the prosecutors now have an attitude of “win at all costs”. They do not release “Brady material” willingly. In fact, they can, and often do, threaten to charge witnesses as accomplices or co-conspirators if they testify favorably to the defense.
“Many prosecutors see the Brady rule as a thorn in their sides—an obstacle to overcome rather than a welcome responsibility to be scrupulously observed.”
Judge Kozinski points to the case against former Senator Ted Stevens, who was convicted in 2008 after federal prosecutors concealed evidence and lied about it in court. The truth only came out after an honest FBI agent broke ranks and disclosed the government’s willful Brady violations and lies and the judge ordered an investigation, stating “The United States Government has an obligation to pursue convictions fairly and in accordance with the Constitution, and when the Government does not meet its obligation to turn over evidence, the system falters.” Now, judges support the prosecution’s lies and illegal activities.
In my case, I identified the following infractions of the constitution:
- 5th amendment rights of due process, both substantive and procedural.
- 4th amendment rights of unreasonable search and seizure.
- 6th amendment rights of trial by impartial jury and assistance of counsel for her defense.
- 14th amendment rights of loss of liberty and property without due process.
I have experienced personally what Judge Kozinski says next:
“What happened in Stevens’s case is vanishingly rare. Prosecutors know that if they fail to produce exculpatory evidence, no one is likely to find out. Even when evidence is disclosed, judges are very reluctant to order a new trial, so they sweep the evidence under the rug. Sanctions against prosecutors who violate Brady are practically unheard-of and professional discipline is non-existent. As a consequence, there is an epidemic of Brady violations abroad in the land.”
At the end of his forward, Judge Kozinski states:
“This book should serve as the beginning of a serious conversation about whether our criminal justice system continues to live up to its vaunted reputation. As citizens of a free society, we all have an important stake in making sure that it does.”
Our criminal justice system is not only cracked, it has sunk to the depth of rampant injustice. In the arena of government overreach into medicine, we have to stop the criminality of medicine. Nothing about patient treatment should be placed in the realm of criminal prosecution. The only way to stop this government overreach is to stop the conviction of doctors in the court. Stop the gravy train.