DECORATED VIET NAM VETERAN, DILIGENT SCHOLAR, DISTINGUISHED ATTORNEY, WRONGLY ACCUSED, PROSECUTED, CONVICTED, SENTENCED AND IMPRISONED, DENIED PARDON, DENIED COMMUTATION BECAUSE HE IS INNOCENT.
WELCOME TO THE PGHN WEBSITE AND BLOG--dedicated to providing news and analysis of federal and States criminal law, and prison conditions, including their impacts on recidivism, the family, and government. PGHN has been created to provide useful services and information to a Community of caring, sharing persons, including the accused, their attorneys, their families, (or, in the case of entities, their officers, directors, shareholders, partners, trustees, employees—pejoratively "white collar criminals") prosecutors, legislators, college and graduate school professors and students, whose interests are education, forensics, law, political science, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, related disciplines, other interested intellectuals and professionals, and the general public, who are as impacted by crime, criminal law, and imprisonment, as all of the usual subjects, even though they may not realize it until too late, except, hopefully, as they gain awareness through our Community.--
the next few blogs, we will analyze why the federal Indictment of FedEx is a
piece of crap which should never have been given birth, why it should be
dismissed by any judge worth the title, why it should be a basis for
sanctioning, if not also prosecuting, the California based federal prosecutors
who brought it to life, as well as for their prior extortions of millions from
UPS, Walgreens, and CVS. Our purpose is not to assist
FedEx in its worthy defense, but rather to castigate, by example, federal
prosecutors who routinely extort guilty pleas from those not so savvy and
well represented as FedEx by bribery, browbeating, overcharging, threats and
other dastardly means, all of which has been chronicled in Marking Time as to many less sanguine and less well-heeled than FEDEX and therefore less able to fight off the FED.
UPS, Walgreens and
CVS were criminalized as drug dealers, and large sums extorted from them by US
Attorney Melinda Haag of San Francisco, because weight loss, insomnia, anxiety,
and anti-convulsion drugs were delivered through them from pharmacies to patients
whose prescriptions were issued by doctors employed by the pharmacies based on their
doctors' review of questionnaires without physical examination. Now her office is trying to extort more millions
from FedEx on the same bogus premises.That
premise of criminality is that the prescriptions delivered were bogus because
the prescribing doctors based them on internet questionnaires instead of physical
examinations and therefore drugs must have been dispensed to persons "who
had no legitimate medical need for them."We admit upfront that in one real sense, the FedEx allegations are
correct, at least facially.But they are
correct only because the offending questionnaires were completed by federal
Drug Enforcement, Food and Drug agents and like State agents, who obviously had
no need of the prescription drugs for weight loss, insomnia, panic disorder, and
convulsions that FedEx delivered to them.Clearly, had a physical examination of them been conducted, the doctors
would have known that their requests for prescriptions were motivated by their
wanting to create evidence and entrap rather than by any need to abate their
personal maladies.As for anyone other
than these entrappers, why would anyone "who had no legitimate medical need
for them" even want these drugs? Wouldn't
anyone who needed these drugs be able to go before a doctor and display the
symptoms, such as obesity, tiredness, anxiety, and convulsions, necessary to
obtain a prescription for them?So what makes
dispensing them at less time and cost based on a questionnaire reviewed by the
prescribing doctor criminal?What is more, what makes FedEx a criminal for
providing a means for their delivery?Why isn't the prescribing and delivery that the Fed seeks to criminalize
just a natural marketplace provision of needed product at least price?
Why isn't the Fed
too late with its Fedex Indictment? (9/3/14)
1 of the FedEx indictment ascribes criminality to acts committed by FedEx as a
conspirator to distribute controlled substances beginning 1/2001 and ending
2/20/2008. Counts 2 through 10 each
allege that FedEx distributed a specific controlled substance in 2007. Count 11 alleges that FedEx conspired to
distribute misbranded controlled prescription drugs in interstate commerce,
citing deliveries of such drugs from 4/26/2000 through 1/2008 pursuant to allegedly
phony orders to 13 pharmacies based on false affidavits provided them by DEA,
FDA, and like State agencies, only one of which deliveries was to California
where the indictment has been filed. Counts
13 and 14 each allege that FedEx distributed a specific controlled substance in
2008. 18 USC 3282 provides with respect to offenses not
capital: (a) In General.â€” Except as
otherwise expressly provided by law, no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or
punished for any offense, not capital, unless the indictment is found or the
information is instituted within five years next after such offense shall have
been committed. So it would appear that
all of the Counts against Fedex are no count and should be dismissed pursuant
to motion to dismiss. LEAVE YOUR COMMENT/VOTE BY CLICKING ON COMMENT! RESULTS OF VOTING WILL BE REPORTED PERIODICALLY.
BOOKS AND MAGAZINES CAN BE SENT INTO PRISONS ONLY FROM PUBLISHERS OR BOOKSELLERS
CLICK ON IMAGES BELOW FOR IMMEDIATE PURCHASE ACCESS AND AUTHORIZED PRISON DELIVERY
The Resurrection Project miracle has arrived!!!
Revised Alleyne petitions now' argue that Alleyne's retrospectivity should be unaffected by the 1-year limitation usually applied to disallow habeas corpus petitions. Order now:
x==========Resurrection Project ORDER FORM==========x
(copy this form and email to firstname.lastname@example.org )
( ) pro forma version ($50*), which provides the bases and argument for overturning the inmate's drug ( ), drug conspiracy( ), money laundering ( ), or other ( ) convictions (check which), sentences and incarceration. You provide the personal, trial, appeal, and post-conviction proceeding details; or
( ) custom version ($150*). You provide the Inmate's full name(s) (and if known, federal registration #, federal courts—trial, appellate, and post-conviction) so that I can deliver to you a version customized with the inmate's personal, trial, appeal, and post-conviction proceeding details, and with the bases and argument for overturning the inmate's drug ( ), drug conspiracy ( ), money laundering ( ), or other ( ) convictions (check which), sentences and incarceration specific to the inmate. And, if you need it: ( ) cover letter to the Supreme Court ($1.00*); ( ) in forma pauperis petition and affidavit ($2.00*).
Deliver by reply email attachment ( ). Deliver by other means ( ) (indicating (a) means (e.g. USPS, FedEx.UPS)/(b) name/(c) address): (a)______________________ / (b)_____/c)___________
*per each inmate petitioner
If delivery is to be made other than by the preferred reply by email attachment, please so indicate, including the address and desired means of delivery. The cost of such delivery will be added to your payment. Payment per Invoice via PayPal is the preferred payment method. If payment is to be made by check, please so indicate with your order so that delivery instructions may be forwarded to you via email reply. You will be invoiced via email based upon your choice of pro forma or custom version and manner of delivery. Email or other delivery method of your selected version will be commenced upon receipt of your payment.
=================(end of form)======================
Some who did not file an Alleyne petition by Alleyne's first anniversary (6/17/2014) deadline may have made that decision based on their hope that the DOJ's Clemency Initiative would free them from their sentence just as well. We did not address that complaint at the time for lack of time, but do now because we believe Alleyne continues to remain alive for retrospective application. Unless an inmate satisfies all of the following eight conditions, it is not available: (1) the inmate would be characterized as a non-violent federal inmate; (2) the inmate would not pose a threat to public safety if released; (3) By operation of law, the inmate likely would have received a substantially lower sentence if convicted of the same offense(s) today; (4) the inmate would be characterized as a non-violent, low-level offender without significant ties to large-scale criminal organizations, gangs, or cartels; (5) the inmate has served at least 10 years of the inmate's sentence; (6) the inmate does not have a significant criminal history; (7) the inmate has demonstrated good conduct in prison; and (8) the inmate has no history of violence prior to or during the inmate's current term of imprisonment. Even if an inmate satisfies all of these eight criteria, clemency is dependent upon the DOJ recommending clemency to the President and the President exercising his totally discretionary right to grant clemency or not. By contrast, none of these criteria are relevant to the grant of an Alleyne habeas corpus petition.
HEADLINE NEWS--About what Morgan Freeman said when last on Jimmy Kimmel by his silence--Jimmy does kibble (meaning "course ground meat and grain" not "crack"—sorry DEAers!), not the prime cuts; it follwed from Freeman saying Bonfire of the Vanities was a movie he never revisited. And what might this mean? Freeman played Judge Leonard White whose pithy monologues were [to court room] "Racist? You dare call me racist? Well I say unto you, what does it matter the color of a man's skin if witnesses perjure themselves; if a prosecutor enlists the perjurers; when a district attorney throws a man to the mob for political gain, and men of the cloth, men of God, take the prime cuts? Is that justice? Let me tell you…justice is the law, and the law is man's feeble attempt to set down the principles of decency. Decency! And decency is not a deal. It isn't an angle, or a contract, or a hustle! Decency... decency is what your grandmother taught you. It's in your bones! Now you go home. Go home and be decent people. Be decent." Is it commentary about goings on in Ferguson, Travon Martin—for bonfire analysis of which read Kony and His Invisible Children, pp. 25, 64-66; Kony himself? Frequently, silence is more powerful than words. Then, again, maybe it was just Jimmy not pursuing the matter as would those who go into true interrogation mode--Barbara Walters, Oprah Winfrey, Dick Cavett come readily to mind. Are there any left like them? Admittedly, Morgan was with Jimmy to promote Dolphin Tale2, not any social agenda; perhaps, like this promo of Kony and His Invisible Children—albeit Dolphin and Kony both may have social agendas beyond mere entertainment. Unlike Kimmel?