PDA

View Full Version : drugging of suspects ok'ed by court



mojo
03-13-2002, 06:48 PM
http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/temp/0308-140.html

AAPS: Unlimited Forced Drugging OK'd By Court
Physician Group Calls Ruling 'Shocking & Inhumane'

WASHINGTON, March 8 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Defendants can be
forcibly drugged even though they haven't been convicted of any
charges and pose no danger to themselves or others. That's the
ruling issued yesterday by the Federal Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit in the case of United States vs. Charles Thomas
Sell. (see http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/03/011862P.pdf)
The 2-1 split decision establishes government power to forcibly
medicate a person with mind-altering drugs even before trial.

"It's a shocking, inhumane decision. Now, all the government
needs are allegations and a cooperative psychiatrist to forcibly
drug any citizen," said Andrew Schlafly, general counsel for the
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). That group
filed an amicus brief opposing the government drugging.

"It's unprecedented to allow prosecutors to drug peaceful
defendants presumed to be innocent. Government cannot force
citizens to pledge allegiance to the flag, but now can forcibly
medicate them with mind-altering drugs," said Schlafly.

Dr. Sell, a St. Louis dentist, has been imprisoned for more than
4 years, including 1-1/2-half years in solitary confinement after
being charged with Medicaid fraud. He has never been brought to
trial.

While acknowledging that "the evidence does not support a
finding that Sell posed a danger to himself or others" the majority
opinion still found that "charges of fraud" alone are "serious"
enough to justify forced medication. Further, the Court held that
there are no limits on the quantity or type of drugs.

"There's no good reason why Dr. Sell has been held so long
without trial, and this decision will most likely prolong his
imprisonment with no end in sight," said Schlafly. The dissenting
judge pointed out that even if Dr. Sell were to be found guilty,
his sentence would be no more than 41 months -- one year less than
he's already served.

A similar case is pending before the same court to allow the
state to forcibly medicate a convicted murderer for execution.

"It's appalling that the court will drug a man presumed to be
innocent, even if it's illegal to do the same thing to a convicted
killer," Schlafly said. He said that AAPS will seek to overturn the
ruling.

AAPS is a non-partisan, dues-supported professional association
of physicians in all practices and specialties, dedicated since
1943 to protecting the sanctity of the patient-physician
relationship from third-party interference.

For more information on Dr. Sell's case, see
http://www.aapsonline.org and click on "Court Okays Forced
Drugging"

Nija
03-13-2002, 06:53 PM
that's ****in' bull****....

is this for better "homland security"

pffft...

whitak24
03-14-2002, 07:13 AM
that is absolutely insane. i do not understand why a non-violent prisoner would need to be medicated anyway.
ok, that decision just pisses me off.

welfareloser
03-14-2002, 07:41 AM
wow.

i'm going to accuse all the judges who made that decision of murder.

Nija
03-14-2002, 08:02 AM
Originally posted by welfareloser
wow.

i'm going to accuse all the judges who made that decision of murder.

I wouldn't say murder... that's a little extreme... but.... there is obviously nothing nice to say about their decision

Two Cents
03-14-2002, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by Nija


I wouldn't say murder... that's a little extreme... but.... there is obviously nothing nice to say about their decision

Nijni, get a clue...she's saying she would accuse them of murder so THEY can be drugged...and personally face the consequences of a decision they made...

Wizard
03-14-2002, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by Two Cents


Nijni, get a clue...she's saying she would accuse them of murder so THEY can be drugged...and personally face the consequences of a decision they made...

Yeah come on Nijni get a damn clue!!!


Anyways I would have to say that this is absolutely rediculous. All this homeland security junk is going to far. I am not willing to give up so many freedoms in the name of homeland security.

Why do I have a feeling that in a couple of years we'll be hearing about the Bush Jr. impeechment trial for constitutional violations in the name of homeland security?

mojo
03-14-2002, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Wizard


Yeah come on Nijni get a damn clue!!!


Anyways I would have to say that this is absolutely rediculous. All this homeland security junk is going to far. I am not willing to give up so many freedoms in the name of homeland security.

Why do I have a feeling that in a couple of years we'll be hearing about the Bush Jr. impeechment trial for constitutional violations in the name of homeland security? this has nothing to do with homeland security or bush. he's been in for 4 yrs.

Wizard
03-14-2002, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by flojo
this has nothing to do with homeland security or bush. he's been in for 4 yrs.

Bah you and your technicalities. :P I like blaming bad things on Bush. He's easy to blame things on, and plus he looks like a monkey. And we all like monkeys. Actually I think that's half the reason people voted for him, they subconciously were reminded of a monkey when they looked at him and since everyone likes monkeys they voted for him. :hihi::hihi::hihi:

jase71
03-14-2002, 05:28 PM
Pleading the 5th? Bah... we haven't had to worry about that ever since they decided it was legal to "medicate" the defendant.

A little sodium pentathol goes a long way towards make the case...

:rolleyes:

LPMiller
03-14-2002, 06:17 PM
ah well, I didn't want any civil rights anyway...I'd just abuse them.

Wizard
03-14-2002, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by LPMiller
ah well, I didn't want any civil rights anyway...I'd just abuse them.

HAHAHAHA... :hihi::hihi: That was excellent.