Court rules drug tests improperly seized

[cjclong]

A NY Times article says a California Court of Appeals has ruled that that prosecutors lacked probable cause to seize the drug test results, some of which have been leaked, of major league baseball players. If the government does not appeal this ruling the article says the results will be destroyed.

[frikativ54]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

The government should definitely appeal. What do they mean, no probable cause? They've got an MLB drug ring on their hands. Of course they have reason to believe that illegal behavior is going on; the MLB is not above the law.

[rj_lucas]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

The government should definitely appeal. What do they mean, no probable cause? They've got an MLB drug ring on their hands. Of course they have reason to believe that illegal behavior is going on; the MLB is not above the law.

Could you clarify for us what illegal behavior you're referring to? The use of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone was legal when these tests were conducted in 2003, and they're legal now.

Further, the use of these substances was not prohibited by MLB policy in 2003. Their use is prohibited now. Players testing positive for these substances today are in violation of MLB policy. They have not committed a criminal act.

Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens are under legal scrutiny today not because they are accused of using performance enhancing drugs, but because they are alleged to have committed perjury before a Grand Jury and members of Congress, respectively.

This issue would be better served if we stick to the facts and leave the smear campaigns to the New York Times.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[cjclong]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

As I understand it the search warrant only listed 10 tests to be seized and the Feds seized them all. A search warrant has to be specific in what is to be seized and the probable cause to seize what is requested in the warrant must be granted by a judge. You can't just get a warrant saying bad things are happening but must show probable cause that a particular person or or persons named in the warrant has been involved in a particular crime and that there is reason to believe that the items to be seized are proof of that crime. The officers with the warrant may normally only seize what they have requested in the warrant issued and nothing else. Without reading the opinion by the appeals court it appears that the search warrant only asked for 10 tests and so they had no legal authority to seize the entire list. Additionally, the person or person who is releasing names to the media may be guilty of a crime themselves.

[David]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Steroids was and is legal only with valid prescription. Most baseball players who used steroids were using it illegally. There are valid medical uses of steroids, but, by US law, steroids can't be used or prescribed for strictly athletic performance reasons.

[rj_lucas]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Steroids was and is legal only with valid prescription. Most baseball players who used steroids were using it illegally. There are valid medical uses of steroids, but, by US law, steroids can't be used or prescribed for strictly athletic performance reasons.

Again, for the sake of remaining factual, a wide range of anabolic steroids are available over-the-counter without a script. Others, as you've noted, are RX only. HGH is RX only.

And I realize it seems like a legal nit-pick, but while obtaining these meds without a prescription is illegal, the USE of them is not. That's critical in the case of those players who maintain they used these substances under the direction of a trainer with the assumption they were OTC supplements.

Believe it or don't believe it, that's not the point. There is a constitutional presumption of innocence in this country that must be maintained.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[David]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Use of a prescription medication without a valid prescription is illegal.

[boardburn]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Anabolic steroids, as a class of drugs, were registered as Schedule III controlled substances by the US government, register #70 FR 74653, as of 1/17/06.

It is a violation of law to have or use these substances without a valid prescription, and it is illegal to prescribe them for purposes other than their intended medical necessity.

Here is a link to the DOJ's website... This is a list (not complete by any means) of the substances covered in Schedule III. If you are having trouble sleeping, reading the links on this website should fix you right up...

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/listby_sched/sched3.htm

Tom

[frikativ54]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

If you are having trouble sleeping, reading the links on this website should fix you right up...

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/listby_sched/sched3.htm

Tom

Thanks. I'll try that tonight.

[rj_lucas]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Use of a prescription medication without a valid prescription is illegal.

Apologies, I'm not making my point clearly. I'll use an illustration. Trainer applies 'salve' to athelete's bicep. Salve is, in reality, a topical steroid. Assume, for the sake of argument, the athelete believes the salve to be an OTC ointment.

The athelete has used a steroid that was not perscribed to them. That is a fact. Have they committed an illegal act? If someone slips GHB into your drink at party and you consume it, have you committed an illegal act?

Again, I'm going to come back to a presumption of innocence, vis-a-vis the list of names.

The media has annointed itself as the judge, jury, and executioner on this issue, as they so often do. Do we really want to follow that lead?

I understand we all have our personal opinions, and it's not realistic to expect personal neutrality in all things. But hopefully we can all agree that it is the duty of prosecutors and the courts to meet the burden of proof on this or any other legal matter.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[godwulf]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Use of a prescription medication without a valid prescription is illegal.

In addition to rj's explanation, let me just add this, from my own professional experience.

Every day of the week, my office conveys positive drug test results - for methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstasy, marijuana, you name it - to Superior Court judges, in connection with Family Court cases...people who are drug testing because of child custody and visitation disputes. In thirteen years, and after many thousands of such reports, I have never seen or heard of a single individual being charged with a crime in connection with any positive test result. Not even when they come to test directly from court, and end up testing positive for three or four illegal drugs.

The most drastic action available to the courts, in those situations, is to order a change of custody or a suspension of visitation; unless someone is on Probation or Parole, or is being similarly monitored for some reason, under special circumstances, simply testing positive for an illegal or non-prescribed substance is not cause for punitive legal action.

[godwulf]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

I should have added..."or the one testing positive has been driving".

[David]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

What you are describing is the illegal use of a drug. Who is legally responsible (player, trainer, other) is also an important question (maybe the trainer is at fault), but that doesn't make the use itself legal or the legal questions to stop. If there is evidence of illegal use of medications, the police or feds or whomever will look into it, they will ask questions of all parties involved. They will do things like ask the user (player) if he had a prescription and, if so, to show it. If the player says he didn't have a prescription and used it unknowingly, they will talk to the trainer and others.

Even when owned legally, the presence of certain prescription drugs will invite questions from authorities (marajuana, pot, Quaaludes, codeine, steroids, HGH). If you take a trip on an airplane to Tulsa and have a bottle of codeine in your bag, the airport official will ask for proof that the medicine was prescribed to you. They aren't saying you don't have the right to have the medication, but they want to see proof. If you don't have proof, you could be in trouble (just ask Rush Limbaugh).

My personal guess is that of the MLB players who used prescription grade steroids, 99 percent knew what they were taking and 1% had a legal prescription (meaning, they were using it legally). As steroids can't be legally prescribed for purely athletic reasons, 99 percent couldn't have gotten a legal prescription anyway.

[cohibasmoker]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

Apologies, I'm not making my point clearly. I'll use an illustration. Trainer applies 'salve' to athelete's bicep. Salve is, in reality, a topical steroid. Assume, for the sake of argument, the athelete believes the salve to be an OTC ointment.

The athelete has used a steroid that was not perscribed to them. That is a fact. Have they committed an illegal act? If someone slips GHB into your drink at party and you consume it, have you committed an illegal act?

Again, I'm going to come back to a presumption of innocence, vis-a-vis the list of names.

The media has annointed itself as the judge, jury, and executioner on this issue, as they so often do. Do we really want to follow that lead?

I understand we all have our personal opinions, and it's not realistic to expect personal neutrality in all things. But hopefully we can all agree that it is the duty of prosecutors and the courts to meet the burden of proof on this or any other legal matter.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

Are we to believe that a bunch of "rogue" trainers decided upon themselves to start mixing "hot" ointments, they then applied the ointments to only a select group of athletes and these athletes had no idea they were receiving "hot" ointments?

The athletes in turn could not figure out why they suddenly gained muscle-mass, extra weight and all of a sudden, they started jacking baseballs out of ballparks at record paces.


Jim

[treant985]

Re: Court rules drug tests improperly seized

I'm not really surprised of the outcome. A 9-2 ruling is a pretty solid majority when it comes to anything supposedly 'controversial,' meaning that the decision wasn't even a close one among the judges.

The g'ment argued that they went in for the 10 results for which they had a warrant and that the other results were in "plain sight," so they didn't need a warrant for them. It's a clever argument--but ultimately it had to fail, especially when it comes to computer records like in this case.

It'd be like seizing 10 people's medical records in one file cabinet, then having 50 other file cabinets "in plain sight" in the same office and deciding to take all those people's records, too. If you analogize this to computer records, then everything on a computer could be considered plain sight.

I doubt MLB will appeal. It'd just cost money, and I doubt the Supreme Court would even take up the case at all (they only have to hear cases that they feel like, with a few rare exceptions).