You’re Within The NormsUncategorized January 1, 2021 30 Minutes
https://www.wesh.com/article/special-report-pharmacies-denying-legitimate-prescriptions/4439866#
” WE ARE PHARMACISTS NOT DRUG DEALERS “
BY
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L.CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., REV. C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., WILLIE GUINYARD BS., BRAHM FISHER ESQ., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., ESTHER HYATT PHD., BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER, CUDJOE WILDING BS, DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
THE DARK SIDE OPERATIONS OF THE DEA
The testimony in this article is that of Richard James Alpert, a Diversion Investigator for the United States Drug Enforcement Agency. His title of Diversion Investigator is but a deception because he failed to do the obvious and what is required of an Investigative law enforcement officer; knowing the laws and ignoring truth:
JUDGE DOWD: “And is it your job, is it part of your investigation in these cases to reach out to the prescribing physicians to determine if there’s a legitimate medical reason to justify the prescription, the opioid or whatever that’s actually prescribed? Is that part of your investigation?“
DI ALPERT: That wasn’t part of my investigation. No sir.
ALL PRESCRIPTIONS ARE VALID
Pronto Pharmacy LLC, At Cost Pharmacy of Fort Myers, Fl, Gulf Med Pharmacy of Cape Coral, Florida, Oak Hill Pharmacy of Oak Hill, West Virginia to this date have neither violated nor broken any laws. All control medications in these pharmacies have been dispensed according to CSA guidelines, and all prescriptions filled by these pharmacies were legally written by licensed medical/dental practitioners.
According to Michael Krause Law Professor at the George Mason University, Scalia Law School, an article on December 27, 2021, Wall Street Journal titled, A Case Against Walmart Mocks Justice, “The federal government sues the chain for filling valid prescriptions in compliance with state law” (2)
” Under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, when there’s a contradiction between valid federal and state law, the former prevails. But there’s no federal law requiring that Walmart pharmacists refuse to fill prescriptions that state law requires them to fill. The Controlled Substances Act creates only two circumstances in which pharmacists commit a federal crime by filling facially valid prescriptions for controlled substances.“
” First, if they “knowingly fill” a prescription that wasn’t issued by a doctor “in the usual course of professional treatment”—for instance, if a doctor hands out his entire Rx pad without examining any patient. Second, if they fill a prescription outside the “usual course of” pharmacy practice—for instance, if a “pill mill” dispenses opioids without checking the DEA number of the prescribing doctor. Not only isn’t Walmart being sued for such infractions; it has adopted innovative opioid-stewardship programs and worked with law enforcement agencies including the DEA to root out corrupt doctors.”
As written December 29, 2020, by the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board which was in a stark rebuke of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit filed in federal court in Delaware claims that:
” Walmart “failed to detect and report at least hundreds of thousands of suspicious orders” and that as a pharmacy it “unlawfully filled thousands upon thousands of invalid controlled-substance prescriptions.” These actions enabled opioid abuse and “helped fuel a national crisis,” the feds say. (1)
“The complaint further alleges:
“Violations of the Controlled Substances Act and its accompanying regulations, but it is really a 160-page exercise in scapegoating a company because it is well-known and has deep pockets. Walmart doesn’t push pills on opioid addicts. Its pharmacists fill valid prescriptions written by doctors who are licensed by their states and registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).” (1)
Similarly, in the actions of Pronto Pharmacy LLC, Tampa Florida the DOJ/ DEA has shown absolutely NO proof these prescriptions written by licensed practitioners and patients having been diagnosed with a disease condition are illegitimate. Neither the DOJ/DEA found any prescription medications were being diverted for non-medical use.
THE FORM
Both Walmart and Pronto Pharmacy had implemented internal procedures unique to their specific operations to detect fraudulent prescriptions. The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board further wrote on December 29, 2020:
“When Walmart’s pharmacists catch a prescription that appears fraudulent or forged, they are trained to refuse to fill it and document the incident. Walmart says it has passed tens of thousands of leads about suspicious prescriptions to state and federal law enforcement. It’s the job of the DEA and state medical boards to investigate and revoke doctors’ licenses and prescribing privileges if there’s wrongdoing.”
THE FORM: A MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
Pronto Pharmacy also had a required “Form” (MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD) in which every patient with any type of prescription had to fill out. The Form was used along with the National Prescription Drug Monitoring Program to screen for suspicious activity of control medications.
The Form was very successful in detecting fraudulent prescriptions and groups engaged in “pharmacy shopping,” for diversion purposes. People who were up to “no good” would turn around and leave when they were made aware of the Memorandum For Record “The Form,” and the consequences of not being truthful.
Richard James Alpert was knowledgeable of the Pronto Pharmacy “Form” and its purpose. Yet, Mr. Alpert chose not to consider “The Form” as a component of deterring suspicious activity. The dismissal of the purpose of the Pronto Pharmacy “Form” by Mr. Alpert is further indicative of his lack of completing a thorough investigation and failure to get at the truth.
As noted from Mr. Alpert’s court testimony, he in fact didn’t talk with any prescribing physicians or their patients. Richard James Alpert had been made aware and also had full knowledge, not one person who came to Pronto Pharmacy, got any prescriptions filled without filling out the Form and everyone received a consultation as well as paid a $25 one-time consultation fee.
The Form was evaluated by Pharmacist Daniel Buffington of Tampa, Florida and he agreed with Pronto Pharmacy implementing this Form as part of their prescription intake procedure. Buffington further felt Pronto Pharmacy should charge for this service as any other health professional would because it is a consultation; a MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD. (5)https://videopress.com/embed/gelhCSK4?preloadContent=metadata&hd=1THE LORD INSTRUCTED PAUL DO NOT BE AFRAID
The violation of the Pronto Pharmacy Form did cause some people to go prison. More importantly, any suspected fraudulent activity identified and proven by the pharmacist was forwarded to their Attorney who communicated directly with the law enforcement department and/or State Attorney Offices. The Form was part of The Pronto Pharmacy Standard Operation Procedure as a mechanism in place to prevent diversion. The Form is a Memorandum For Record which could be used by any Court to identify the Patients intent.
- Who
- What
- When
- Where
Both the National Prescription Drug Monitoring Program and the Pronto Pharmacy Form were always used together to detect and report suspicious “unlawfully invalid controlled-substance prescriptions.” Both Diversion Investigator Richard James Alpert and so-called Pharmacist diversion expert Donald R. Sullivan were well aware of the Pronto Pharmacy Form and that all patients who came to Pronto Pharmacy were required to complete “The Form.”
FIGURES DON’T LIE BUT LIARS DO FIGURE
However, Dr. Sullivan was suspicious of the patient questionnaire used by the subject pharmacy. The questionnaire inquired whether the patient lived more than 100 miles from the pharmacy. Dr. Sullivan opined that this reason was insufficient to resolve the red flags.
The questionnaire contained a certification to be made by the patient, certifying that “I am taking all of my medication prescribed.” Dr. Sullivan deemed this certification ineffectual in resolving the red flags of early fills and of diversion. A further statement by the patient that, “I am not selling any of my medication,” did not alleviate any concerns that the patient may have been diverting his medication. (5)
Indeed, Dr. Sullivan suspected the question exposed a subterfuge by the pharmacy, revealing the pharmacy believed patients were selling their medications, and the question was designed to relieve the pharmacy of any liability. If a pharmacist believes a patient is selling his/her medications, the pharmacist should not fill any further prescriptions for that patient.
RICHARD JAMES ALPERT AND DONALD SULLIVAN’S TESTIMONY OF BIAS AND FRAUD
Donald Sullivan’s testimony amounted to unsubstantiated fraudulent rubbish and bias. He nor Richard James Alpert took the time to investigate the origins of The Form. The Form was approved by the Pharmacy Attorney.
Dan Buffington, PharmD, MBA of Tampa, Florida has been selected as President-Elect of the Florida Pharmacy Association for 2020-2021. Dr. Buffington is President and Practice Director of Clinical Pharmacology Services in Tampa and is also on the faculty at the University of Florida College of Medicine and Pharmacy. (5)
He served for 6 years on the Board of Trustees of the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and represents pharmacists on the American Medical Association’s Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) Editorial Panel. He served for 5 years as a medication safety expert with the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on the Healthcare Reform team in the CMS Innovation Center and the Center for Clinical Standards and Quality (CCSQ) focused on improving health outcomes, patient safety, and alternate payment models. (5)
Thus, the testimony of both Donal Sullivan and Richard James Alpert demonstrates their gross incompetence and failure to investigate. If these two would have investigated, they would have easily found the people of Pronto Pharmacy LLC always adhered t to the rules, regulations, and laws which govern pharmacy.
We demand that the CSA certificate of Pronto Pharmacy LLC., be returned unrestricted, and both Alpert and Sullivan be removed from employment from the Federal Government for fraudulent misrepresentation and abuse of authority.
THE CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. SISCO
JUDGE DOWD: And is it your job, is it part of your investigation in these cases to reach out to the prescribing physicians to determine if there’s a legitimate medical reason to justify the prescription, the opioid or whatever that’s actually prescribed? Is that part of your investigation?
DI ALPERT: That wasn’t part of my investigation. No sir.
Mr.Sisco: Okay. So you talked to the patients, right?
DI Alpert: Did I talk to the patients?
Mr.Sisco: Yes, sir.
DI Alpert: No, sir
Mr.Sisco: You didn’t talk to the patients?
DI Alpert: No, sir
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. SISCO
Q. Good morning, Mr. Albert
A. Good morning.
Q. We’ve met before on a number of occasions, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And in the 12 weeks of training that you received as a diversion investigator you were taught to be thorough in your investigation, correct?
A. Yes, sir
Q. And to gather as much information as you can to support an allegation that you were investigating, correct?
A. Yes, sir
Q. And in this case, you followed that training, is that correct?
A. Yes, sir
Q. So it was important for you to make sure that everything that you did, that you documented, was an accurate refection of your investigation efforts, right?
A. Yes, sir
Q. All right, And you ran down available leads
A. What are you referring to?
Q. Well, you know I presume that as part of your investigation you looked to see whether there was any information that was contrary to other information you’d come up with in the case, right?
A. I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to.
Q. You would want to know if there was some information that was out there that differed from the conclusions that you’d reached, right?
A. I’m not sure what you’re asking as far as…
Q. Well, let’s make this basic.
A. Okay.
EXPOSING THE DEA’S FRAUDULENT RED FLAG ANALYSIS
The DEA agent Richard Albert prepared a warrant that “opinion based on a red flag that Pronto Pharmacy engaged in manufacturing-controlled substances. This is an assumption that a crime was committed within the Pronto Pharmacy. Pronto Pharmacy is a licensed pharmaceutical company by law that can compound medications.
As further written December 29, 2020, by the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board in a stark rebuke of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit filed in federal court in Delaware claims that: The Walmart DOJ complaint also includes:
” more than 190 mentions of “red flags” about suspicious opioid prescriptions. It claims Walmart often didn’t adequately resolve them and sometimes knowingly filled illegitimate prescriptions despite the warnings. But Walmart notes in its lawsuit that the Controlled Substances Act “and its implementing regulations do not include the concept of red flags, let alone identify any particular factors as a red flag.”
“The feds try to side-step this problem by claiming that, under the Controlled Substances Act and regulations, “the pharmacist’s conduct must adhere to the usual course of his or her professional practice as a pharmacist.” The complaint argues that catching and resolving “red flags” for opioid prescriptions is “a well-recognized responsibility of a pharmacist in the professional practice of pharmacy,” so “failing to fulfill this responsibility” is a violation of the federal law.”
However, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board further points out:
” All of this raises constitutional issues based on a lack of legal standing. A negligence claim like the one alleged here is supposed to have a specific party claiming a specific injury caused by someone specific. Those are typically claims by one private party against another. The government can sue for violations of law, not because someone was negligent. The government’s claims of Controlled Substances Act violations are so general that they seem contrived to add some violation of the law.(1)
” In effect, DOJ is asking the federal court to overrule state law in favor of informal federal guidance and a vague notion of pharmaceutical best practices. This harassment was typical of the Obama era but it’s especially disappointing from the Trump Justice Department. The Biden Administration will be happy to run with this prosecutorial abuse.”(1)
THE SIX “RIGHTS”
The six medication rights serve as the foundation of safe medication administration. The RIGHT PATIENT must be given the RIGHT MEDICATION in the RIGHT DOSE by the RIGHT ROUTE at the RIGHT TIME. The pharmacist must also ensure that the prescription is supported by the RIGHT DOCUMENTATION.
This involves cross-checking the prescriber’s order against the patient’s history and medical information to identify potential drug-drug, drug-disease, or drug-allergy interactions. Although electronic prescribing technology can help detect errors in medication names, dosing, and frequency, it is not foolproof. The pharmacist should verify that all elements of the order are correct (Brown, 2016).
Once the medication ordered is verified as appropriate for the patient and appropriately prescribed, it is the pharmacist’s responsibility to ensure that the correct medication in the right form and dose is provided to the patient at the appropriate time. With the vast array of drugs on the market, it is not possible for a prescriber or a pharmacist to be personally familiar with the uses, dosing, side-effects, potential interactions, and other implications of every drug. (
If a pharmacist is unfamiliar with a medication, he or she must consult a drug reference before dispensing the medication.https://videopress.com/embed/gdUg8wup?preloadContent=metadata&hd=1DR. RICHARD WYNN, PHARMACIST, PROFESSOR OF PHARMACOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND DENTAL
These guidelines appear on nearly every State Governing boards of Pharmacist and Pharmacy-Technician throughout the United States of America.
RETURN TO THE CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. SISCO
Q. Okay? What you did was, if there was information that was in your possession that was relevant to this investigation, you wanted to make sure that you investigated that information completely; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. So in this case you identified a number of patients whose prescription that you found to be– to raise red flags; right?
A. Correct.
Q. All right. And that’s what caused you to talk to your superiors about, you know, initiating the show cause process and retaining an expert; right?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. So you talked to the patients, right?
A. Did I talk to the patients?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. No, sir
Q. You didn’t talk to the patients?
A. No, sir
Q. Well, wouldn’t it have been important for you to discuss with the patients whether or not they had an explanation for why they traveled to Pronto Pharmacy, for instance?
A. You could assume that, yes.
Q. Well, but you never attempted to speak with them; correct?
A. No
Q. So specifically the 11 patients that were here, you’ve spoken with them?
A. No, sir
Q. Okay. You had some concerns as a diversion investigator regarding the legitimacy of prescriptions that were issued to those patients; is that true?
A. Not necessarily the legitimacy or the actual prescription.
Q. Okay. So that wasn’t an issue that you were concerned about?
A. I’m not saying that’s not an issue. but I’m saying, not necessarily, that that was just was the main thing.
Q. All right. So you went and you had the prescriptions, right?
A. Correct.
Q. So for those 11 patients that are identified in the orders to show cause, right?
A. Correct.
Q. And that’s part of the information that you reviewed, either in the spreadsheets or by looking at the original prescriptions, you’re very familiar with that; right?
A. Correct.
Q. And so – –
JUDGE DOWD: Let me ask a question.
Mr. Albert, in looking at prescriptions what was your focus? Was it that there was a name on the prescription; that it was facially legitimate, or did you have any interest in looking into the prescription?
THE WITNESS: So when I looked at the prescription, of course I make sure it has all the information on it. What triggered suspicion was is that the prescription was written for tablets, but then on the back it was filled in capsules. So that intrigued my interest on those prescriptions.
JUDGE DOWD: And is it your job, is it part of your investigation in these cases to reach out to the prescribing physicians to determine if there’s a legitimate medical reason to justify the prescription, the opioid or whatever that’s actually prescribed? Is that part of your investigation?
THE WITNESS: That wasn’t part of my investigation. No sir.
JUDGE DOWD: Okay. I’m sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Sisco.
MR. SISCO: Well, Judge, you’re stealing my thunder.
JUDGE DOWD: Sorry. I just want to make that clear, because you asked have you looked into the prescription. And I want to know if it was just facially or if it was the history of the prescriber or whatnot.
BY MR. SISCO:
Q. So Investigator Albert, you did not go and talk to any of the prescribers; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. So even though you had a concern about how these prescriptions were filled, capsules as opposed to tablets, you never talked to the prescribers about whether or not the authorized that; is that correct?
A. No, I did not.
Q. That would be important information to have, wouldn’t it?
A. My best answer is yes and no.
JUDGE DOWD: Could you- – that doesn’t help us. Could you explain your answer?
THE WITNESS: Because in my investigation I do not necessarily have to talk to the prescriber based on the investigation that I perform.
BY MR. SISCO:
Q. Well, you don’t have to but you could. There’s nothing preventing you from doing that, right?
A. No. There’s nothing preventing me.
Q. All right. And so if you really want to get to the truth of the matter, what you do is you talk to the doctor and say; well, doctor, did you authorize the substitution of capsule for tablets on behalf of tis patient, right?
A. Yes.
Q. That’s kind of a simple, direct and straightforward way to get to the heart of this issue, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you didn’t do it?
A. Well, I didn’t do it on one particular doctor because he was under investigation already.
Q. Okay. Then you went to Pronto Pharmacy, you observed, starting in September 17, you observed, that they were building out a sterile compounding room?
A. I observed a compounding room, yes sir.
JUDGE DOWD: And what is that? How did you know that was a compounding room? What distinguishes a compounding room from any other room in a pharmacy?
THE WITNESS: So when you go in the pharmacy, this particular pharmacy, and you walk down the hallway and you go around, it’s a whole other room. And they have what appears to be like a laboratory, if you will.
JUDGE DOWD: Like a clean room?
THE WITNESS: Yes. Kind of a clean room. So it’s a big, enclosed area where you have a door to go in then I guess where the pharmacist would do his compounding.
JUDGE DOWD: All right, thank you.
BY MR. SISCO:
Q. And when you walked in the lobby, the entrance area of Pronto Pharmacy there’s a number of signs on the wall; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. There’s a sign, for instance, that tells patients that the pharmacist is available for consultations with them, right?
A. I’m not sure, sir.
Q. Okay. And there’s a sign that talks about the substitution of generic equivalents, correct?
A. I’m not sure.
Q. Well, you’re aware that that’s required by Florida statutes, right? Is that part of your training?
A. Thats not part of our training, no sir.
Q. Okay. So you were concerned – _ I think you used the word “suspicious,” because of the distance some of these patients traveled in order to get to Pronto Pharmacy; is that right?
A. Yes, sir
Q. So with regards to that issue, you wanton to Google and tried to figure out how far it was?
A. Yes, Sir.
COMPOUNDING AND THE TESTIMONY OF DIVERSION INVESTIGATOR ALPERT:
DIVERSION INVESTIGATOR RICHARD JAMES ALBERT
So, when Diversion Investigator Richard James Alpert, in May of 2019 returned to Pronto Pharmacy for his 5th visit, make no mistake, his actions as directed by his handlers, Susan Langston, DEA Divisional Director State of Florida located in Miami, Florida Aimee Hickerson Diversion Supervisor, Florida assigned to Pharmacies, John Beerbower Esq., United States Attorney for the DEA. was laser-targeted on finally disrupting, dismantling and destroying the business of Pronto Pharmacy LLC. In a similar manner as Superior Pharmacy of Tampa, Florida, or in West Virginia, Oak Hill Home Town Pharmacy, Oak Hill, WV.
DEA’s argument has been Pronto Pharmacy compounding of control medications was concluded as manufacturing and Pronto Pharmacy needed a separate manufacturing registration. This was because their retail registration license does not cover for manufacturing. The chart of guidelines more than contradicts all DEA assertions made by both DI Albert and his handlers against Pronto Pharmacy.
DI Alpert of DEA stated in his testimony, he did not know state law or federal law as it pertains to Pronto Pharmacy LLC alleged in order to show cause. DI Alpert further stated he use a form default letter which is located in DEA’s Computer system to write the Order to Show Cause which he had started in April, 20019, 3-months prior to their raid of August 29, 2019.
The jurisdiction on who defines compounding or manufacturing is that of the FDA. Had DI Alpert consulted with the FDA, or understood the rules on pharmaceuticals perhaps the outcome would be far different. Had DI Alpert reviewed the DOH Administrative finding of 2018 and our response he may have been better educated in the subject matter as to not proceeded with a criminal complaint. See administration 20017-18 case: ph201705581 also, Atty dale Sisco response and DOH, findings.
FLORIDA 64B16-27.700 DEFINITION OF COMPOUNDING
“Compounding” is the professional act by a pharmacist or other practitioner authorized by law, employing the science or art of any branch of the profession of pharmacy, incorporating ingredients to create a finished product for dispensing to a patient or for administration by a practitioner or the practitioner’s agent; and shall specifically include the professional act of preparing a unique finished product containing any ingredient or device defined by Sections 465.003(7) and (8), F.S.
The term also includes the preparation of nuclear pharmaceuticals and diagnostic kits incident to use of such nuclear pharmaceuticals. The term “commercially available products,” as used in this section, means any medicinal product as defined by Sections 465.003(7) and (8), F.S., that are legally distributed in the State of Florida by a drug manufacturer or wholesaler.
(1) Compounding includes:
(a) The preparation of drugs or devices in anticipation of prescriptions based on routine, regularly observed prescribing patterns.
(b) The preparation pursuant to a prescription of drugs or devices which are not commercially available.
(c) The preparation of commercially available products from bulk when the prescribing practitioner has prescribed the compounded product on a per prescription basis, and the patient has been made aware that the compounded product will be prepared by the pharmacist.
The reconstitution of commercially available products pursuant to the manufacturer’s guidelines is permissible without notice to the practitioner.
If the officers were asked the difference between compounding and manufacturing, they must know what they are being asked. A reasonable officer could not support or testify to the facts of any item or file that was within the seized computer or secondary storage systems.
It is within DI Richard Albert’s own statement that he “conceded that he did not know what significance the Florida Administrative Code (FAC) which guides Pharmacy in the State of Florida.” Agent Richard Alpert said, “ FAC provisions were already included in his subpoena template, and that he did not know what those provisions meant.”
Q Are you familiar with the FDA guidelines with regard to compounding?
A No, sir.
Q As part of your training, the 12 week diversion investigator training, did you receive training with regard to the compounding of medication and the laws that apply to it?
A Not compounding, manufacturing.
Q Okay. But not compounding?
A Not specifically compounding.
Q All right. And one of the things that you’re trained on in that 12-week course is the law; right?
A Yes.
Q And Federal law, I presume?
A Yes.
Q And have you educated yourself on Florida law that applies to pharmacy operations?
A My answer will be no on that.
Q So in your analysis of this case, you looked solely to federal law?
A Correct.
Q Even though, for instance, your subpoena references specific Florida Administrative Code provisions?
A Correct.
Q You drafted the subpoena, didn’t you?
A Yes.
Q Okay. So when you put those code provisions in there, they had some significance to you; didn’t they?
A Yes.
Q Okay. What was the significance that they had?
A I don’t know, sir.
Q Okay. So you don’t know what — you put them in there but you don’t know what they mean?
A They’re already in there, actually.
Q Oh. So it’s just a template?
A Part of it, yes, sir.
Q Okay. So you just plug it in. But you really don’t know what it means?
A No, sir,
JACK FOLSON:
- The issues here are several. The diversion Investigator has testified in open court that he has no understanding of the difference between compounding and manufacturing. However, in light of this discrepancy, he continued with the warrant without educating himself about what he was doing.
- Furthermore, there is no indication that anyone on his team took the time to educate him on this crucial factor. This is somewhat problematic in that how can you prove by the preponderance of the evidence that this Pharmacy is non-compliant in the law without the investigator knowing what is in the law?
- Since this investigator drafted the subpoena, he needed to have probable cause to present to an administrative law judge to sign. Without an adequate probable cause, there is no warrant.
- Without a warrant, there is no case due to a violation of the constitutional protection of illegal search and seizure. Without a subpoena, there is no case.
- Therefore, this falls by the virtue of the “fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.”
MFR is a matter of taking note which identifies what is happening at the moment of time. His testimony was simply a lie as he has done before and people have gone to prison Harold Eugene Fletcher who went to props based on the tesitmony of Donal R Sullivan.
” A pharmacist may manufacture an aqueous or oleaginous solution or solid dosage form containing a narcotic controlled substance in Schedule II–V in a proportion not exceeding 20% of the complete solution, compound, or mixture. A retail pharmacy may perform central fill pharmacy activities.“
The below chart demonstrates Richard James Albert nor his handlers know existing laws and/or rules guiding the practice of Pharmacy. More specifically control medications and this chart under (iv) practitioners, hospitals retail pharmacies are permitted under their DEA Federal Registry certificate to process Schedule medications II-V. This chart specifically outlines:
Yet, what is more, troublesome it that these guidelines are from the DEA’s own website under 21 USC 1301.13 under certificate new license and renewal (224&224a) and the cost for this license is $731.00 and it is good for 3 years. The importance is DI Albert didn’t know the laws, never looked for the laws, and his handlers, Aimee Hickerson, Susan Langston, John Beerbower kept him ignorant of the laws.
| (iv) Dispensing or instructing (includes Practitioner, Hospital/ Clinic, Retail Pharmacy, Central fill pharmacy, Teaching Institution) | Schedules II–V | New–224 Renewal–224a | 731 | 3 | May conduct research and instructional activities with those substances for which registration was granted, except that a mid-level practitioner may conduct such research only to the extent expressly authorized under state statute. A pharmacist may manufacture an aqueous or oleaginous solution or solid dosage form containing a narcotic controlled substance in Schedule II–V in a proportion not exceeding 20% of the complete solution, compound, or mixture. A retail pharmacy may perform central fill pharmacy activities. |
DEA WEBSITE UNDER 21USC 1301.13
DEA: THE CRIMES OF A BLACK-OWNED PHARMACY, PUNISHED FOR PAYMENT OF THEIR SERVICES
The DEA goes further to criminalize their medical and payment methodologies without conducting any investigation.
THE DELIBERATE WRONG DOING OF THE DEA
THE
Interference with Wholesalers
On August 29, 2019, a well-coordinated attack implemented by both the DEA and Florida Department of Health was waged on Pronto Pharmacy. Their actions were beyond the scope of service of a certified law enforcement agency. Upon entering, a DEA Agent is videotaped removing and disabling Pronto Pharmacy’s camera systems wherein they damaged and destroyed several articles of equipment. (10) (See below videos)
pharmacy-blurred-mp4“DEA DAMAGE AND DISABLE SECURITY CAMERAS”
The process begins with DEA investigators like Richard Albert interfering with wholesalers, by calling and suggesting they close the merchant account of the targeted pharmacy, under the DEA’s “Know Your Customer Program.” In the case of Pronto Pharmacy, the wholesaler was Safe Chain Solutions. DI Albert instructed Safe Chain to close Pronto Pharmacy’s control medication account in June of 2019, making the products commercially unavailable to them. Therefore, Pronto Pharmacy continued its compounding in order to meet the demand of its patient base. (1)
Ms. Cheryl Elshaer saw a Pharmacy owned by a Black Family that had the capability of compounding control medications, (SHE DID A KAREN) and called the police (DEA). (2)
fl-doh-mqa-search-portal-2022June 26, 2019 Fl-doh inspection
ABBIE DIVILIO SAFE CHAIN STATE REGULATION COORDINATOR
Ms. Divilio and the DEA worked together with the intent to undermine and destroy the business of Pronto Pharmacy, using distance travel from the physician’s office under know your customer program. Again, no such law exists in either the Federal and State statute.
Sometime in June 2019, Ms. Divilio made an onsite visit to Pronto Pharmacy and spoke with Pharmacist Guy Decker. Video recordings show Ms. Divilio stayed approximately 7.3 minutes. She examine no records, asked Mr. Decker one question, and reviewed no profiles. Approximately, a week later Pronto Pharmacy’s control medication account was closed. Ms. Divilio informed that they were concern regarding distance traveled between the physician’s office and Pharmacy.
35 AGENTS OF DEA RAID PRONTO PHARMACY AUGUST 29, 2019.
The DEA has learned the rewards are even better against a doctor, dentist, pharmacist, manufacturer, or hospital using RICO, and Justice Department intimidations. Further, the DEA has its own Court System ( that Operates as a Kangaroo Court) which does not adhere to Federal Rules of Civil Procedures. Their Judges answer solely to the head of the DEA.
https://videopress.com/embed/noz5NgRf?preloadContent=metadata&hd=1MR. GERALD KILEY
We Demand hearings from Congress as the activity of the DEA affects the lives of all of America during this Covid pandemic by creating disparity and shortages and the majority of the times this has been done by race.
Yet it is clear that the DEA agents were operating in absence from the law whereby Richard Albert, testified on January 28, 2020, in a DEA Federal Court Hearing that he did not “Know or understand the law(s) or how any law apply to the practice of Pharmacy.” There is no evidence that any medication was being diverted. (6)
9/17/opinion/drugs-dea-defund-heroin.html
DEA Diversion Investigator Richard James Albert so entered the premises of Pronto Pharmacy LLC., based on an assumption that lead Pharmacist Norman J Clement, his family and those employed were illegally manufacturing Oxycodone and Hydromorphone based on suspicion and dispensing high doses of illegally controled prescriptions.
ALL PHYSICIANS WERE LICENSED
All medications, controlled and non-control, have been properly prescribed by a licensed physician, for treatment of a disease state, supported by radiographs, physical examination, and treatment plan, all part of the patient’s medical/dental records. DI Albert, purposely withheld relevant facts by eviscerating the patient-practitioner relationship, by using Google Maps to track distance traveled by theses patients to have their prescriptions filled, and the patients paying in cash. This is negligence. His handlers have taught him well. Jack Folson Pharmacist Expert writes:
“Currently, the DEA has no statistical guidelines or law to support or establish boundary levels, which are indicative of criminal acts when filling any Control prescription written for patients by a physician who has performed a thorough physical examination, diagnoses supported by medical/dental radiographs and treatment plan. The DEA guidelines are tactic acts that specifically target African American pharmacists.” (8)
DRUG ADDICTION IS NOT A CRIME
It is unreasonable to expect a Diversion Investigator to have a complete understanding of these complex issues. Notwithstanding the basic foundation of patho-physiology is not in their 12-week course as compared to Physicians and Pharmacists requiring years of training to make adequate choices in this arena.
THE PAINFUL DISCUSSION OF BEING UNDERESTIMATED, UNDERVALUED AND MARGINALIZED
Let it be clear the poor training and limited comprehension, lack of understanding of pharmaceutical science, pharmacy law, and pharmacy protocols of DI Richard James Albert are deliberate, yet essential, and purposefully crafted by his handlers to perform his mission. Richard James Albert does not perform without their command. His handlers know they can prevail with him in spight of their dismissiveness toward medical science and protocols. DI Albert could never be used successfully against a large Chain Drug Store or a Jewish, or White-owned pharmacy because the quality of his knowledge and training would quickly be exposed in a legal proceeding.
Yet, the United States Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) will prosecute black pharmacist and black-owned pharmacies for accepting cash as a form of payment. (9),(10) The problem here directly falls on the incompetents of the DEA and their private vendors (Appriss Health) who have failed to develop the software of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) which can distinguish when a person pays in cash, credit card, or debit.
Pages (151 – 152) TRANSCRIPTS JANUARY 29, 2019, DEA VS PRONTO PHARMACY LLC
Summary Testimony of Diversion Investigator Alpert:
Q. Based upon the investigation that you conducted. did you attempt to determine what the volume was of prescriptions that were being dispensed at Pronto Pharmacy?
A No, sir.
Q But you could tell from the dispensing records, for instance, how man prescriptions were being dispensed each day, each week, each month or each year; right?
A I would be able to tell that, yes.
Q But you never made an attempt to do that?
A No, sir.
Q And did you analyze the records, the prescribing records that you obtained via the administrative inspection warrant to compare the patients who received capsules that were compounded at Pronto Pharmacy to the anticipated patient need?
A No, sir.
SUMMARY OF DIVERSION INVESTIGATOR RICHARD JAMES ALPERT’S DIVERSION OF THE TRUTH
Diversion Investigator Richard Albert,(DI) testified that he did not “Know or understand the law(s) or how any law applies to the practice of Pharmacy. On January 28, 2020, Richard Albert (DI Albert) under cross-examination by Pronto Pharmacy Attorney Dale Sisco of Tampa, Fl, in summary, stated
- In reviewing the respondent’s prescription data, he became suspicious because certain prescriptions were written for tablets but filled in capsules. However, DI Albert admitted that he is not familiar with FDA guidelines regarding compounding and, further, that he did not analyze the records he obtained from the respondent to compare the patients who received capsules that were compounded at respondent’s pharmacy to the anticipated patient’s need. Likewise, DI Albert did not compare the number of doses of capsules documented as having been compounded by the batch reports to the number of drugs dispensed by the respondent.
Senator Hatch video on DEA and Opioid Crisis and Abuse| C-SPAN.org
https://www.c-span.org/video/?435395-3/senator-hatch-dea-opioid-crisis
- DI Albert admitted that speaking with the prescribing physicians identified in the E-FORCE data would have been a simple and straightforward method to ascertain whether any of those prescribers had, in fact, authorized the substitution of capsules for tablets for a particular prescription. He testified further that there was nothing to prevent him from contacting all but one of the physicians who wrote the prescriptions for the patients at issue. However, DI Albert never contacted, spoke with, or attempted to contact or speak with any of the prescribing physicians. (3),(4),(5)
- DI Albert did not know of any federal or state law or regulation that limits the geographic area in which a pharmacy can dispense medications. (2)
CONCLUSION
Why must an agency continue to operate when it openly violated the laws. We can see that the DEA is no longer an agency that practices and enforces the law effectively and correctly. This agency has developed a system of support for the rightness of the agency and not for the rights to protect and serve the country. If this agency is not reorganized or shut down, it will continue to present a clear and present danger to all of America.
THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATION. CHAIRMAN JOHN CONYERS (D) DETROIT 1990 C-SPAN VIDEO “WHAT THEY FOUND ACROSS THE BOARD THE WAR ON DRUGS WAS HAVING A DISPROPORTION IMPACT ON BLACK PEOPLE” (9)
https://www.c-span.org/video/?14263-1/jails-prisons-drugs
BOTH HOUSE AND SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES MUST GIVE OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATE AND REORGANIZE THE DEA
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN THE NORMS
ENDNOTES
2 Good compounding practice applicable to state-licensed pharmacies. In: Model State Pharmacy Act and Model Rules of the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy. Park Ridge, Ill: national Assocciationof Boards of Pharmacy; 1993;C-1-C-5.
4. Joseph Madison “The Black Eagle” XM 126, THE URBAN VIEW, Thank you, Joe if I’m a celebrity then let it be for Obamacare which saved my life from Invasive Early Stage Colon Cancer through an eye exam 2016. Thank you, Joe, for the Goats.
5. White Opioids: Pharmaceutical Race and The War on Drugs, that wasn’t , released April 2017 by The United States Department Health and Human Services (HHS) a 25 page study (with broad foot notes) on White Opioids see url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5501419/#R28/
6. Dr. Cedric L. Alexander, a 39-year law enforcement veteran, has an exemplary and proven record
of working with diverse populations and of innovation in dealing with major challenges. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/community-policing-as-a-counter-to-bias-in-policing
7. it was during this Raid of August 29, 2019, Norman J Clement wrote: “THE MANIFESTO OF THE NORTH STAR PROJECT“…..(defiled, enough is enough).
9. HEARING HELD BY THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS (BRAIN TRUST) 30 YEARS AGO LEAD NARRATED BY RON DANIELS, concerningTHE WAR ON DRUGS which HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUNT RACE. And young Black males, Black Doctors, Black Pharmacist have always been the targets of some kind. This hearing held by Congressman John Conyers 30 years ago October 1, 1990. Norman J. Clement, RPh., DDS IS ON THIS PANEL.
