“IF EVER ONE THINKS THEY’RE TOO SMALL TO MAKE CHANGES, THEN THEY HAVE NEVER SLEPT WITH A MOSQUITO !!!”
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC., SPIRIT OF REV. C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGWORTH, LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
“WE ARE HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS, PHYSICIANS, DENTISTS, PHARMACISTS, AND NOT GOD DAMN FUCKING STREET DRUG DEALERS …DEA-DOJ !!!”
THE VERY GRAY AREA OF MEDICAL PRACTICE UNDER PROSECUTION:
A Playbook for Conviction
This source reveals a disturbing trend where the lines between healthcare and law enforcement are blurring, resulting in the criminalization of medical practice, particularly concerning opioid prescriptions.
It describes a “targeting playbook” where government agencies, sometimes prompted by insurers, use prescription monitoring programs and expert opinions to investigate and prosecute physicians for alleged overprescribing. The sources highlight the case of Dr. Neil Anand and reference the Ruan Supreme Court decision as crucial for potentially rectifying what is seen as prosecutorial overreach and flawed expert opinions.
Physicians Against Abuse (PAA) was founded to address this issue, emphasizing the unprecedented number of imprisoned doctors in the US for prescribing practices. The text further highlights concerns about lack of due process, reliance on flawed expert testimony, and the potential for profit-driven motives in these prosecutions, arguing that tort law is being wrongly conflated with criminal law.
Ultimately, the source advocates for reforms, emphasizing that federal prosecutors have overstepped their bounds, leading to severe penalties for doctors that are disproportionate to those for actual drug traffickers.
IMAGINE IF YOU WILL A TARGETING PLAYBOOK
Marjorie Belsky, writes;
“The lines between law enforcement and health care are blurring. Police increasingly lean on doctors to provide them with genetic samples, prescription histories, and toxicology results they could not obtain independently.
This often occurs without a warrant or the patient’s consent.” Brown, Teneille R., When Doctors Become Cops (January 1, 2023). University of Utah College of Law Research Paper No. 566, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4346154 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4346154
Physicians and patients are increasingly being goaded into the role of law enforcement. Last week’s indictment and verdict in the Neal Anand trial showed that.
An insurer audits the highest-billing physicians and then files a complaint with a government agency, claiming the physician is overbilling and performing medically unnecessary procedures. The agency passes the complaint on to other agencies.
A warrant ensues, and the government subpoenas patient records. The PMP is used as support for overprescribing medications, and an indictment ensues. This playbook happens every day without or with the PMP and was originally offered as a strategy by McKinsey in the 1990s to Allstate, called the zero-sum game, and delineated in Jay Feinman’s book Deny, Delay, Defend.
In the United States. v Orlandis Wells NV 2022, the playbook read the same way. The government, which is law enforcement, took it upon itself to use the PMP to support an indictment. Ironically, the PMP was started as a medical decision tool for physicians in 1995 in Nevada so that doctors could see other scheduled medications.
“The CSA authorizes the DEA to track physicians and patients, formulate quotas for prosecutions, and indict and potentially incarcerate physicians and patients for medication prescribing habits and patient utilization.
Using the information gleaned from the mandated prescription-tracking databases and the authorization provided by the CSA, private for-profit companies run the data through proprietary algorithms to assist the government in both criminal and civil proceedings as deemed necessary by the government”. Sutton, Kristina, and Belsky, Marjorie.
The Scarlet ‘C’ (September 15, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3974275 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3974275
ALL PHYSICIANS PICTURED HERE HAVE BEEN ARRESTED AS DRUG DEALERS “PILL MILL DOCTORS IN WHITE COATS
Physician Against Abuse (PAA)
In analyzing the root cause of the nearly 99% success rate of convictions against physicians, Physician Against Abuse (PAA) was founded in 2019 in response to the astronomical number of convictions against physicians involving “scope of practice” charges that have sprung up in the past two decades. Concluded;
“…that what it all boiled down to was a prosecutor with a hunch hiring an expert using the deep pockets of the government, often not even in the same field as the accused physician, to criminalize the behavior of the accused physician. While this may be acceptable in the context of medical malpractice litigation, it is not acceptable where the consequences are loss of freedom for the accused physician.”
According to Margorie Beltsky, MD, Esq., an Integrated Pain Specialist, the biggest problem is that they confuse Tort law with criminal law.
United States law enforcement and Courts have been wrongly accusing and imprisoning doctors, particularly in cases related to opioid prescriptions, instilling a fear through Coercion of government lack of due process, authoritative agencies brutally forced their way into medicine using these unscientific guidelines, creations, and manipulation of medical protocols.
The PAA wrote in the Amicus Brief to the Supreme Court of the United States of America;
“It is not clear how the federal prosecutors lost their way, but it is certainly clear that they did so because they have, for so long, had unfettered discretion that the courts have repeatedly condoned. We are where we are today because it is not feasible to maintain integrity when there is such a lack of accountability, with very little to no redress for bringing these prosecutions for personal agenda.”
Garry Kasparov writes, “Standing up to dictators, you must stand, giving in to bullies doesn’t save you from their encroachment.”
_______________________________________________________/
II. Case Law Analysis
1. United States v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1998)
The Second Circuit held that a 12-day gap between the conclusion of direct and the beginning of cross-examination did not violate the defendant’s rights, especially since the break was for logistical reasons and the defense was not denied the opportunity to cross-examine.
2. United States v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673 (1986)
Established that limitations on cross-examination may violate the Sixth Amendment only when they deny the jury sufficient information to make a discriminating appraisal of a witness’s credibility. A delay, without more, is not inherently unconstitutional.
3. United States v. McRae, 593 F.2d 700 (5th Cir. 1979)
A long delay in testimony might be an error only if it causes prejudice—for example, if the witness becomes unavailable, forgets critical facts, or if the jury is left with a skewed perception after hearing only direct examination for an extended period.
Dr. King’s System: Not Reliable
The DOJ and DEA are accused of operating outside the rule of law, creating their flawed medical science to misidentify legitimate prescriptions of FDA-approved narcotic analgesic medications as illegitimate, leading to wrongful prosecutions.
Sebastian Ohanian, Esq.
Counsel for Amicus Curiae Physicians Against Abuse wrote on December 27, 2021:
“Federal prosecutions based on federal experts determining what is ‘outside the scope of professional practice’ offend comity and should be eliminated. The only logical way to do this is to require a criminal referral to be made by state medical boards before federal prosecutors can initiate prosecution against physicians for charges relating to the practice of medicine.”
The sources characterize Dr. King’s system for assessing medical practice as unreliable and potentially harmful. Here’s a breakdown:
- Lack of Scientific Rigor and Validation: The sources emphasize that despite being touted as “objective,” Dr. King’s system lacks scientific validation and has not been subjected to rigorous peer review. [1-3] His patent application is still pending, possibly due to scientific rigor and legal admissibility concerns. [1] Experts in the field do not seem to endorse or utilize his system. [2]
- Subjective Standards and Unsupported Symbols: The system relies on “colorful symbols,” like ticks and crosses, to flag behaviors that deviate from Dr. King’s standards of medical conduct. [4] The meaning of these symbols and how they objectively measure a doctor’s intent is not clearly defined. [5] The sources argue that this reliance on subjective interpretations undermines the system’s claims of objectivity. [3, 5, 6]
- Ignores Patient Individuality and Complexity of Chronic Pain: The system disregards the subjective nature of pain and reduces patients to data points, ignoring individual needs and responses to treatments. [7] The sources criticize this approach as it fails to acknowledge the complexities of chronic pain management, where patients often require individualized care. [6-8]
- Potential for Harm: The sources express concern that using this system in courtrooms could lead to miscarriages of justice. [8-10] Doctors could be unfairly judged and penalized based on an algorithm simplifying complex medical decisions. [9, 10] The focus on “spreadsheet management” could also compromise patient care by prioritizing adherence to the system’s standards over individualized treatment plans. [8]
- Profit-Driven Motives: The sources suggest that Dr. King’s system is primarily profit-driven, as he has monetized his opinions and become a sought-after expert witness for the prosecution in cases against doctors. [11]
Odonto-Toxicity
OPEN HEART SURGERY
THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE IS UNDER THREAT
WARNING From Physicians Against Abuse:
“For the past decade or more, physicians’ freedom has been hanging on the unfettered discretion of prosecutors and the opinion of their hired experts. In this endeavor, the prosecutors have scored big wins, making the United States the only country in the world with the highest number of physicians behind bars.
As of to date, we have physicians in federal prisons who are sentenced to 327 years, (US v. Mukerjee 4:04-cr-50044 in Eastern District of Michigan), life (US v. Henson 6:16-cr-10018 in District Court of Kansas), life (US v. Webb 3:08-cr-00136 in Northern District of Florida), life (US v. Volkman 1:07-cr-00060 Southern District of Ohio), and countless more serving 20 years plus for prescribing controlled substances that a government hired expert believed was outside the scope of professional practice.
Even the most prolific drug traffickers with known criminal enterprises that expand over several continents and have been in existence for decades do not get these stiff penalties.
Actual traffickers of hard drugs serve less time (and leave prison with more money) than doctors who have spent their lives helping the sick.”
THE SACKLER HATERS
CONCLUSION
“…When The Supreme Court Rules on A Case 9-0… That’s The Law Of The Land..”
…Morning Joe Scarborough 4/16/2025….
RUAN IS THE LAW OF THE LAND…THE CONVICTION OF DR. NEIL KAMAL ANAND, MD., MUST BE VACATED
OR SEND
TO CASH APP:$docnorm
ZELLE 3135103378
ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE
BE SURE TO DONATE TO THE MARK IBSEN GOFUNDME DEFENSE FUND, WHERE THE SON ALWAYS RISES!!!
For now, you are
Within
the norms
Briefing Document: Erosion of Physician Autonomy and Potential Criminalization of Medical Practice
Date: October 26, 2023 Prepared For: [Intended Audience – e.g., Legal Counsel, Advocacy Groups, Interested Parties]
Subject: Review of Sources on the Increasing Intersection of Law Enforcement and Healthcare, Focusing on Physician Targeting and the Role of Expert Testimony.
Executive Summary:
This briefing analyzes the provided sources, highlighting a disturbing trend in the United States: the lines between law enforcement and healthcare are increasingly blurred.
This convergence leads to the targeting and prosecution of physicians, particularly in cases involving opioid prescriptions, based on subjective interpretations of medical practice and the opinions of government-hired experts.
The sources raise serious concerns about due process, the criminalization of medical judgment, the potential for miscarriages of justice, and the chilling effect this has on legitimate medical practice and patient care.
A key focus is the criticism of expert witness testimony, particularly the system employed by Dr. Timothy King, and the argument that federal prosecutors are overreaching their authority in the absence of clear, scientifically validated standards and proper oversight from state medical boards.
Main Themes and Important Ideas:
1. Blurring Lines Between Law Enforcement and Healthcare:
- The sources emphasize a growing trend where law enforcement agencies are increasingly relying on healthcare providers for information and are scrutinizing medical decisions as potential criminal acts.
- Quote: “The lines between law enforcement and health care are blurring. Police increasingly lean on doctors to provide them with genetic samples, prescription histories, and toxicology results they could not obtain independently. This often occurs without a warrant or the patient’s consent.” (Brown, Teneille R.)
- This blurring is facilitated by the use of Prescription Monitoring Programs (PMPs) not just as medical decision-making tools but also as evidence in criminal investigations.
- The PMP was originally intended as “a medical decision tool for physicians in 1995 in Nevada so that doctors could see other scheduled medications.”
- However, “the government, law enforcement, took it upon itself to use the PMP to support an indictment.”
2. The “Targeting Playbook” and Strategic Prosecution of Physicians:
- The sources describe a recurring “playbook” where various entities, including insurers and government agencies, collaborate to initiate investigations and prosecutions against physicians, often focusing on high-billing or prescribing habits.
- Quote: “An insurer audits the highest-billing physicians and then files a complaint with a government agency, claiming the physician is overbilling and performing medically unnecessary procedures. The agency passes the complaint on to other agencies. A warrant ensues, and the government subpoenas patient records. The PMP is used as support for overprescribing medications, and an indictment ensues. This playbook happens every day…”
- This strategy has historical roots, allegedly originating from a McKinsey concept called the “zero-sum game” used by Allstate.
- The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) is cited as providing the DEA with broad authority to track physicians and patients, set prosecution quotas, and indict individuals based on prescribing habits.
- Quote: “The CSA authorizes the DEA to track physicians and patients, formulate quotas for prosecutions, and indict and potentially incarcerate physicians and patients for medication prescribing habits and patient utilization.” (Sutton & Belsky)
- Private companies utilizing proprietary algorithms further assist the government in these proceedings.
3. Critiques of Expert Witness Testimony and Dr. Timothy King’s System:
- A significant portion of the sources focuses on the role and reliability of expert witnesses hired by the prosecution, particularly Dr. Timothy King.
- Dr. King’s system for assessing medical practice is characterized as lacking scientific rigor, validation, and peer review.
- Quote: “…despite being touted as ‘objective,’ Dr. King’s system lacks scientific validation and has not been subjected to rigorous peer review.”
- The system relies on “colorful symbols” with unclear and potentially subjective interpretations, failing to account for patient individuality and the complexities of chronic pain management.
- Quote: “The system relies on ‘colorful symbols,’ like ticks and crosses, to flag behaviors that deviate from Dr. King’s standards of medical conduct. The meaning of these symbols and how they objectively measure a doctor’s intent is not clearly defined.”
- Concerns are raised about the potential for this system to lead to miscarriages of justice by oversimplifying complex medical decisions and prioritizing adherence to a rigid system over individualized patient care.
- The sources suggest potential profit-driven motives behind Dr. King’s work as a sought-after expert witness for the prosecution.
4. Criminalization of Medical Judgment and “Scope of Practice” Charges:
- Physicians Against Abuse (PAA) highlights the high conviction rate against physicians on “scope of practice” charges, arguing that these often stem from prosecutors with a “hunch” hiring experts to criminalize a physician’s behavior.
- Quote: “…that what it all boiled down to was a prosecutor with a hunch hiring an expert using the deep pockets of the government, often not even in the same field as the accused physician, to criminalize the behavior of the accused physician.” (PAA)
- This is seen as a conflation of tort law (medical malpractice) with criminal law, where the consequences are far more severe, including loss of freedom.
- Quote: “According to Margorie Beltsky, MD, Esq., an Integrated Pain Specialist, they are Conflating Tort law with criminal law; that’s the biggest problem.”
- The lack of due process and the perceived brutality of government agencies’ intrusion into medicine are also highlighted.
5. Fear and Chilling Effect on Medical Practice:
- The prosecution and imprisonment of physicians for prescribing practices are instilling fear among doctors, potentially leading to undertreatment of patients, particularly those with chronic pain.
- Quote: “…instilling a fear through Coercion of government lack of due process, authoritative agencies brutally forced their way into medicine using these unscientific guidelines creations, and manipulation of medical protocols.” (Marjorie Belsky)
6. Lack of Accountability and Unfettered Prosecutorial Discretion:
- The PAA argues that the high number of wrongful prosecutions is due to the “unfettered discretion” of federal prosecutors and a lack of accountability.
- Quote: “It is not clear how the federal prosecutors lost their way, but it is certainly clear that they did so because they have, for so long, had unfettered discretion that the courts have repeatedly condoned.” (PAA Amicus Brief)
- The brief suggests that there is “very little to no redress for bringing these prosecutions for personal agenda.”
7. Disproportionate Penalties Compared to Actual Drug Traffickers:
- The sources point out the extreme sentences received by some physicians for prescribing controlled substances, which are often harsher than those given to convicted drug traffickers.
- Examples: Physicians sentenced to 327 years, life sentences for prescribing practices deemed outside the “scope of professional practice.”
- Quote: “Even the most prolific drug traffickers with known criminal enterprises that expand over several continents and have been in existence for decades do not get these stiff penalties. Actual traffickers of hard drugs serve less time (and leave prison with more money) than doctors who have spent their lives helping the sick.”
8. Call for Reform and Reliance on State Medical Boards:
- Sebastian Ohanian, Esq., suggests that federal prosecutions of physicians for practice of medicine issues should require a criminal referral from state medical boards.
- Quote: “Federal prosecutions based on federal experts determining what is ‘outside the scope of professional practice’ offend comity and should be eliminated. The only logical way to do this is to require a criminal referral to be made by state medical boards before federal prosecutors can initiate prosecution against physicians for charges relating to the practice of medicine.”
9. Importance of Supreme Court Precedent (Ruan v. United States):
- The conclusion of the provided text emphasizes the significance of the Supreme Court ruling in Ruan v. United States, which clarified the standard for prosecution of physicians for unlawful drug distribution.
- The sources suggest that this ruling should result in the vacating of convictions like Dr. Neil Kamal Anand’s if the standard applied was not consistent with Ruan.
- Quote: “…RUAN IS THE LAW OF THE LAND…THE CONVICTION OF DR. NEIL KAMAL ANAND, MD., MUST BE VACATED.”
Case Law Analysis (Briefly Noted):
The provided case law excerpts (United States v. Salameh, United States v. Van Arsdall, United States v. McRae) relate to the timing and limitations of cross-examination and the potential for delays in testimony to prejudice a defendant. While not directly addressing the central themes of physician targeting, they touch upon due process considerations within legal proceedings, which are relevant to the concerns raised about the fairness of prosecutions against doctors.
Conclusion:
The reviewed sources paint a concerning picture of the increasing criminalization of medical practice in the United States.
The reliance on potentially flawed expert testimony, the broad discretion of federal prosecutors, and the severe penalties imposed raise serious questions about due process, the integrity of the justice system, and the potential negative impact on patient access to necessary care.
The emphasis on the Ruan ruling suggests a potential avenue for challenging past convictions and advocating for a more balanced and evidence-based approach to regulating medical practice, one that respects physician autonomy and relies on the expertise of state medical boards.
