3 ms·
There's something super strange about how this article is written. There's a very heavy emphasis on how the government invaded this poor fireman's privacy and e
by tinco 12y ago
There's something super strange about how this article is written. There's a very heavy emphasis on how the government invaded this poor fireman's privacy and endangered the adoption process of two young children. The fireman is emotional, and feels victimized by the police and is even sueing the mayor, the main argument of the article seems to be that the police has too much information about people.
But when you extract just the factual statements from the article there's a whole different picture. The police was investigating a pretty serious crime. One of their tools in this investigation was checking medical records of employees of the fire department to find irregularities that might point to someone with motive to steal opiates. Instead of finding a direct motive they found out a person was committing fraud with prescription drugs. The person was charged, but eventually the charges were dropped because they couldn't round out the evidence, the reason is unclear.
Did this person really commit prescription drug fraud? Did he make money off that? Is that the sort of crime that should throw a wrench in an adoption process?
I obviously don't know the guy, but it seems a bit weird to me to just disregard the idea that the authorities have hard evidence of him circumventing a law. Using the properties of that guy that make him seem like a stand-up guy just to make a larger point about privacy feels a bit disingenuous.
- SoftwareMaven 12y agoMarlon Jones (the Deupty Fire Chief mentioned) had "a double-knee replacement in 2009 and had been dealing with chronic back pain since 2000. His three doctors prescribed different painkillers and muscle relaxers."[1] That was enough to get him charged for prescription fraud. That doesn't seem over-zealous to you? Further, these are medical records. You know, things that we all get HIPAA notices for every time we go to a doctor. I have to go through a pain in the ass process every time I want to get two of my own doctors to talk. Police could just bypass that, without any probable cause (Feds still can). Phone record searches require probable cause. Financial and personal records require probable cause. Prescription records? Wide open to the police to comb through any time they like. As a person who has had different controlled substances prescribed by three doctors this year, this is frightening as hell. As for Mr. Pyle, "Firefighter Ryan Pyle had also been dealing with chronic back pain, and after a five-day stint in the hospital for an infected tooth, was also prescribed painkillers on several occasions. Police saw these prescriptions in the database and charged Pyle with one felony count."[1] The assumption of guilty until proven innocent (and he must be guilty if the police were looking at him, right?) is revolting. The ability of police to peruse records at a whim and destroy people's lives is even more so. 1. http://www.kutv.com/news/features/local-news/stories/Utah-39-s-bitter-pill-56073.shtml#.VVKZ6eQ2xC0 http://www.kutv.com/news/features/local-news/stories/Utah-39...
- ScottBurson 12y ago> Instead of finding a direct motive they found out a person was committing fraud with prescription drugs. Where does it say that? All I see is this: Pyle had been prescribed short-acting and long-acting opiate-based painkillers for years after being diagnosed with an inoperable mid-back disc herniation from a dirt-bike accident. If that counts as evidence of fraud sufficient for criminal charges to be filed, I think we have a problem.
- shirro 12y agoEvidence only counts if you can't get the victim to plead guilty to a lesser charge. A bit of trial by media, career damage, pressure on the family, legal costs and who is going to contest a charge. Sadly society doesn't seem to care about the occasional Aaron Swartz getting caught in the machine.