PROZAC: Murder: Involuntary Intoxication Plea: Tennessee

Paragraph 14 reads:  “The Petitioner had available as a
defense at trial and also as a competency issue the fact that he was
[intoxicated] from the ingestion of . . .[the] medically prescribed drugs[,
Moban and Prozac].
The Petitioner contends that this intoxication
constitutes a valid defense that was overlooked by defense counsel. The
prescribed medications were taken pursuant to medical advice and without [the
Petitioner’s] knowledge of [their] potentially intoxicating effects. . . .
Petitioner contends that due to the ingestion of the aforementioned prescription
drugs he was unexpectedly intoxicated to the point of unconsciousness, incapable
of controlling his actions, and thus not criminally responsible for his actions.
Because the Petitioner was unaware of the potential for his medications to
produce abnormal thought processes and behavior, and because [they were]
medically prescribed to him, the petitioner’s condition qualified as involuntary
intoxication. See T.C.A. § 39-11-503(c). As a result of the aforementioned
prescribed medication-induced physical disorder of the brain, the Petitioner was
(1) unable to exercise his customary moral judgment, (2) unable to control his
violent impulses, (3) unable to appreciate the consequences of his violent
actions, and (4) unable to appreciate right and wrong in regard to what he was
doing at the time of the
homicide.”

http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=intnco20100412326

SILER v. STATE

JEFFERY T. SILER, JR.,
v.
STATE
OF TENNESSEE.

No. E2009-00436-CCA-R3-PC.

Court of Criminal Appeals
of Tennessee, at Knoxville.

Assigned on Briefs August 26,
2009.

Filed April 12, 2010.

Jeffery T. Siler, Pro Se, Only,

Tennessee.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; and
Clark B. Thornton, Assistant Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of
Tennessee.

Camille R. McMullen, J., delivered the opinion of the court,
in which Joseph M. Tipton, P.J., and D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., J.,
joined.

OPINION

CAMILLE R. McMULLEN, JUDGE.

The
Petitioner, Jeffery T. Siler, Jr., appeals the Knox County Criminal Court’s
summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief as untimely. On
appeal, the Petitioner contends that due process considerations toll the
one-year statute of limitations for post-conviction relief and entitle him to a
delayed appeal. Upon review, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction
court.

Prior to trial, the Petitioner pleaded guilty to the charge of
attempted especially aggravated robbery and received a sentence of eight years.
See State v. Jeffery T. Siler, No. E2000-01570-CCA-R3-CD, 2001 WL
387088, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Knoxville, Apr. 17, 2001). A Knox County
jury subsequently found the Petitioner guilty of the felony murder charge.

See id. He received a life sentence that was to be served
concurrently to his eight-year sentence for the attempted especially aggravated
robbery conviction. See id. The Petitioner’s convictions were
affirmed on direct appeal, and the Petitioner did not file an application for
permission to appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court pursuant to Rule 11 of the
Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id.

On February
13, 2009, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, claiming,
among other things, that: (1) his conviction was based on a coerced confession;
(2) his conviction was based on a violation of the privilege of
self-incrimination; (3) he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial;
(4) he had newly discovered evidence; (5) his attorney failed to appeal to the

Tennessee Supreme Court after his convictions were affirmed on direct appeal;
(6) his attorney failed to withdraw following the direct appeal; (7) he had a
right to a delayed appeal because his attorney failed to appeal his case to the
Tennessee Supreme Court after his convictions were affirmed on direct appeal and
because his attorney failed to withdraw after the direct appeal; (8) he received
ineffective assistance of counsel at his transfer hearing; (9) his attorney was
ineffective for failing to argue he was incompetent because of involuntary
intoxication from prescribed medicatons and for failing to assert the defense of
involuntary intoxication; (10) his attorney was ineffective for failing to
investigate his psychiatric history and for failing to include this history in a
motion to suppress his pretrial statements; (11) his attorney was ineffective
for failing to hire an expert to support the defense of involuntary intoxication

from prescribed medications which established his actual innocence; (12) his
attorney was ineffective for failing to argue the Petitioner was insane at the
time of the homicide and for failing to hire an expert to support the defense of
insanity; (13) the grand jury that returned the indictment against him was
unconstitutionally selected because it did not reflect a cross-section of the
community and his attorney was ineffective for failing to raise this issue; (14)
the State committed prosecutorial misconduct by making inflammatory comments
about the Petitioner, the evidence, and the crime, and by implying that the
Petitioner would commit other crimes if the jury did not convict him; and (15)
the trial court erred by allowing “irrelevant, inadmissible, and false evidence”
to be presented to the jury, by failing to charge the jury on all applicable
defenses, and by failing to charge the jury on all lesser-included offenses. On
February 20, 2009, the post-conviction court summarily dismissed the petition as
untimely. The post-conviction court’s order did not address whether due process
required tolling of the statute of limitations period. On March 2, 2009, the
Petitioner filed a notice of appeal.

In the opinion on direct appeal,
this court provided a summary of the underlying facts in this case:

On February 19, 1998, the fifteen-year-old defendant and fifteen-year-old
Lavon Davis were riding with Jason Copley. Davis stated that he was “looking
for a lick,” meaning someone to rob. Upon seeing fifty-six-year-old Tommy
Haworth, the victim, walking down the street, they decided to rob him. The
defendant agreed to take Davis’ pistol, and Davis and the defendant exited the
vehicle and followed the victim to his residence. There, the defendant
confronted the victim and asked him for money. The victim replied that he had
none. The defendant then cocked the pistol, and it fired. The victim was hit
in the face with the bullet and died as a result of this gunshot wound.
The defendant and Davis fled the scene, and the defendant threw the empty
shell casing into a storm drain. Copley, who had remained in the vehicle,
stayed at the scene and told someone to call 911.
The defendant and Davis were subsequently arrested, and the defendant
confessed his involvement in the offense. In his statement the defendant
contended the gun went off accidentally during the attempted robbery, and he
did not intend to shoot the victim. An analysis of the shell casing found in
the storm drain and the projectile recovered in the victim’s toboggan revealed
they were fired from the pistol recovered from Davis’ coat pocket. The
defendant’s fingerprints were also found on the door of the victim’s
residence.
The defendant was transferred from juvenile court to the Criminal Court
for Knox County and indicted in Count 1 for first degree murder during the
perpetration of an attempted especially aggravated robbery and in Count 2 for
attempted especially aggravated robbery. On the morning of trial, the
defendant entered a guilty plea to attempted especially aggravated robbery,
and the case was tried before a jury on the felony murder charge. The jury
found the defendant guilty of felony murder. The defendant was sentenced to
concurrent sentences of life for felony murder and eight years for attempted
especially aggravated robbery.

Id. at *1 (internal footnote
omitted).

On appeal, the Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court
erred in dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief as untimely. He also
contends that due process considerations should toll the post-conviction statute
in light of his counsel’s failure to appeal his case to the Tennessee Supreme
Court after his convictions were affirmed on direct appeal, his counsel’s
failure to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 14, and
his counsel’s failure to argue that he was incompetent because of involuntary

intoxication and failure to assert the defense of involuntary intoxication at
trial. As explanation for his untimely filing, the Petitioner claims in his
appellate brief that his “multiple mental health diagnoses” including “mental
retardation” prevented him from determining how much time it would take for the
Tennessee Supreme Court to grant or deny counsel’s promised application for
permission to appeal. See Tenn. R. App. P. 11. Finally, the Petitioner argues
that he should be given a delayed appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court because
of these due process violations. See Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 28, § 9(D)(1)(b). In
response, the State argues that the Petitioner’s claims do not qualify as
exceptions to the statute of limitations, that the post-conviction court
properly dismissed his petition as untimely, and that he is not entitled to a
delayed appeal based on due process concerns.

Regarding counsel’s failure
to appeal his case following the direct appeal, the Petitioner cites to
counsel’s April 19, 2001 letter to him, wherein counsel stated:

Your appeal was denied by the Court of Criminal Appeals. I shall ask for
permission to appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court, unless you instruct me
otherwise within the next ten (10) days. A copy of the Court’s opinion is
enclosed.
If I do not hear from you within the next ten (10) days, I shall prepare a
Request for Permission to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Tennessee. While I do
not think permission to appeal will be granted, I believe it is obviously in
your best interest for me to ask on your behalf. Thank you for the opportunity
to represent you in this matter.

The Petitioner also cites to
counsel’s November 4, 2008 letter to the Board of Professional Responsibility,
wherein counsel stated: “The Court of Criminal Appeals denied Mr. Siler’s
appeal, and he did not contact me within thirty (30) days, orally or in writing,
to appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Regarding counsel’s failure to withdraw
pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 14, the Petitioner cites to the
response he received from Becky Doyal, the Deputy Clerk of the Courts of the
State of Tennessee, wherein she stated:

Your question: “Did [counsel] file a motion to withdraw on your behalf[.”]
If you are asking if [counsel] filed a motion to withdraw as your attorney,
the answer is no. If you are asking[] if [counsel] filed a motion to withdraw
the appeal, the answer is no.

The Petitioner included copies of
counsel’s April 19, 2001 letter, counsel’s November 4, 2008 letter to the Board
of Professional Responsibility, and the response from the Deputy Clerk of the
Courts of the State of Tennessee as exhibits to his petition for post-conviction
relief.

Finally, regarding counsel’s failure to assert competency or
defense arguments based on involuntary intoxication, the Petitioner argues:

The Petitioner had available as a defense at trial and also as a
competency issue the fact that he was [intoxicated] from the ingestion of . .
.[the] medically prescribed drugs[, Moban and Prozac]. The Petitioner contends
that this intoxication constitutes a valid defense that was overlooked by
defense counsel. The prescribed medications were taken pursuant to medical
advice and without [the Petitioner’s] knowledge of [their] potentially
intoxicating effects. . . . Petitioner contends that due to the ingestion of
the aforementioned prescription drugs he was unexpectedly intoxicated to the
point of unconsciousness, incapable of controlling his actions, and thus not
criminally responsible for his actions. Because the Petitioner was unaware of
the potential for his medications to produce abnormal thought processes and
behavior, and because [they were] medically prescribed to him, the
petitioner’s condition qualified as involuntary intoxication. See T.C.A. §
39-11-503(c). As a result of the aforementioned prescribed medication-induced
physical disorder of the brain, the Petitioner was (1) unable to exercise his
customary moral judgment, (2) unable to control his violent impulses, (3)
unable to appreciate the consequences of his violent actions, and (4) unable
to appreciate right and wrong in regard to what he was doing at the time of
the homicide.

“[A] person in custody under a sentence of a
court of this state must petition for post-conviction relief within one (1) year
of the date of the final action of the highest state appellate court to which an
appeal is taken or, if no appeal is taken, within one (1) year of the date on
which the judgment became final. . .” T.C.A. § 40-30-102(a) (2006). The statute
explicitly states, “The statute of limitations shall not be tolled for any
reason, including any tolling or saving provision otherwise available at law or
equity.” Id. It further stresses that “[t]ime is of the essence of the right to
file a petition for post-conviction relief or motion to reopen established by
this chapter, and the one-year limitations period is an element of the right to
file the action and is a condition upon its exercise.” Id. In the event that a
petitioner files a petition for post-conviction relief outside the one-year
statute of limitations, the trial court is required to summarily dismiss the
petition. See id. § 40-30-106(b) (2006). Similarly, “[i]f, on reviewing the
petition, the response, files, and records, the court determines conclusively
that the petitioner is entitled to no relief, the court shall dismiss the
petition.” Id. § 40-30-109(a) (2006). Furthermore, “[i]f and when a petition is
competently drafted and all pleadings, files and records of the case
conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief the court may
properly dismiss the petition without the appointment of counsel or conducting a
hearing.” Martucci v. State, 872 S.W.2d 947, 949 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993) (citing
T.C.A. § 40-30-109; Stokely v. State, 470 S.W.2d 37, 39 (Tenn. Crim. App.
1971)).

Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-102(b) (2006) sets out
three exceptions to the statute of limitations for petitions for post-conviction
relief:

No court shall have jurisdiction to consider a petition filed after the
expiration of the limitations period unless:
(1) The claim in the petition is based upon a final ruling of an appellate
court establishing a constitutional right that was not recognized as existing
at the time of trial, if retrospective application of that right is required.
The petition must be filed within one (1) year of the ruling of the highest
state appellate court or the United States supreme court establishing a
constitutional right that was not recognized as existing at the time of trial;

(2) The claim in the petition is based upon new scientific evidence
establishing that the petitioner is actually innocent of the offense or
offenses for which the petitioner was convicted; or
(3) The claim asserted in the petition seeks relief from a sentence that
was enhanced because of a previous conviction and the conviction in the case
in which the claim is asserted was not a guilty plea with an agreed sentence,
and the previous conviction has subsequently been held to be invalid, in which
case the petition must be filed within one (1) year of the finality of the
ruling holding the previous conviction to be
invalid.

Additionally, due process concerns may toll the
statute of limitations for post-conviction relief. The Tennessee Supreme Court
concluded:

[B]efore a state may terminate a claim for failure to comply with
procedural requirements such as statutes of limitations, due process requires
that potential litigants be provided an opportunity for the presentation of
claims at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.

Burford
v. State, 845 S.W.2d 204, 208 (Tenn. 1992) (citing Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.,
455 U.S. 422, 437, 102 S. Ct. 1148, 1158-59 (1982)).

Here, the Petitioner
was required to file his petition for post-conviction relief within one year of
April 17, 2001, the date that the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed
his convictions on direct appeal, which was the final action of the highest
state appellate court to which an appeal was taken in his case. See T.C.A. §
40-30-102(a) (2006). The Petitioner does not list any ground that would make him
eligible for the exceptions to the one-year statute of limitations. See id. §
40-30-102(b) (2006). However, regarding counsel’s failure to appeal to the

Tennessee Supreme Court after his direct appeal and counsel’s failure to
withdraw as counsel, he relies on Williams v. State, 44 S.W.3d 464, 468 (Tenn.
2001), for the proposition that due process considerations should toll the
one-year statute of limitations for filing his petition for post-conviction
relief. In Williams, the Tennessee Supreme Court stressed that in limited
circumstances an attorney’s misrepresentation to a petitioner could result in a
tolling of the statute of limitations for due process concerns:

[W]e are not holding that a petitioner may be excused from filing an
untimely post-conviction petition as a result of counsel’s negligence.
Instead, the focus here is . . . upon trial and appellate counsel’s alleged
misrepresentation in failing to . . . notify the petitioner that no
application for permission to appeal would be filed in [the Tennessee Supreme]
Court.

Williams, 44 S.W.3d. at 468 n.7. In Craig Robert Nunn,
this court agreed that “[t]he Williams decision is not intended to require a
hearing on due process concerns every time a petitioner alleges that the
untimeliness of his petition is due to his trial or appellate counsel’s
negligence.” Craig Robert Nunn v. State, No. M2005-01404-CCA-R3-PC, 2006 WL
680900, at *5 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, Mar. 17, 2006) (citing Bronzo
Gosnell, Jr. v. State, No. E2004-02654-CCA-R3-PC, 2005 WL 1996629, at *4 (Tenn.

Crim. App., at Knoxville, Aug. 19, 2005), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn. Dec. 19,
2005)). However, this court explained that the facts in the Williams case
necessitated an evidentiary hearing:

In Williams, the inmate/petitioner averred that he believed trial counsel
was continuing to represent him through the appeals process. The court
remanded for an evidentiary hearing on grounds that the inmate/petitioner
might “have been denied the opportunity to challenge his conviction in a
timely manner through no fault of his own but because of the possible
misrepresentation of counsel.”

Barry N. Waddell v. State, No.
M2001-00096-CCA-R3-PC, 2001 WL 1246393, at *3 (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, Oct.
17, 2001) (quoting Williams, 44 S.W.3d at 468) (emphasis added)), perm. to
appeal denied (Tenn. Apr. 8, 2002). Ultimately, the court in Williams remanded
the appellee’s case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing to determine:

(1) whether due process tolled the statute of limitations so as to give
the appellee a reasonable opportunity after the expiration of the limitations
period to present his claim in a meaningful time and manner; and (2) if so,
whether the appellee’s filing of the post-conviction petition . . . was within
the reasonable opportunity afforded by the due process tolling. Williams, 44
S.W.3d. at 471. The Williams court then held that if the trial court
determined that the statute of limitations should be tolled and that the
appellee had filed his petition for post-conviction relief within the
“reasonable opportunity afforded by the due process tolling” then the trial
court would have “jurisdiction to determine whether Williams was deprived of
his right to request pro se Supreme Court review under Rule 11 of the
Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure.” Id. at 472 (citing Tenn. Sup. Ct. R.
28, § 9(D)).

Although the Petitioner does not specifically cite
State v. Nix, 40 S.W.3d 459 (Tenn. 2001), we think this case is also
particularly relevant, given the Petitioner’s claim in his appellate brief that
his mental conditions prevented him from determining how much time it would take
for the Tennessee Supreme Court to grant or deny counsel’s promised application
for permission to appeal. Prior to Nix, the Tennessee Supreme Court, following
the holding in Watkins v. State, 903 S.W.2d 302, 307 (Tenn. 1995), concluded
that “mental incompetency, if established, tolled the statute of limitations.”
Seals v. State, 23 S.W.3d, 272, 279 (Tenn. 2000). The court further held that
the statute of limitations for post-conviction relief should not deny a
Petitioner the right to raise a claim in a meaningful time and manner:

[W]e conclude that while the one-year statute of limitations set forth in
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-202(a) does not violate due process on its face,
application of the statute must not deny a petitioner a reasonable opportunity
to raise a claim in a meaningful time and manner. Thus, a petitioner who is
mentally incompetent is denied an opportunity to raise a claim in a meaningful
manner unless the statute of limitations is tolled during the period of mental
incompetence.

Id. Less than a year later, the Tennessee Supreme
Court held that the Watkins and Seals cases did not specify the standard of
mental incompetence that a petitioner must satisfy in order for due process
concerns to toll the statute of limitations for post-conviction relief. Nix, 40
S.W.3d at 463. Ultimately, the court held:

We emphasize that to make a prima facie showing of incompetence requiring
tolling of the limitations period, a post-conviction petition must include
specific factual allegations that demonstrate the petitioner’s inability to
manage his personal affairs or understand his legal rights and liabilities.
Unsupported, conclusory, or general allegations of mental illness will not be
sufficient to require tolling and prevent summary dismissal under Tenn. Code
Ann. § 40-30-206(b) & (f).

Id. at 464-65.

On appeal,
the Petitioner contends that counsel violated his due process rights by failing
to appeal his case to the Tennessee Supreme Court after his convictions were
affirmed on direct appeal, by failing to withdraw as counsel pursuant to
Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 14, and by failing to argue that he was incompetent
because of involuntary intoxication and failing to assert involuntary

intoxication as a defense at trial. We recognize that the petition for
post-conviction relief was not filed until February 13, 2009, nearly seven years
after the expiration of the one-year statute of limitations. In addition, based
on the record, the Petitioner’s February 13, 2009 petition appears to be the
first time he has argued that due process concerns should toll the one-year
statute of limitations. See Richard A. Emmitt v. State, No.
M2004-00564-CCA-R3-PC, 2005 WL 639133, at *6 (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, Mar.
16, 2005) (concluding that the trial court’s dismissal was proper where the
Petitioner waited eighteen years after his convictions became final before
filing a petition for post-conviction relief and before requesting a delayed
appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn. June 27,
2005). However, as explanation for his lengthy delay in filing his
post-conviction, the Petitioner argues in his appellate brief but not in his
petition for post-conviction relief that his “multiple mental health diagnoses”
including “mental retardation” prevented him from determining how much time it
would take for the Tennessee Supreme Court to grant or deny counsel’s promised
application for permission to appeal. The Petitioner further asserts, on appeal
and in his post-conviction petition, that he lived in a psychiatric institution
nearly his entire childhood and that he was receiving Social Security benefits
for a mental disability and was taking the prescriptions Moban and Prozac for
schizophrenia at the time of the homicide in this case. He attached medical
records documenting his mental conditions from his early childhood to his
petition; however, there are no records showing his condition after
trial.

Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the
post-conviction court erred in dismissing the petition without conducting a
hearing to make determinations as outlined in Williams. See Eric Wright v.
State, No. W2001-00386-CCA-R3-PC, 2001 WL 1690194, at *2 (Tenn.Crim.App., at
Jackson, Dec. 17, 2001). Here, the Petitioner attached a letter from counsel as
proof of counsel’s intent to file for a Rule 11 appeal as well as a letter from
the court clerk as proof of counsel’s failure to properly withdraw from his
case. Before dismissing the petition as untimely, Williams required the trial
court to conduct a hearing to determine if “in fact, [the petitioner] [was]
misled to believe that counsel was continuing the appeals process, thereby
requiring the tolling of the limitations period.” Williams, 44 S.W.3d at 471;
see also Shelvy Baker v. State, 2008 WL 2648957, at 2 (Tenn.Crim.App. 2008)
(concluding that petitioner’s allegations that counsel “(1) failed to notify the
Petitioner that counsel did not intend to file a Rule 11 application for
permission to appeal; (2) failed to formally withdraw as the attorney of record
or otherwise failed to inform the Petitioner of counsel’s withdraw; and (3)
counsel assured `the Petitioner that he would take the case all the way to the
Tennessee Supreme Court'” required a Williams based evidentiary
hearing).

Accordingly, we are constrained to reverse the post-conviction
court’s summary dismissal of the petition and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
On remand, the post-conviction court is required to determine

(1) whether due process tolled the statute of limitations so as to give
the [Petitioner] a reasonable opportunity after the expiration of the
limitations period to present his claim in a meaningful time and manner; and
(2) if so, whether the [Petitioner’s] filing of the post-conviction petition
in [February 2009] was within the reasonable opportunity afforded by the due
process tolling.

Williams, 44 S.W.3d at 471. In addition, on
remand, the trial court should consider the Petitioner’s claims regarding his
mental condition against the standard for mental competency established in State
v. Nix, 40 S.W.3d 459, 464 (Tenn. 2001).

CONCLUSION

We reverse the post-conviction
court’s summary dismissal of the Petitioner’s petition for post-conviction
relief and remand for further proceedings consistent with this
opinion.

964 total views, no views today

ANTIDEPRESSANTS: Man Has Huge Cache of Weapons in his House: MA

Paragraph six reads:  “According to police reports,
Girard was engaging in target practice in a makeshift, illegal shooting range in
the attic of his 23 Bridge St. condo. He also had a six-month supply of food and
prescription drugs, including

anti-depressants.”

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/22530569/detail.html

Police: Armed Man Prepared For ‘Armageddon’

Officers Find Tear Gas, Grenades In Massachusetts Home

POSTED: 6:05 am EST February 11, 2010
UPDATED: 1:41 pm EST February
11, 2010

MANCHESTER-BY-THE-SEA, Mass. —

A Massachusetts man is in jail facing weapons charges after his wife turned him in

to police for having a huge cache of weapons, including rifles, tear gas
grenades and explosives, inside his North Shore condominium.

Gregory
Girard, 45, of Manchester-by-the-Sea was arrested Tuesday, police said, after he
allegedly told officers he was preparing for Armageddon.

He allegedly
told his wife, Kristine Girard, a licensed psychiatrist, that he was convinced
the end of the world was near.

“He’s convinced that martial law is
imminent, and that he made the following statements recently to (his wife):
‘Don’t talk to people. Shoot them instead. It’s fine to shoot people in the
head, because traitors deserve it,” state prosecutor Honor Segal told a judge at
Girard’s arraignment hearing.

Girard was arraigned in Salem District
Court on four counts of possession of an infernal device and four counts of

possession of a dangerous weapon and is now facing a dangerousness hearing on
Friday.

According to police reports, Girard was engaging in target
practice in a makeshift, illegal shooting range in the attic of his 23 Bridge
St. condo. He also had a six-month supply of food and prescription drugs,
including anti-depressants.
e
Police said they found about
20 high-powered rifles, shotguns and handguns, and armor-piercing bullets, in

the Girard’s second-floor condo. The weapons were purchased legally and were
registered, but officers said they also found grenades, which are illegal.

Girard’s weapons licenses were immediately revoked.

He was
described as cooperative when officers arrived to arrest him. Stunned neighbors
in the couple’s high-end condo complex said the Girards were a nice couple.

“I don’t think he was intending to harm anybody … no, I never heard
anything,” a neighbor said.

Girard has no criminal record. He pleaded
not guilty and was ordered held without bail at his arraignment.


865 total views, no views today

ANTIDEPRESSANTS: Man Has Huge Cache of Weapons in his House: MA

Paragraph six reads:  “According to police reports,
Girard was engaging in target practice in a makeshift, illegal shooting range in
the attic of his 23 Bridge St. condo. He also had a six-month supply of food and
prescription drugs, including

anti-depressants.”

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/22530569/detail.html

Police: Armed Man Prepared For ‘Armageddon’

Officers Find Tear Gas, Grenades In Massachusetts Home

POSTED: 6:05 am EST February 11, 2010
UPDATED: 1:41 pm EST February
11, 2010

MANCHESTER-BY-THE-SEA, Mass. —

A Massachusetts man is in jail facing weapons charges after his wife turned him in

to police for having a huge cache of weapons, including rifles, tear gas
grenades and explosives, inside his North Shore condominium.

Gregory
Girard, 45, of Manchester-by-the-Sea was arrested Tuesday, police said, after he
allegedly told officers he was preparing for Armageddon.

He allegedly
told his wife, Kristine Girard, a licensed psychiatrist, that he was convinced
the end of the world was near.

“He’s convinced that martial law is
imminent, and that he made the following statements recently to (his wife):
‘Don’t talk to people. Shoot them instead. It’s fine to shoot people in the
head, because traitors deserve it,” state prosecutor Honor Segal told a judge at
Girard’s arraignment hearing.

Girard was arraigned in Salem District
Court on four counts of possession of an infernal device and four counts of

possession of a dangerous weapon and is now facing a dangerousness hearing on
Friday.

According to police reports, Girard was engaging in target
practice in a makeshift, illegal shooting range in the attic of his 23 Bridge
St. condo. He also had a six-month supply of food and prescription drugs,
including anti-depressants.
e
Police said they found about
20 high-powered rifles, shotguns and handguns, and armor-piercing bullets, in

the Girard’s second-floor condo. The weapons were purchased legally and were
registered, but officers said they also found grenades, which are illegal.

Girard’s weapons licenses were immediately revoked.

He was
described as cooperative when officers arrived to arrest him. Stunned neighbors
in the couple’s high-end condo complex said the Girards were a nice couple.

“I don’t think he was intending to harm anybody … no, I never heard
anything,” a neighbor said.

Girard has no criminal record. He pleaded
not guilty and was ordered held without bail at his arraignment.


597 total views, no views today

ANTIDEPRESSANTS: Two Brothers Commit Suicide One Week Apart: Arkansas

Paragraphs eight and nine read:  ”  ‘One guy last
year locked himself inside a bathroom and shot himself, and this was a
retired military man that was highly decorated
, Bearden said. “Then
come to find out, his brother had done the same thing the week before in
another state.”

“The correlation between the two brothers was

anti-depression medications, Bearden said. While he can’t confirm
that the prescription medication was what led to the brothers’ suicides, Bearden
said it happens too often that prescription drugs change
the mindset of a person.”

Paragraph four reads:  “Bearden
added,  ‘People need to know that we do, in fact, have a problem in Saline
County. We don’t really have many ‘hard’ drugs here anymore. Every once in
awhile you’ll see cocaine or marijuana or other street drugs, but most of the deaths … 90 percent come from prescription
drugs’.”

http://www.bentoncourier.com/content/view/204346/1/

Coroner: Teen Drug Death Rate High

Saturday, 06
February 2010

The hand reaches down as another parent
enters the room fearing the worst. The large black bag slowly unzips and the
worst fear a parent never wants to believe, that moment is here. Inside the
darkness of the body bag lies someone’s son, daughter, nephew, their niece ­
someone’s good friend, and another family is torn apart with grief, confusion,
and a wish it was them instead.

It is a day that
Will Bearden has seen too often in his 13 years as the Saline County Corner, and
18 years previously riding on an ambulance as an EMT. Nearly everyday Bearden
has to tell yet another family what caused the death of a loved one, and
surprising to many, he said nearly 90 percent are due to drugs and
alcohol.


In fact, in 2009 alone, Bearden said that about 60 deaths were related
to drugs and alcohol, and nearly 30 of those deaths involved teenagers living in
Saline County, and state officials say the county leads the state in the number
of fatal drug overdoses.

“When you say it won’t happen to me or my family,
you are about to eat your words, because I have seen it happen time and time
again,” Bearden said. “I work in it every day, and I see a lot of sad families
asking what they could have done to help their son or daughter.”
Bearden added, “People need to know that we do, in fact,
have a problem in Saline County. We don’t really have many ‘hard’ drugs here
anymore. Every once in awhile you’ll see cocaine or marijuana or other street
drugs, but most of the deaths … 90 percent come from prescription
drugs.”
Bearden said even Arkansas Chief Medical Examiner
Charles Kokes believes “Saline County has one of the highest percentages of
deaths caused by drug overdoses.”
But it isn’t just teens that are dying from prescription
drugs or alcohol; everyone is at risk, he said. From fatality accidents to
accidental overdoses to suicides, people “age 85 and down” have deaths related
to the rise in prescription drug abuse.
One guy last year locked himself inside a bathroom and
shot himself, and this was a retired military man that was highly decorated,”
Bearden said. “Then come to find out, his brother had done the same thing the
week before in another state.”
The correlation between the two brothers was
anti-depression medications, Bearden said. While he can’t confirm that the
prescription medication was what led to the brothers’ suicides, Bearden said it
happens too often that prescription drugs change the mindset of a
person.
“Drugs definitely affect a person’s mental state,” he
said. “I also believe that it’s a mental disease when someone gets hooked on
drugs. Many people addicted believe they have pain (whether physical, mental or
emotional) and they take medications for their pain. Some aren’t trying to do
harm; they just take too much and then some just go and take their lives, and
probably wouldn’t have if they wouldn’t have had so much medication affecting
their mental state.”
Bearden said of the nearly 60 deaths in Saline County
last year, around 22 were ruled suicides. After the bodies are sent to the
Arkansas State Crime Lab for toxicology screens, most come back with some type
of drugs in their system, the majority being prescription drugs.
“I’ve had to help out with a lot of those autopsies
because the medical examiner is overloaded with cases all the time, and I’ve
seen where pills aren’t even digested in the stomach yet and sometimes are still
in a person’s mouth,” Beard said. “What makes this job tough is when you have to
approach the loved ones of those that died. I’ve seen a lot of divorces and
hatred with families after a son or daughter’s death because the parents keep
blaming each other … it’s just a real sad thing to see, and I see it too
often.”
Bearden also recalls many trips to the Saline Memorial
Hospital in which a person survived an overdose. But it isn’t in any way
pleasant for anyone, he said.
“Three or four times a night I bet someone overdoses on
drugs, but survives from having their stomachs pumped and they fight with the
doctors and nurses,” Bearden said. “It’s got to be a unbelievable pain to have a
stomach pumped, but they shouldn’t have put themselves in that situation if they
didn’t want that to happen and the medical staff has to do whatever they can to
save their life.”
Then there is the criminal side of people hooked on
drugs. Once, Bearden said he left the home of an older person that had just
died  and later returned to the home to retrieve medications to help with
the death investigation.
“It wasn’t even 30 minutes later that I returned to the
home,” he said. “I found the back door kicked in and inside were two teenagers
going through the medicine cabinets. They were ambulance-listening and chasing
in hopes of finding prescription drugs.”
Bearden said police and others are now even warning
families to not list the addresses of the deceased. He said the prescription
drug abusers do everything from listen to police/fire/ambulance scanners, to
chasing ambulances to even reading obituaries in newspapers.
“It has unfortunately come to that point,” Bearden said.
“Don’t tell people where the family is because they’ll break in and look for
whatever (prescription) drugs they can find.”
However, Bearden believes this can be overcome. He said
people first need to listen and believe there is a problem and then work
together to find solutions.
“We’ve got to get the message to the younger kids and we
can do that by getting the parents and grandparents involved in teaching them
and making them realize that it can happen to them,” Bearden said. “I think we
need more programs in school to recognize and talk about this problem. And the
younger the children we can reach, the better we can be in helping it all end.
But really the best way is by word of mouth.”

One program Bearden said he is
“100 percent behind” is the Operation Medicine Cabinet. (See related
article.)

Most importantly, Bearden said people have to truly
believe there is a problem with prescription drug abuse in Saline County.

Unzipping another body bag and
having to tell parents that their child is gone is a part of the job Bearden
wishes he never has to do again, but it happens ­ much too often.

“ … It will send chills up
your spine,” he said. “ … Letting parents in to identify the body … that’s
real stuff, and I want to change that. If we can all work together, we can end
it.”

721 total views, no views today

ANTIDEPRESSANTS: Sleeping Pills: Death: 32 Year Old Woman Dies from a …

Paragraph two reads:  “Bolton Coroner’s Court heard that
Samantha Andrews, aged 32, of Harpford Close, Breightmet, died after taking drugs including
sleeping tablets, anti-depressants and
anti-hystamines.”

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/4776972.Depressed_woman_died_from_cocktail_of_drugs/

Depressed woman died from cocktail of drugs

11:00am
Friday 4th December 2009

A woman who was suffering from depression died
after taking a cocktail of prescription drugs, an inquest heard.

Bolton
Coroner’s Court heard that Samantha Andrews, aged 32, of Harpford Close, Breightmet,
died after taking drugs including sleeping tablets, anti-depressants and
anti-hystamines.

But Assistant Deputy Coroner Peter Watson said there
was insufficient evidence to prove that Miss Andrews committed suicide and
recorded an open verdict.

The inquest heard that Miss Andrews, who had
trained as a nurse, had previously twice taken overdoses but told doctors that
these were a cry for help.

She was found unconscious in her bed by her
partner, Philip Brockbank, on March 2 and taken for treatment at the Royal
Bolton Hospital, before being transferred to a hospital in Wigan where she died
on March 5.

The cause of death was brain death due to lack of oxygen,
caused by the overdose.

Mr Watson said: “She was still a young woman who
clearly had talent but had troubles in her life.”

800 total views, no views today

PROZAC: State Representative Arrested for DUI & Bail Jumping: Wisconsin

Fourth paragraph from the end reads:  “A breath test
showed he had no alcohol in his system. Police found he had 55
tablets of naproxen, an anti-inflammatory used to control pain; 22 tablets
of fluoxetine, an anti-depressant commercially known as
Prozac;
and 25 tablets of an antibiotic.”

SSRI Stories
note:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/65563987.html

Wood could face expulsion

Wood accused of drug-related DUI, bailjumping in third case this
year

By Patrick Marley of the Journal
Sentinel

Posted: Oct. 22, 2009

Madison ­ State Rep.
Jeff Wood (I-Chippewa Falls) was charged Thursday with driving under the
influence of prescription drugs and bail jumping – raising his chances of
becoming only the second lawmaker to be expelled from the Legislature in 161
years.

Wood’s arrest Wednesday in Tomah marked the third time in less
than a year he was picked up on suspicion of driving under the influence of
alcohol or drugs. The arrests come as lawmakers try to crack down on drunken
driving.

Before Wood’s arrest Wednesday, Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan
(D-Janesville) said he was reluctant to try to expel Wood. But he signaled his
attitude was changing in a statement Thursday.

“We must take a very hard
look at his case and determine if he is truly able to serve the people of his
district,” Sheridan said. “Rep. Wood must take responsibility and be held
accountable for his actions. . . . Rep. Wood has brought shame not only on
himself, but on the Wisconsin State Assembly.”

Gov. Jim Doyle on Thursday
told The Associated Press that Wood should resign.

“When you’re just
simply not providing the basic representation, you’ve got to acknowledge that
and step aside and allow somebody else to represent that district,” Doyle
said.

Wood, 40, was convicted of drunken driving in 1990 and
1991.

This January, he was charged in Columbia County with drunken
driving and possessing marijuana and drug paraphernalia. In September, he was

arrested in Marathon County on suspicion of driving under the influence of
anti-anxiety drugs and cold medicine. Charges in that case could be filed soon,
said Assistant District Attorney Laura Kohl.

Those two cases, as well as
Thursday’s case in Monroe County, could result in third, fourth and fifth
offenses of driving under the influence.

A fifth offense would be a
felony, which would force Wood out of the Legislature. But the three cases could
take months to resolve and stretch past the November 2010
election.

Thursday’s bailjumping charge stems from a condition of his
bail in Columbia County that required him to maintain absolute sobriety and
barred him from committing crimes. In Columbia County, he was charged with
possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and third offense
drunken driving.

Wood’s staff was not in his Capitol office Thursday and
did not return calls.

Expulsion to be reviewed

Sheridan soon will form a
committee of three Democrats and three Republicans that will review a resolution
by Rep. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) to expel Wood. Nass introduced the resolution
in response to Wood’s Sept. 23 arrest in Marathon County.

Expelling him
would require a two-thirds vote of the Assembly.

The only lawmaker to be
expelled since Wisconsin became a state was Frank Raguse, a Milwaukee Socialist
who was removed in 1917 for refusing to retract statements his colleagues deemed
disloyal to the United States.

Wood’s attorney, Tracey Wood, said
lawmakers were acting prematurely in trying to remove the lawmaker. The Woods
are not related.

“People in our system are innocent until proven guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt,” she said. “It seems a little crazy to me to rush to
judgment.”

Blood tests will not be available for months in the two cases
where he is suspected of driving under the influence of drugs, she
said.

Wood was first elected as a Republican in 2002. He quit the party
in the summer of 2008, and in November became the first independent elected to
the Legislature since 1928.

“I’m not sure the people of the 67th
(Assembly District) are being served,” said Assembly Republican Leader Jeff
Fitzgerald of Horicon.

In September, Wood joined his colleagues in a
unanimous vote to make fourth offense driving under the influence a felony if it
occurs within five years of the third offense. Less than a week later, he was

arrested on what could be a fourth offense.

According to the complaint
filed Thursday in Monroe County Circuit Court, Wood was pulled over Wednesday
after another driver called to report she saw him weave out of his lane and into
oncoming traffic. She said he twice entered intersections on red lights, stopped
in the intersections and then backed up.

When officers pulled Wood over,
he struck the curb, drove back into traffic and then drove up onto the curb, the
complaint said. During field sobriety testing, he fell onto the back of his car
and lost his balance a second time.

A breath test showed he had no
alcohol in his system. Police found he had 55 tablets of naproxen, an
anti-inflammatory used to control pain; 22 tablets of fluoxetine, an
anti-depressant commercially known as Prozac; and 25 tablets of an
antibiotic.

He was released Thursday afternoon from the Monroe County
Jail after posting $1,000 bail in cash.

After his September arrest, Wood
said he had enrolled in an in-patient treatment program at a veterans hospital
in Minneapolis. He was later transferred to a program in Tomah, said Sheridan’s
office.

Wood was absent for Tuesday’s Assembly session, which his office
said was because he was in
treatment.

889 total views, no views today

DEPRESSION MED: 14 Year Old Girl Attempts Suicide in School During Class…

Paragraph four reads:  “The victim’s mother said her
daughter
takes medication for ADHD and
depression.”

http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/latest/lat_703887.shtml?v=1642

Middle school student attempts suicide during class
Stephanie
Toone | South Carolina Bureau Chief
Thursday, Dec. 10, 2009 4:42
p.m.

GRANITEVILLE – A Leavelle McCampbell Middle School student tried
to commit suicide in a classroom Wednesday by overdosing on prescription drugs.


An art teacher at the middle school on Canal Street said the 14yearold
took close to 50 pills during class around 8:15 a.m. in an attempt to kill
herself, according to an Aiken County Sheriff’s Office report. The student was
transported to Aiken Regional Medical Center’s emergency room, but there were no
details on her condition.

Two students told investigators that the
student said she was going to take her “death pills,” then swallowed the
cocktail of prescription drugs, according to the report.

The victim’s
mother said her daughter takes medication for ADHD and depression.


Cecelia Davidson, associate superintendent for administration, said she
was not aware of the incident, but said the guidance and principal staff has
protocol for suicide threats or attempts.

From the Thursday, Dec. 10,
2009 online edition of The Augusta Chronicle

838 total views, no views today

ZOLOFT & SEROQUEL: Multiple Drug Toxicity-Marine’s Autopsy Report Released

NOTE FROM Ann Blake-Tracy:

Yet another soldier’s sudden death is confirmed as being caused by
prescription drug toxicity. How many do we need to see before we stop this
madness of killing more of our troops with prescription drugs than we are seeing
die at the hands of our “enemies”?
This makes you wonder if we are really aware of who our real
enemies are when the fact is that we lose as many lives EVERY WEEK in this
country to “properly prescribed prescription drugs” as we lost in the 9/11
tragedy. We are in Iraq over a small handful of American deaths while
the mass prescription drug genocide continues on a weekly basis with the death
toll now approaching the 2 million mark just since 9/11 [without counting
the millions of deaths before that time and to add controversy to the issue –
with the jury still out on WHO was really behind that attack].
What was left out of this article are several critical points that
would help one to better understand how prescription drugs killed Cpl. Chad
Oligschlaeger –
#1 Antidepressants CAUSE as a side effect – flashbacks.
# 2 Antidepressants CAUSE as a side effect – horrifyingly violent and
very vivid nightmares.
#3 Antidepressants CAUSE as a side effect – all the symptoms
of Post Traumatic Stress.
#4 Antidepressants CAUSE as a side effect – mania and one form of
mania is known as Dipsomania which is described as an overwhelming craving for
alcohol.
#5 Antidepressants CAUSE as a side effect – suicide.
#6 Antidepressants often show up in autopsy as amphetamine.
#7 Zoloft, Seroquel and amphetamine/methamphetamine all increase serotonin
levels thus leading to the very strong possibility of producing Serotonin
Syndrome which causes death via multiple organ failure.
These facts will better help you to understand not only that the
prescription drugs killed Chad, but that they may have produced side
effects for which he was subsequently medicated with such a deadly combination
of drugs.
_______________________________________________
“The prescription drugs killed him.”

Chad Oligschlaeger had
returned from Iraq in early 2006, unsettled by flashbacks and nightmares.

His parents have said that he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress
disorder, and they have said that he was given prescription drugs to treat it.

“The biggest thing was he wasn’t drinking that night,” Eric
Oligschlaeger said. “And we got affirmation that he didn’t commit suicide.”

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/10/01/1001autopsy.html

Autopsy report released in Round Rock Marine’s death

Chad Oligschlaeger is found to have died from multiple drug
toxicity.

By Joshunda Sanders
AMERICAN-STATESMAN
STAFF
Thursday, October 01, 2009

The U.S. Marine Corps has released

the autopsy report for Cpl. Chad Oligschlaeger of Round Rock, who was found dead
in his room at the Twentynine Palms Marine base in California on May 20, 2008.

The report found that Oligschlaeger died from multiple drug toxicity.
His death was ruled accidental, according to the report.

The report

shows that methamphetamine and the antidepressants sertraline [Zoloft] and
benzodiazepine were found in Oligschlaeger’s system. Propranolol, a hypertension
drug used to treat post-traumatic stress disorder, and Quetiapine [Seroquel], an
antipsychotic medication, were also found.

“There were no surprises
there,” Eric Oligschlaeger, Chad Oligschlaeger’s father, said of the autopsy
results. “The prescription drugs killed him.”

Chad Oligschlaeger had
returned from Iraq in early 2006, unsettled by flashbacks and nightmares.

His parents have said that he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress
disorder, and they have said that he was given prescription drugs to treat it.
But his family said Oligschlaeger was left unsupervised in military housing for
long periods after his second tour of duty in Iraq.

Military officials
have said that Marine policies prohibit commanders from discouraging mental
health treatment or leaving troops physically or mentally wounded troops uncared
for.

The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology would not comment on the
findings, citing confidentiality laws related to patient information.

“The biggest thing was he wasn’t drinking that night,” Eric
Oligschlaeger said. “And we got affirmation that he didn’t commit suicide.”

jsanders@statesman.com; 445-3630

840 total views, no views today

9/11-Paxil Birth Defect Case-One Year Anniversary of the Death of Baby Indiana

Why would it even be going to court? Glaxo is so stupid! They let the Donald Schell murder/suicide case go to court and look what it got them. Now they are going to do this????

Who is handling this one? Hope the attorneys are using Dr. Pal Paucher whose work has demonstrated this for a very long time.

-Ann

[NOTE: This is being sent to you directly as well as being posted on our “BREAKING NEWS” section of our new website. We are posting new cases there as they come in as well..]

We just had the anniversary of 9/11. And today is the anniversary of the death of baby Indiana. And this week we will have the first Paxil Birth Defect case hit the courts.

So what do all of these have in common? PLENTY!!

Baby Indiana lost her life a year ago today due to the fact that her mother took Effexor during her pregnancy and her parents were not warned of the potentially fatal dangers involved. (Please go to one of the sites below to lend support to her family in their battle to raise awareness and also to see what happened to baby Indy.)

All antidepressants increase serotonin levels. The main function of serotonin is constriction of smooth muscle tissue – the lungs and broncial tubes, the intestines, uterus, and the major organs of the body.

Serotonin was originally given to put pregnant women into labor so is it any wonder that Indy and so many other babies born to mothers on antidepressants are either miscarried or born early?

When serotonin levels go too high it results in Serotonin Syndrome which can be fatal producing death via multiple organ failure as the organs constrict and shut down as happened with baby Indy’s lungs.

Now the 9/11 connection: EVERY WEEK IN THIS COUNTRY WE LOSE AS MANY LIVES AS WE LOST IN THE 9/11 TRAGEDY TO ADVERSE REACTIONS FROM PRESCRIPTION DRUGS PRESCRIBED VIA FDA GUIDELINES – NOT ABUSED, BUT GIVEN AND TAKEN ACCORDING TO FDA GUIDELINES.

Why, are we at war in the Middle East over so few deaths (not that they did not matter or were any less important) as opposed to the thousands upon thousands of needless and senseless deaths that continue to happen every week in America due to these deadly prescription drugs that the world tends to ignore?!!! This is an ongoing, never ending 9/11 tragedy striking every week for years before 9/11 and for many years now since 9/11.

Who are the real terrorists? And why have we not declared war on them?

Now this week another family will go into court to fight the battle their little one cannot fight on his/her own. The birth defects have been known of for some time in medical science, but not shared with the parents of those who should be watching for them.

And just how many are there? We have NO idea. Most families are dealing with them with no idea even yet what the cause is. Last year I was speaking with a father about a business matter who explained he could not speak long because his 15 year old daughter was born with a hole in her heart and he had to run her to a doctor’s appointment.

I immediately asked which antidepressant his wife was taking during pregnancy with his daughter. Without hesitation he turned to his wife and asked, “Honey, which antidepressant were you on when you carried ________? Paxil. It was Paxil remember? That was when you had me start taking it.”

Of course I told him he needed to look up the FDA warnings on the drug and heart defects at birth due to the drug. I then gave him the numbers of several attorneys and explained that his daughter has every right to file for this terrible problem that has so affected her life for the past 15 years and will for the rest of her life that will be cut short as a result of the damage done by the drug.

So how many other 15 year olds are there out there dealing with these birth defects even though they have no knowledge of this being a side effect of their mother’s medication? And how many others like Indy did not survive their damages? We need to know. Hopefully this case finally making its way into court will stir up enough publicity to wake up enough people to give these children and their families answers.

Dr. Ann Blake-Tracy, Executive Director,
International Coalition for Drug Awareness
www.drugawareness.org & www.ssristories.drugawareness.org
Author of Prozac: Panacea or Pandora? – Our
Serotonin Nightmare (Order #)

http://wp.me/phViU-qd

Today, September 13, 2009 is the one year anniversary of Indiana Delahunty’s death. We encourage you to please go to her parent’s, Christian & Matt Delahunty’s, blog to offer some moral support to the family at this time.

http://indibaby.wordpress.com/

http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/test-paxil-case-hits-court-next-week/2009-09-11
Test Paxil case hits court next week
September 11, 2009 — 10:43am ET | By Tracy Staton
Related Stories

* AP: Glaxo reps aided Paxil ghostwriting
* Supremes ask for Obama view in vaccine case
* Glaxo under scrutiny in EU
* U.S. Paxil probe broadens
* Grassley asks FDA for Paxil review

GlaxoSmithKline and a bunch of plaintiffs’ lawyers will have their eyes on a Philadelphia court next week. That court is hosting a bellwether liability case over claims that the antidepressant Paxil causes birth defects. Glaxo faces some 600 lawsuits with similar claims. “These cases are sort of like the canary in the coal mine,” law professor David Logan told Bloomberg. “The early cases set the parameters for any global settlement negotiations.”

In this first case, plaintiff Michelle David claims that Paxil caused heart defects in her son Lyam Kilker and that Glaxo failed to warn about the drug’s potential to cause birth defects. As you know, FDA asked Glaxo in 2005 to update Paxil’s label with information on heart defects in infants. Glaxo says the FDA’s action doesn’t prove that Paxil causes birth defects; its own studies after the warning “have been inconclusive with mixed results,” the company says.

But David’s attorney says that Glaxo failed to follow up on early animal studies that suggested Paxil might cause birth defects, and that the company designed Paxil studies to use low doses of the drug to avoid triggering adverse events. “In 1998, GSK internally concluded that it had received an ‘alarming’ number of abnormal pregnancy adverse events for Paxil and failed to disclose this information to the FDA, physicians or the public,” the lawyers said in a court filing. We’ll be hearing much more from both sides next week.

– read the Bloomberg piece

Read more: http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/test-paxil-case-hits-court-next-week/2009-09-11#ixzz0Qq0vDCIS

1,505 total views, 1 views today

Lilly admits paying docs to peddle drugs – at what cost??

As part of a large government fine of $1.4 BILLION Eli Lilly, makers of Prozac, Cymbalta, Stratera, Cialis, etc. has begun to disclose payouts to doctors to peddle their wares/drugs. When you consider the long reaching damaging effects of that, you realize that the fine is nothing compared to the loss of lives that are the end result.
Let’s look at just a few facts:
1. The third leading cause of death in America is “properly prescribed (following FDA and AMA guidelines) prescription drugs. That does not count those taking these drugs “off label” or in higher amounts than recommended, etc., but only taking them as recommended by those who are suppose to know safest prescribing guidelines.
2.

Eli Lilly and Co. paid Jacksonville-area doctors thousands of dollars as consultants to market drugs

Maker of Prozac and Cialis was forced to publish doctor names and compensation.

  • Story updated at 11:29 PM on Friday, Sep. 4, 2009

Drug companies routinely pay physicians as experts in the course of marketing their products. While legal, the practice is widely criticized as a conflict of interest that drives up drug costs.

One pharmaceutical company paid more than $76,000 to Jacksonville-area doctors and other medical providers in the first three months of this year.

That’s according to the first publicly released information to document the long-hidden financial ties between drug companies and doctors.

Eli Lilly and Co., the maker of Prozac, Cymbalta and Cialis, was forced to begin publishing the names and compensation of its paid consultants as part of a $1.4 billion settlement with the federal government last January.

Among the names that became public were those of several physicians practicing in the Jacksonville area. For the full story, including names of the physicians, see Sunday’s Business section of the Times-Union.

Comments

Wendell's picture

Dr.’s are as bad as politicians!

Submitted by Wendell on Fri. 9/4/2009 at 5:09 pmDr.’s are as bad as politicians!

  • Login or register to post comments
  • Flag as offensive
  • Dr’s Got To Make A Living Too

    Submitted by fearlessfan on Fri. 9/4/2009 at 9:05 pmYou shouldn’t blame the doctors, it’s the high dollar Pharmaceutical companies who are pushing the dough.   Anybody in their right mind would take it especially if its legal; too heck with ethics.

  • Login or register to post comments
  • Flag as offensive
  • It is all about ethics

    Submitted by rs471911 on Sat. 9/5/2009 at 10:50 am Recently I was in my doctor’s waiting room, 45 minutes past my scheduled appointment. During my wait I watched as 4 pharmaceutical reps, one after another, walked right in to see the doctor and peddle their drugs. The nurse said the doctor sees each rep personally. When I finally saw the doctor I asked if he saw more pharmaceutical reps or patients a day. He gets perks for prescribing their drugs. The scariest part was I heard him asking one of the reps for medical advice. He is no longer my doctor.

  • Login or register to post comments
  • Flag as offensive
  • I had the same thing happen to me six years ago///

    Submitted by Xenon on Sat. 9/5/2009 at 1:53 pmI also was waiting for a appointment for over 45 minutes and was shocked at the people walking in and out without signing in. Finally when i was checking out, three representatives were in the hallway laughing and talking with the Doctor and talking about a upcoming quail hunt, Montana hunting trip and a deep sea fishing trip at their expense, one female representative turned to me and handled me a pen, with pharmaceutical advertisement on it as i was trying to sign my check and said to me, “Just keep it, a sovernier.” Smiled perkily and turned back to the group and the Doctor.

    I have not been back since. I just wish integrity, honor, honesty and accountability would come back along with true patriotism for our country and it’s citizens. My age is showing…

  • Login or register to post comments
  • Flag as offensive
  • 1,373 total views, no views today