DVD Talk
Woman could get 60 days in jail for buying 2 bottles of cold medicine. [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Santa Buddies
Buy: $29.99 $9.99
7.
8.
9.
10.
Julie & Julia
Buy: $28.96 $9.99
DVD Blowouts
1.
Cars [Blu-ray]
Buy: $34.99 $15.49
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Woman could get 60 days in jail for buying 2 bottles of cold medicine.


grundle
09-29-09, 04:48 PM
This is just plain dumb.


http://www.tribstar.com/local/local_story_246225916.html/resources_printstory

Wabash Valley woman didn’t realize second cold medicine purchase violated drug laws

By Lisa Trigg

The Tribune-Star

CLINTON September 03, 2009 10:58 pm

— When Sally Harpold bought cold medicine for her family back in March, she never dreamed that four months later she would end up in handcuffs.
Now, Harpold is trying to clear her name of criminal charges, and she is speaking out in hopes that a law will change so others won’t endure the same embarrassment she still is facing.

“This is a very traumatic experience,” Harpold said.

Harpold is a grandmother of triplets who bought one box of Zyrtec-D cold medicine for her husband at a Rockville pharmacy. Less than seven days later, she bought a box of Mucinex-D cold medicine for her adult daughter at a Clinton pharmacy, thereby purchasing 3.6 grams total of pseudoephedrine in a week’s time.

Those two purchases put her in violation of Indiana law 35-48-4-14.7, which restricts the sale of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, or PSE, products to no more than 3.0 grams within any seven-day period.

When the police came knocking at the door of Harpold’s Parke County residence on July 30, she was arrested on a Vermillion County warrant for a class-C misdemeanor, which carries a sentence of up to 60 days in jail and up to a $500 fine. But through a deferral program offered by Vermillion County Prosecutor Nina Alexander, the charge could be wiped from Harpold’s record by mid-September.

Harpold’s story is one that concerns some law-abiding citizens who fear that innocent people will get mistakenly caught in the net of meth abuse roundups.
But the flip side of the story comes from the law enforcement arena, which is battling a resurgence in methamphetamine production in the Wabash Valley.
As the 12th-smallest county in the state, Vermillion County ranked as the state’s fifth-largest producer of methamphetamine just a few years ago.
“I don’t want to go there again,” Alexander told the Tribune-Star, recalling how the manufacture and abuse of methamphetamine ravaged the tiny county and its families.

While the law was written with the intent of stopping people from purchasing large quantities of drugs to make methamphetamine, the law does not say the purchase must be made with the intent to make meth.

“The law does not make this distinction,” Alexander said.

If the law said “with intent to manufacture methamphetamine,” no one could be arrested until it was proven that the drug actually was used to make meth, the prosecutor said.

And that certainly wasn’t the intent of the law, either. It was written to limit access to the key ingredient in meth — pseudoephedrine — and thereby to stop the clandestine “mom and pop” meth labs that were cooking drugs throughout the area.

Just as with any law, the public has the responsibility to know what is legal and what is not, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, the prosecutor said.
“I’m simply enforcing the law as it was written,” Alexander said.

Pharmacies post “Meth Watch” signs, alerting customers that their purchases of drugs containing ephedrine and pseudoephedrine are being monitored. Pharmacies also are required to submit a list of purchase records to police, who then examine the lists for violations of the law.

It is up to customers to pay attention to their purchase amounts, and to check medication labels, Alexander said.

“If you take these products, you ought to know what’s in them,” she said.
While many people know that Sudafed, Actifed and Claritin-D contain pseudoephedrine, there are many more over-the-counter medications that also contain the key meth ingredient.

Ron Vencel, a pharmacist with JR Pharmacies in Terre Haute, said consumers should check all drug labels, and notes that any drug that has a “D” after it, for “decongestant,” has a likelihood of containing pseudoephedrine, or PSE.
Vencel has worked with area police to help curb the sale of over-the-counter pseudoephedrine to people buying it as a meth ingredient, and he offered insight into some of the purchasers.

As authorities and retailers have limited the sale of PSE, some meth-makers have resorted to asking their relatives and friends, who are unaware of the intended use of the product, to go buy the cold medicine. That has put some innocent people unwittingly into the cycle of meth production. And a buyer may call five or six different people to go buy the cold medicine, thereby circumventing the law.

Harpold, who is employed at the Rockville Correctional Facility for women, feels her reputation has been damaged by the arrest, and that she has been wrongly labeled as someone who makes meth.

Her police mug shot ran on the front page of her local newspaper, she wrote, in a letter to the Tribune-Star, “with an article entitled, ‘17 Arrested in Drug Sweep.’”

“That is something I have never been involved in,” she said of meth.
When she told her co-workers about the arrest, she said, they could not believe it. They have been supportive of her, she said, and other friends in the community have tried to help stop the misinformation that has spread because of the arrest.

The morning she was arrested, Harpold and her husband were awakened by police officers banging on the front door of their home at Midway along U.S. 36. She was allowed to get dressed, and was then taken in handcuffs to the Clinton Police Department, where she was questioned about her cold medicine purchases. She was later booked into jail, and her husband had to pay $300 bail to get her released.

Harpold said she did go talk to the prosecutor about the situation, and Alexander offered her the deferral program, in which Harpold is required to pay the court costs, abide by all laws and not be arrested for 30 days. At the end of 30 days, the class-C misdemeanor will be erased from her record.
Alexander said she is working with Harpold about the charge, but the prosecutor asserts that Harpold did break the law with her purchases and is being held accountable.

“I do want people to know that we will check the pharmacy records and we will prosecute people who violate this law,” Alexander said.

Vermillion County Sheriff Bob Spence said he also is willing to help Harpold overcome the negative situation.

“If there’s any way we can help her, we will,” Spence said.

He explained that the process leading to Harpold’s arrest involved an officer checking area pharmacy purchase records, and coming up with about 40 purchases that violated the law.

That information was then taken to the prosecutor, whose staff drew up the probable cause affidavits to be filed in court. A judge then found probable cause and issued arrest warrants, and the sheriff’s department is required by statute to see that the warrants are served.

Harpold was not arrested by Vermillion County officers, Spence stressed, since her residence is in Parke County. But she was returned to Clinton where she was questioned and processed.

Spence agreed with pharmacist Vencel’s scenario that the people making the meth often send other people to buy the medicine. And Vigo County Sheriff Jon Marvel, who recently renewed efforts to track pseudoephedrine sales in the Wabash Valley, understands Harpold’s arrest is embarrassing for her.
“Sometimes mistakes happen,” Marvel said. “It’s unfortunate. But for the good of everyone, the law was put into effect.

“I feel for her, but if she could go to one of the area hospitals and see a baby born to a meth-addicted mother …”

For now, Harpold is hoping to raise public awareness so others will avoid the stress she is going through. She has written to state lawmakers and to U.S. Sens. Richard Lugar and Evan Bayh and Congressman Brad Ellsworth about changing the law.

So far, only Lugar has responded to her letter, she said, but she will continue to pursue the issue.

“I just don’t want this to happen to other people.”

classicman2
09-29-09, 04:51 PM
I believe 5 years is a suitable sentence.

Talkin2Phil
09-29-09, 04:53 PM
Move along, just collateral damage in the War on Drugs.

Tracer Bullet
09-29-09, 04:55 PM
If she didn't want to get arrested, she never should have had a family.

Superboy
09-29-09, 05:55 PM
This isn't necessarily a reason to legalize drugs, but it's a really good reason to look at the facts of a case before we start indiscriminately prosecute people.

crazyronin
09-29-09, 06:07 PM
While the law was written with the intent of stopping people from purchasing large quantities of drugs to make methamphetamine, the law does not say the purchase must be made with the intent to make meth.


Government making laws without thinking? Well, I never.

The Bus
09-29-09, 06:17 PM
What's the point of even jailing her? Pharmacies should be allowed to have a "kill button" that they hit once someone picks up a second bottle of Robitussin.

JasonF
09-29-09, 06:25 PM
What's the point of even jailing her? Pharmacies should be allowed to have a "kill button" that they hit once someone picks up a second bottle of Robitussin.

Easier solution: every second bottle of "Robitussin" is actually posion.

fujishig
09-29-09, 06:34 PM
What's the point of even jailing her? Pharmacies should be allowed to have a "kill button" that they hit once someone picks up a second bottle of Robitussin.

I remember a couple of years back, my wife was suffering from a severe cold, and I went to Costco to pick up the deluxe boxes of Nyquil and Dayquil, and they wouldn't sell me both. I'm just amazed that they monitor this activity across stores and over a week. And the article even says that these drug makers get unsuspecting people to go buy the stuff for them, which circumvents this anyway.

How do they id these people (if they pay with cash), and what stops them from using a fake id to make the additional purchases?


But for the good of everyone, the law was put into effect

I would like to see the statistics showing that meth addiction is down because of this law.

The Bus
09-29-09, 06:41 PM
Meth ceased to become a problem within 6-8 weeks of this law being put in the books. How do I know that? No one I know is on meth.

fujishig
09-29-09, 06:46 PM
Meth ceased to become a problem within 6-8 weeks of this law being put in the books. How do I know that? No one I know is on meth.

But everyone was using it before the law was put out, right? I'm convinced!

Maybe they have statistics on "babies born to meth-addicted mothers" since they apparently have some in every hospital in the area.

WallyOPD
09-29-09, 06:49 PM
Government making laws without thinking? Well, I never.

The article implies that they did think it through. The law was intentionally written that way to make it easier to prosecute offenders without having to prove the intent.

What's the point of even jailing her? Pharmacies should be allowed to have a "kill button" that they hit once someone picks up a second bottle of Robitussin.

The article says that the pharmacies send the information to law enforcement who then cross-check the lists. There's no constant link between pharmacies to know how many bottles someone has purchased at another store. Also, I'm against giving pharmacies the legal authority to kill their customers.

How do they id these people (if they pay with cash), and what stops them from using a fake id to make the additional purchases?

I don't know the details of this state, but in most places with these types of laws you do need to show ID now even if you are paying with cash. That doesn't solve the fake ID problem, of course.

fujishig
09-29-09, 06:55 PM
It just seems odd because, especially after the first large bust, you'd only get the really, really stupid criminals to bite, and even if the poorly run meth labs had no means of getting a fake id or having other gang members buy the stuff, they could just buy it, oh, I dunno, every 8 days.

arminius
09-29-09, 06:57 PM
So now they are arresting people for buying stuff that might be used for criminal activity. No problems there.

WallyOPD
09-29-09, 07:05 PM
It just seems odd because, especially after the first large bust, you'd only get the really, really stupid criminals to bite, and even if the poorly run meth labs had no means of getting a fake id or having other gang members buy the stuff, they could just buy it, oh, I dunno, every 8 days.

I think it's really only designed to stop the mom and pop meth producers. There's only so many times they can ask their cousin to buy cold medicine for them before he catches on. Also, they could certainly only buy it every 8 days but that's not really going to be enough to support a meth lab.

For larger criminal organizations they can still buy larger quantities by spreading the purchases around their lackies, but it's still going to be a lot more hassle for less production than they would have had before the law was put into effect.

Disclaimer: I think these laws are terrible and should be repealed. The purchase of these ingredients has a legitimate and legal use. You shouldn't turn ordinary citizens into criminals just because it makes it easier to catch the bad guys as well.

Dr Mabuse
09-29-09, 07:07 PM
60 days in the hole
That's what they give you now
60 days in the hole
Oh, yeah
60 days in the hole
All right, all right
60 days in the hole

What you doin' girl?
You here for 60 days

arminius
09-29-09, 07:26 PM
60 days in the hole
That's what they give you now
60 days in the hole
Oh, yeah
60 days in the hole
All right, all right
60 days in the hole

What you doin' girl?
You here for 60 days
Well she was a greasy whore and I'm sure there was a rolling dance floor somewhere in her house.

Dr. Mantle
09-30-09, 05:56 AM
Harpold said she did go talk to the prosecutor about the situation, and Alexander offered her the deferral program, in which Harpold is required to pay the court costs, abide by all laws and not be arrested for 30 days. At the end of 30 days, the class-C misdemeanor will be erased from her record.
Alexander said she is working with Harpold about the charge, but the prosecutor asserts that Harpold did break the law with her purchases and is being held accountable.

Gee, thanks Ms. Prosecutor. Good to know you're earning your salary with stupid shit like this. -rolleyes-

orangecrush
09-30-09, 10:16 AM
Just as with any law, the public has the responsibility to know what is legal and what is not, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, the prosecutor said.
“I’m simply enforcing the law as it was written,” Alexander said.I nominate this guy for douche of the year. I think every prosecutor who utters those words as an excuse for royally screwing a law abiding person's life should be shot in the crotch.

Tracer Bullet
09-30-09, 10:37 AM
I nominate this guy for douche of the year. I think every prosecutor who utters those words as an excuse for royally screwing a law abiding person's life should be shot in the crotch.

Yeah and aside from that, it's also bullshit. Prosecutors decide what cases to prosecute and which to not ALL THE TIME. It's kind of their job.

orangecrush
09-30-09, 11:08 AM
Yeah and aside from that, it's also bullshit. Prosecutors decide what cases to prosecute and which to not ALL THE TIME. It's kind of their job.This is why I find the excuse so infuriating. If you are going to pursue these kinds of cases, sac up and tell the truth: that you are padding your “drug conviction” numbers.

Sean O'Hara
09-30-09, 11:19 AM
I remember a couple of years back, my wife was suffering from a severe cold, and I went to Costco to pick up the deluxe boxes of Nyquil and Dayquil, and they wouldn't sell me both. I'm just amazed that they monitor this activity across stores and over a week.


Some states require stores to keep track of everyone who buys ephedrine products. If the store puts the info into a computer, it's trivial for them to cross-check.

chuckd21
09-30-09, 01:02 PM
I love how the law is only iron clad in situations like this. With giant cases things pretty much seem to be ambiguous, but in an instance like this? "Yeah I feel for her, but the law is the law. She should go see what meth babies look like." I mean, WTF?

Rypro 525
09-30-09, 02:24 PM
any pics of the mug shot? So i can make an informed decision if she should indeed spend 60 days in the slammer, or go cold free

jdodd
10-01-09, 12:33 PM
any pics of the mug shot? So i can make an informed decision if she should indeed spend 60 days in the slammer, or go cold free

If she and her family were cold-free the whole mess would have been avoided.

grundle
10-01-09, 07:31 PM
any pics of the mug shot? So i can make an informed decision if she should indeed spend 60 days in the slammer, or go cold free

http://www.facebook.com/sharpold?_fb_noscript=1

Sally Harpold (Terre Haute, IN)

http://www.facebook.com/profile/pic.php?uid=AAAAAQAQbuR7xdGhug_Ehiq4qDbQIQAAAArVSHqGfl6CkpJNLG4JFlzC

Talkin2Phil
10-01-09, 08:43 PM
http://www.facebook.com/sharpold?_fb_noscript=1

Sally Harpold (Terre Haute, IN)

http://www.facebook.com/profile/pic.php?uid=AAAAAQAQbuR7xdGhug_Ehiq4qDbQIQAAAArVSHqGfl6CkpJNLG4JFlzC


Damn, Meth is a hell of a drug

Josh-da-man
10-02-09, 10:21 AM
I have a feeling that DAs pursue stupid cases like this in order to look tough.

If he's going to go after an old lady for buying too much cough syrup, then you know he's an Elliot Ness motherfucker who's gonna keep the gangbangers in line.

milo bloom
10-02-09, 03:57 PM
I nominate this guy for douche of the year. I think every prosecutor who utters those words as an excuse for royally screwing a law abiding person's life should be shot in the crotch.

That was the same part of the story that really pushed my button too. There is no way to expect a regular citizen to be able to navigate the maze of myriad statutes and ordinances that are passed all in the interest of "protecting us from the bad guys."

Do they seriously think these laws stop serious meth lab proprietors? Please, they're paying off the dock guys at the local drugstore to accidentally drop a box or twelve of this stuff into the dumpster for later retrieval.

Bandoman
10-02-09, 04:20 PM
Do they seriously think these laws stop serious meth lab proprietors? Please, they're paying off the dock guys at the local drugstore to accidentally drop a box or twelve of this stuff into the dumpster for later retrieval.


You seem to know a lot about how it's done, milo bloom (if that's in fact your real name).

Drexl
10-02-09, 04:53 PM
I nominate this guy for douche of the year. I think every prosecutor who utters those words as an excuse for royally screwing a law abiding person's life should be shot in the crotch.

We really need a DVD Talk Douche of the Year poll. Let's see, we have this guy, Kanye West, the Richland County Sheriff (who wanted to go after Michael Phelps), and Perez Hilton.

milo bloom
10-02-09, 04:59 PM
You seem to know a lot about how it's done, milo bloom (if that's in fact your real name).

I actually work in transportation, and we see a lot of shipments broken into (not here, I work out of an office only site). It doesn't take much imagination to figure out how it goes.

orangecrush
10-02-09, 05:19 PM
That was the same part of the story that really pushed my button too. There is no way to expect a regular citizen to be able to navigate the maze of myriad statutes and ordinances that are passed all in the interest of "protecting us from the bad guys."

Do they seriously think these laws stop serious meth lab proprietors? Please, they're paying off the dock guys at the local drugstore to accidentally drop a box or twelve of this stuff into the dumpster for later retrieval.In my view one of the single biggest problems with our legal system is the myriad laws both precise and vague. You can hardly walk down the street without violating some code or interpretation of a law. When you start making stupid, stupid things illegal "for the kids," you end up with a population that doesn't respect the law because they break it every day.

Brack
10-02-09, 07:31 PM
Talk about taking a law to the extreme.

Nick Danger
10-03-09, 05:54 PM
Maybe the prosecutor is on our side. "Ayup, that's the law. And I'm going to keep on prosecuting grannies until the legislature changes the law."

FiveO
10-05-09, 07:01 PM
Maybe the prosecutor is on our side. "Ayup, that's the law. And I'm going to keep on prosecuting grannies until the legislature changes the law."

He probably didn't realize the reign of shit that this prosecution is going to pull down....my guess is that within a few weeks you'll see "dismissed in the interests of justice".

orangecrush
10-06-09, 03:29 PM
In my view one of the single biggest problems with our legal system is the myriad laws both precise and vague. You can hardly walk down the street without violating some code or interpretation of a law. When you start making stupid, stupid things illegal "for the kids," you end up with a population that doesn't respect the law because they break it every day.
I ran across this commentary today I thought would fit well in this thread:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/05/criminalizing-everyone/#
By Brian W. Walsh

"You don't need to know. You can't know." That's what Kathy Norris, a 60-year-old grandmother of eight, was told when she tried to ask court officials why, the day before, federal agents had subjected her home to a furious search.

The agents who spent half a day ransacking Mrs. Norris' longtime home in Spring, Texas, answered no questions while they emptied file cabinets, pulled books off shelves, rifled through drawers and closets, and threw the contents on the floor.

The six agents, wearing SWAT gear and carrying weapons, were with - get this- the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Kathy and George Norris lived under the specter of a covert government investigation for almost six months before the government unsealed a secret indictment and revealed why the Fish and Wildlife Service had treated their family home as if it were a training base for suspected terrorists. Orchids.

That's right. Orchids.

By March 2004, federal prosecutors were well on their way to turning 66-year-old retiree George Norris into an inmate in a federal penitentiary - based on his home-based business of cultivating, importing and selling orchids.

Mrs. Norris testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on crime this summer. The hearing's topic: the rapid and dangerous expansion of federal criminal law, an expansion that is often unprincipled and highly partisan.

Chairman Robert C. Scott, Virginia Democrat, and ranking member Louie Gohmert, Texas Republican, conducted a truly bipartisan hearing (a D.C. rarity this year).

These two leaders have begun giving voice to the increasing number of experts who worry about "overcriminalization." Astronomical numbers of federal criminal laws lack specifics, can apply to almost anyone and fail to protect innocents by requiring substantial proof that an accused person acted with actual criminal intent.

Mr. Norris ended up spending almost two years in prison because he didn't have the proper paperwork for some of the many orchids he imported. The orchids were all legal - but Mr. Norris and the overseas shippers who had packaged the flowers had failed to properly navigate the many, often irrational, paperwork requirements the U.S. imposed when it implemented an arcane international treaty's new restrictions on trade in flowers and other flora.

The judge who sentenced Mr. Norris had some advice for him and his wife: "Life sometimes presents us with lemons." Their job was, yes, to "turn lemons into lemonade." [insert :mad:]

The judge apparently failed to appreciate how difficult it is to run a successful lemonade stand when you're an elderly diabetic with coronary complications, arthritis and Parkinson's disease serving time in a federal penitentiary. If only Mr. Norris had been a Libyan terrorist, maybe some European official at least would have weighed in on his behalf to secure a health-based mercy release.

Krister Evertson, another victim of overcriminalization, told Congress, "What I have experienced in these past years is something that should scare you and all Americans." He's right. Evertson, a small-time entrepreneur and inventor, faced two separate federal prosecutions stemming from his work trying to develop clean-energy fuel cells.

The feds prosecuted Mr. Evertson the first time for failing to put a federally mandated sticker on an otherwise lawful UPS package in which he shipped some of his supplies. A jury acquitted him, so the feds brought new charges. This time they claimed he technically had "abandoned" his fuel-cell materials - something he had no intention of doing - while defending himself against the first charges. Mr. Evertson, too, spent almost two years in federal prison.

As George Washington University law professor Stephen Saltzburg testified at the House hearing, cases like these "illustrate about as well as you can illustrate the overreach of federal criminal law." The Cato Institute's Timothy Lynch, an expert on overcriminalization, called for "a clean line between lawful conduct and unlawful conduct." A person should not be deemed a criminal unless that person "crossed over that line knowing what he or she was doing." Seems like common sense, but apparently it isn't to some federal officials.

Former U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburgh's testimony captured the essence of the problems that worry so many criminal-law experts. "Those of us concerned about this subject," he testified, "share a common goal - to have criminal statutes that punish actual criminal acts and [that] do not seek to criminalize conduct that is better dealt with by the seeking of regulatory and civil remedies." Only when the conduct is sufficiently wrongful and severe, Mr. Thornburgh said, does it warrant the "stigma, public condemnation and potential deprivation of liberty that go along with [the criminal] sanction."

The Norrises' nightmare began with the search in October 2003. It didn't end until Mr. Norris was released from federal supervision in December 2008. His wife testified, however, that even after he came home, the man she had married was still gone. He was by then 71 years old. Unsurprisingly, serving two years as a federal convict - in addition to the years it took to defend unsuccessfully against the charges - had taken a severe toll on him mentally, emotionally and physically.

These are repressive consequences for an elderly man who made mistakes in a small business. The feds should be ashamed, and Mr. Evertson is right that everyone else should be scared. Far too many federal laws are far too broad.

Mr. Scott and Mr. Gohmert have set the stage for more hearings on why this places far too many Americans at risk of unjust punishment. Members of both parties in Congress should follow their lead.

Brian W. Walsh is senior legal research fellow in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation.

fujishig
10-06-09, 03:52 PM
Are there more to these two cases than what's presented in the article? I understand we may have some arcane laws, but why spend the time and money to stake these people out, arrest them, and then send them to prison for 2 years? To teach the other orchid growers and fuel cell developers a lesson?

DeputyDave
10-06-09, 04:02 PM
-ohbfrank- Typical liberal response...

Wait, why is this in politics?

Sdallnct
10-09-09, 12:33 AM
What's the point of even jailing her? Pharmacies should be allowed to have a "kill button" that they hit once someone picks up a second bottle of Robitussin.

Normally I'm anti-lawsuit, but if that happened to me or wife I hire the sleezist high profile attorney I could find to take the the case on and tell him to go after everyone and that he could keep 75% of all money won.

And the first person I'd go after would be CVS or Walgreens or wherever she bought it. They all have electronic record keeping. Every time I buy something they have all my information. They could easily add a code to their system to track such things. I'm not even sure how they are off the hook, criminally. Even if they have sign that says "beer only sold to those 21 years of age" they are held responsible if they sold to a 16 year old kid.