In Rochester
Drug Co-op Doud Trial $900/Hour Expert
Harvard Professor Cashes In On Juul Too
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell
Book
BBC
- Guardian
UK - Honduras
- ESPN
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Jan 25 – A major opioids jury
trial is set to begin on
January 18 in the U.S.
District Court for the
Southern District of New York.
Inner City Press will cover
the trial.
Laurence
F. Doud III, the former CEO of
Rochester Drug Co-operative,
was indicted in 2019, and the
case was assigned to District
Judge George B. Daniels, while
will preside over the
trial.
On January
16, two days before jury
selection, Doud's lawyer
Robert C. Gottlieb wrote to
Judge Daniels to oppose
admission of the testimony of
Barbara Castro, an opioids
addict.
Assistant US
Attorneys Thomas Burnett,
Nicolas Roos and Alexandra
Rothman had indicated they
intend to call Castro "as
early as Tuesday, January 18,
2022, in the afternoon."
But Day 1 went
long. Inner City Press live
tweeted
it.
On Day 2,
a witness who worked under
Doud at RDC cried on the
stand. Inner City Press live
tweeted here
and below.
Day 3 came
toward a close, with the same
witness, with two POVs on a
closed door meeting between
Larry Doud and Jessica Pompeo
leading to the latter's tears,
but why? Live tweeted here.
On January 24, at
the end, Doud's lawyer
bristled at being told, again,
that the DEA is not on trial.
Inner City Press live tweeted,
here
and below.
On Jnaury
25, as the US said it is
nearing resting its case and
the defense fretted about not
having a witness ready - in
the US v. Maxwell trial that
meant the defense was finished
too - an expert took the
stand. The taxpayers are
paying him $900 an hour, for
50 hours so far. Inner City
Press tweeted it here:
Opioids trial of
US v. Larry Doud of Rochester
Drug Co-operative keeps
chugging along, alongside
Judge Daniels' fairness
hearing in an unrelated class
action.
Judge
Daniels is ruling on
prosecutors' request to
exclude a slew of defense
exhibits. He is allowing some
in, "to demonstrate that at
the time the defendant made
his statements, he was not
part of a conspiracy," or try
to demonstrate that.
Defense lawyer
Gottlieb: Any statements made
by people about Lindencare
being in compliance, they are
not being introduced for the
truth of the matter asserted
--
Judge Daniels: I
don't agree. It's not
probative of whether Mr. Doud
was involved in a conspiracy
As US v.
Doud trial day winds down, US
says they could rest as early
as tomorrow. Defense lawyer
Gottlieb says, While they're
free to do whatever the heck
they want, this is a change
and we do not have a witness
ready. [In US v. Maxwell that
meant, it's over]
AUSA reads venue
stipulation.
Now, the next
witness: Professor Cutler from
Harvard University. A health
economist. He says he is
involved in a class action
against Juul. "I match data up
with death," he says, "so I
can draw a picture."
AUSA: Are
you being paid in this case?
Professor Cutler: Yes. I
charge $900 an hour. AUSA: How
many hours so far?
Prof Cutler: Oh,
I'm not sure. I'd say, 50 some
hours. [$45,000 so from,
from taxpayers, to this
Harvard professor also in Juul
case...
From January 24:
Opioids trial of US v. Larry
Doud of Rochester Drug
Co-operative still plugging
along, on cross examination
after day of compliance
witness in the charged
conspiracy.
Defense:
Are you aware of any law that
defined suspicious orders or
orders of unusual frequency?
Witness: I'm not sure.
Defense: Were you aware that
the DEA didn't even want
registrants to tell it when
they found red flags?
Witness: I did not.
Judge Daniels
dismisses the jury. Now AUSA
argues again, the DEA is not
on trial, Mr. Doud is. Defense
lawyer Gottlieb: There were
instances that RDC went out of
its way to do compliance. Not
a perfect job, but they did
it.
Gottlieb:
My client's live is on the
stand [on the line] and I have
a right to cross examine. I
don't need lessons from the
government. Judge Daniels: I
think of the case from the
jurors' perspective, not the
lawyers' perspective.
Judge Daniels
says, We are breaking for the
day, & that tomorrow
morning he has to deal with
another matter before resuming
the trial (sentencing then
class action settlement. But
we'll keep on it
After the
trial date, the defnse put in
a letter seeking to exclude 95
slides to be used by US expert
David Cutler, on Doud's
income, comparisons of opioids
shipments and on compliance
adequacy, on which they say
Cutler is not an expert.
Day 3: Larry Doud
at defense table leaning
forward listening to re-direct
examination about particular
pharmacies "turned on" by
Rochester Drug
Co-operative.
AUSA: You see
this email, where Larry Doud
wrote, I don't think it's
going to end well?
Witness: Yes. AUSA: Then this
one is later. What's going on?
Witness: We were questioning
if we should release the
order. But we did.
AUSA: And GX 278?
Witness; A red flag suspension
on Stanton. But it was years
later... In this other case,
even after Julius Morton went,
there were still red flags.
Even after they were turned
off, management turned them
back on.
Witness: This was
from Larry Doud, I was cc-ed.
He asked, Why does it make
Jessica so long to do the
reports? Sure seems like a
slow process. AUSA: No further
questions.
Defense
re-cross: You said "upper
management" was responsible,
right? But wasn't that Bill P?
Witness: Not necessarily.
Judge Daniels: We
have a witness in from
Rochester. You may take off
your mask. Witness 2: I was
the credit manager of RDC.
AUSA: What
is a credit limit? Witness 2:
The amount of credit we extend
them. AUSA: What is a credit
hold?
Witness 2: For
example if they are behind on
payment. AUSA: Did Larry Doud
ever ask you to lift them?
Witness 2: Yes.
AUSA: Did you
know Jessica Pompeo? Witness
2: Yes.... One time Larry went
in and met with her then she
came out with eyes red. She
said Larry made her release
the hold on an account.
Defense: Is it illegal to
remove a hold? Witness: No.
Judge Daniel:
Already, we are done for the
day.
Day 2: Now there
are tears on the witness
stand, with Larry Doud
directly accused on not
reporting irregularities to
DEA
Assistant US
Attorney: While you worked in
the compliance department, how
many orders were flagged?
Witness: Many. AUSA: What is
this? Witness: The DEA Month
and Orders of Interest report,
from 2012 to 2017. AUSA:
Was anything reported?
Witness: No.
AUSA: What did
you write here? Witness: That
there was a red flag, High
cash for benzo. AUSA: Read
from "man oh man."
Witness: "All the
new stores we are bringing on
have issues."
AUSA:
Meaning? Witness: That we had
seen red flags. AUSA: Read the
1st paragraph from Julius
Morton.
Witness: One of
the partners, Roman of a
pharmacy in Yonkers, he said
we at RDC is picking up
rejects from Cardinal and
other distributors. Witness:
Doud said the DEA was
loosening up its visits -
Defense: Objection!
Judge: Ask her
how she knows. AUSA: Ms. How
do you know this? Witness:
Larry told us. He wanted
accounts turned on as soon as
they passed our credit check.
AUSA: And this?
Witness: It's Larry Doud to
me, it says "I do not want to
slow this down." AUSA: No due
diligence?
Witness: No, we
were not reviewing the
dispensing data. AUSA: Did
Dowd speak to you? Witness:
Yes. He said, turn them on for
controlled substances.
AUSA: Play
the voicemail. "Larry came
into my office... I don't want
Larry to be thinking I'm being
obstinate."
AUSA: GX 502-T is
an accurate transcript of your
voicemail? Witness: Yes. AUSA:
Are you aware of a pharmacy
called 59 Street, in Brooklyn?
Witness: Yes.
Defense: Can we
have a side bar? Judge
Daniels: Uh... Defense: It'll
be brief. [Note: Now Doud is
sitting alone at the defense
table, looking at witness and
his lawyers conferring with
prosecutors and Judge Daniels
at the sidebar
They're
back. AUSA: Was this pharmacy,
59th Street, turned on while
Larry Doud was at the company?
In 2016? Defense: Objection!
Let the witness answer. Judge:
Sustained. AUSA: OK, look at
this email. Witness: It's
December 2016. Larry was
there.
Witness:
Petropinto... David Taylor,
previous vetted, oxy 30 mg.
Bay Ridge, family medicine,
high cash. 90% cash for South
Shore Pro Health. Lambrakis,
100% cash.
AUSA: And Carl
Anderson? Witness: We flagged
him.
It's 4:55 pm.
Judge Daniels excuses the
juror and tellst the witness
to step down. Defense lawyer
Gottlieb: Anything after March
2017 is not relevant. Allowing
it in creates a real due
process for us. We weren't put
on notice.
Judge
Daniels: If I stole a car then
they discover it later, that's
admissible. It's fair
game. Government? AUSA: She'll
say she reported later because
Larry Doud wasn't there saying
don't report. We can brief it
overnight.
Day 1: AUSA
accusing Team Doud of putting
the US on trial.
First US witness
against Doud is a former DEA
agent, now working in a
different job in Virginia. "I
dealt with the registrants in
the field."
Assistant US
Attorney: What did you do in
that role? Witness: I was the
chief. I went to industry
sponsored conferences
AUSA: What
is Subsys? Witness: An opioid
spray for break-through pain.
AUSA: Fentanyl? Witness:
Yes. It's very
dangerous. AUSA: What's
this? Witness: A bottle of
Oxy.
AUSA:
What's this? Witness: A chart
showing the supply chain... It
shows how the drug gets from
the manufacturer to the user.
Inner City Press
It's
approaching 4:30 pm and Doud's
lawyer's cross continues
(still no user as Inner City
Press reported on yesterday)
Defense: Do you
agree that a distributor has
no way to know if a pharmacy's
info is accurate & has
no obligation to
investigate a prescription?
Defense confronts
witness with prior testimony,
then asks: Isn't it the case
the distributors often use
outside consultants to conduct
investigations? Witness:
Yes...
The case is US v.
Doud, 19-cr-285
(Daniels)
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a
month helps keep us going and grants you
access to exclusive bonus material on our
Patreon page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2022 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|