3/7/2013 – “The Skeptics™'” Lynne Batik posted this article on the Colorado Public Television (CPT12) PBS Facebook page: [1]
“The trial of Stanislaw Burzynski for cancer fraud ended in a hung jury (6-6) on March 4” [2]
The problem with this statement is that there is:
——————————————————————
a) NO such thing as a “cancer fraud” law
======================================
b) – 3/3/1997 – “Lake acquitted Burzynski of 34 counts of mail … fraud” [3]
——————————————————————
c) – 3/3/1997 – “He set a May.19 retrial on the remaining charges of introducing an unapproved drug into interstate commerce and contempt of court” [3]
======================================
d) – 5/19/1997 – “A cancer doctor accused of illegally marketing an experimental drug to patients nationwide may face just a single contempt charge …“ [4]
——————————————————————
e) – 5/19/1997 – “Attorneys for Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski said prosecutors told them they will drop 40 of 41 remaining counts“ [4]
“Those charge the doctor with violating U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations in dispensing an unapproved drug“ [4]
——————————————————————
f) – 5/19/1997 – “Assistant U.S. Attorney Mike Clark refused to say at a pre-trial hearing Friday whether prosecutors intend to only pursue a contempt-of-court charge“ [4]
——————————————————————
g) – 5/19/1997 – “The contempt count accuses Burzynski of ignoring a federal judge’s orders in 1983 and 1984 against introducing the drug … into interstate commerce“ [4]
——————————————————————
h) – 5/19/1997 – “(Prosecutors) are telling us the only case they want to try Dr. Burzynski on is the contempt case,” defense attorney Dan Cogdell told Lake … “ [4]
——————————————————————
i) – 5/19/1997 – “He then acquitted Burzynski on 34 counts of mail fraud … “ [4]
======================================
j) – 5/19/1997 – “Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski was charged with mail fraud, contempt and violating Food and Drug Administration regulations“ [5]
——————————————————————
k) – 5/19/1997 – “At a hearing on Friday … prosecutors had said that they planned to try Dr. Burzynski only on the contempt charge“ [5]
——————————————————————
l) – 5/19/1997 – “Judge Lake acquitted him of 34 fraud counts“ [5]
——————————————————————
m) – 5/19/1997 – “The 41 remaining charges include 40 counts of violating F.D.A. regulations“ [5]
======================================
n) – 5/21/1997 – “A jury here heard opening arguments this morning in the retrial of a criminal contempt charge against a doctor who offers an unapproved cancer drug” [6]
——————————————————————
o) – 5/21/1997 – “In November 1995, Dr. Burzynski was indicted on 40 counts of interstate delivery of an unapproved drug, 34 counts of mail fraud and 1 count of contempt … “ [6]
——————————————————————
p) – 5/21/1997 – “The fraud counts said Dr. Burzynski had used the mail to send insurance claims that were false or misleading” [6]
——————————————————————
q) – 5/21/1997 – “After declaring a mistrial, Judge Simeon T. Lake 3d of the Federal District Court here issued a directed verdict of acquittal on the 34 fraud counts … “ [6]
======================================
r) – 5/28/1997 – “The charges included 40 counts of interstate delivery of an unapproved drug; 34 counts of mail fraud for using the mails to file false or misleading claims to insurers, and one count of contempt … “ [7]
——————————————————————
s) – 5/28/1997 – “Judge Simeon Lake 3d of Federal District Court declared a mistrial and then issued a directed verdict of acquittal on the counts of mail fraud … “ [7]
——————————————————————
t) – 5/28/1997 – “On the first day of the retrial, the Government moved to dismiss the 40 counts of interstate delivery against the doctor and all remaining counts against his institute, leaving only the contempt count … “ [7]
======================================
u) – 8/1/1997 – “After Burzynski’s first trial ends in a hung jury, federal prosecutors drop all charges but a single contempt-of-court citation … “ [8]
======================================
I did NOT see “cancer fraud” mentioned anywhere in those above 1997 newspaper articles
======================================
“CBS’s 48 Hours’ interviews of jurors told the tale as to why they couldn’t agree”
“Clearly, the jurors agreed that Burzynski was guilty as charged of violating court orders not to distribute his unapproved “Antineoplastons” in interstate commerce … “
If “the jurors (“Clearly”) agreed that Burzynski was guilty as charged,” why is it
——————————————————————
a) – 3/3/1997 – “Prosecutors vowed to retry a self-described medical revolutionary who treats cancer patients with a compound found in human urine after a jury deadlocked … “ [3]
——————————————————————
b) – 3/3/1997 – “Jurors split 6-6 on all 75 counts against Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski … “ [3]
——————————————————————
c) – 3/3/1997 – ” … Judge Lake declaired a mistrial“ [3]
——————————————————————
d) – 3/3/1997 – “Jurors said … that they were divided from the start, and the six for acquittal never wavered“ [3]
——————————————————————
e) – 3/3/1997 – “The big problem was intent,” explained juror Sharon Wray, 37, a legal assistant. “I don’t think he woke up one day and said `I think I’ll break the law.”’ [3]
——————————————————————
f) – 3/3/1997 – Juror Darlene Phillips concurred
“If we had to have decided `Did he break this law,’ probably most of us could have made that decision by noon last Monday,” Ms. Phillips said
“But the judge’s instructions went a little bit further and we had to say that he not only broke those laws, that he did it with the intent to mislead and to defraud.” [3]
======================================
g) – 5/19/1997 – “He had declared a mistrial in March when a jury deadlocked on 75 counts against the doctor“ [4]
======================================
h) – 5/19/1997 – “A jury deadlocked in Dr. Burzynski’s trial in March” [5]
======================================
i) – 5/21/1997 – “In February, a trial against Dr. Burzynski ended in a mistrial, with the jury deadlocked, 6 to 6“ [6]
======================================
l) – 5/28/1997 – “At Dr. Burzynski’s first trial earlier this year, the jury deadlocked 6 to 6 … “ [7]
——————————————————————
m) – 5/28/1997 – ”I just don’t think that the state proved their case,” said one juror, Stephenie Shapiro, who is a lawyer”
”There was enough ambiguity in the document that they weren’t willing to have a criminal finding against someone“
“And it was very unanimous from the beginning. It’s not like anybody had to be talked into it.‘” [7]
======================================
n) – 8/1/1997 – “The jury acquits unanimously, noting that Burzynski got his staff and patients to sign waivers saying they would not send the drugs outside Texas” [8]
——————————————————————
The lesson: Do NOT believe everything you read that’s NOT backed up by citations references or links
======================================
REFERENCES:
======================================
[1] – 9/13/2013 A Critical Analysis of Wikipedia’s “Failure to Communicate”:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/a-critical-analysis-of-wikipedias-failure-to-communicate/
======================================
[2] – NCAHF News, March/April 1997, Volume 20, Issue #2
——————————————————————
http://www.ncahf.org/nl/1997/3-4.html
======================================
[3] – 3/3/1997 – Associated Press (A.P.) News: HOUSTON (AP)
——————————————————————
http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1997/Jury-deadlocks-retrial-planned-for-Dr-Stanislaw-Burzynski/id-58e7ec089bfad6697d138d7bfe26c011
======================================
[4] – 5/19/1997 – Associated Press (AP): Monday, May 19, 1997, Cancer doctor goes on trial again in federal court, By JOAN THOMPSON / Associated Press Writer, HOUSTON (AP)
——————————————————————
http://www.texnews.com/texas97/doc051997.html
======================================
[5] – 5/19/1997 – New York Times:
——————————————————————
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/19/us/all-charges-but-one-dropped-against-doctor.html
======================================
[6] – 5/21/1997 – New York Times: Unorthodox Doctor Goes on Trial Again on Contempt Charge, May.21, 1997
——————————————————————
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/21/us/unorthodox-doctor-goes-on-trial-again-on-contempt-charge.html
======================================
[7] – 5/28/1997 – New York Times:
——————————————————————
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/28/us/doctor-cleared-in-trial-on-unapproved-drugs.html
======================================
[8] – 8/1/1997 – Reason: Rick Henderson from the August/September 1997 issue, Assets, Sound Diagnosis: Unconventional cancer physician Stanislaw Burzynski’s 14-year battle with the FDA is over
——————————————————————
http://reason.com/archives/1997/08/01/balance-sheet
======================================
Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog 