I've just completed a story on Dr. Michael Reed's motion to be released from the Bay County Jail, pending his federal court sentencing on drug charges.  Last Thursday (July 23, 2009) Dr. Reed pleaded guilty to "Conspiracy Possession with the Intent to Distribute Cocaine".  Federal investigators say Dr. Reed bought a kilo of cocaine earlier this year from a man with connections in Belize.  According to the government, Dr. Reed and his friends snorted half of the kilo, while the 'friend' sold the other half in smaller transactions.  For this, Dr. Reed will spend at least 5 (maybe 10) years in prison, depending on the total weight of the cocaine he actually possessed (still to be determined by the government).  But he could also get as much as life in prison.  For this reason, Federal Judge Richard Smoak did not allow Dr. Reed to remain free until he's sentenced in November.  Judge Smoak says the law is clear in this matter, that drug defendants are to be detained until their sentencing, not only because the possibility of life in prison could tempt even Mother Theresa to flee, but also because our government has determined drug cases are surrounded by a certain element of violence.

          Let's forget, for the time being, that Dr. Reed may have as good a reason as anyone for remaining free for the next few months, so he can properly transfer his patients to another doctor, close his practice and retire from what has been a brilliant medical up to this point.  Let's also forget, for the time being, that Judge Richard Smoak is one of the most honorable men to have practiced law in this region of the country and appears to be a fair and extremely ethical judge.  And let's also concede that Dr. Reed broke the law, pleaded guilty, and will now pay the price.

          Let's, instead, focus on another high-profile federal case in neighboring Okaloosa County, where Charlie Morris has admitted to stealing from taxpayers to allegedly feed his gambling addiction (the actual motive has not been established).  Morris, who was Okaloosa County's Sheriff for about a dozen years, was arrested in late February (2009) in Las Vegas. The feds say he took money from one account at the sheriff's office and paid certain employees "bonuses".  Then those employees would "kick-back" some of the money to Morris.  Morris' Administrative Director Teresa "Terry" Morris was in on the scam.  Both have pleaded guilty and each could be facing as much as 85 years in prison when they're sentenced next month (August).  BUT BOTH MORRIS AND ADAMS ARE CURRENTLY FREE PENDING THEIR SENTENCING!!!  The only question I have is 'What makes their cases any different than Dr. Reed's?'

          I already know the answer to that question.  In a word "drugs".   But let's consider some other factors.  Morris and Adams (and about a half dozen others) are also facing possible charges from the State of Florida.  Doesn't it seem possible that , if allowed to remain free, a defendant could possibly try to coerce or influence a co-defendant or potential witness that could be involved in a later state court proceeding? 

           Is the difference in thes cases the amount of public disappointment?  "Dr. Reed is a hot shot surgeon/physician who had the world in his palm and should have known better.  Look at what he's thrown away."

          Others might counter by saying, "Charlie Morris' crime is far more egregious than Dr. Reed's, because Morris abused his position of public trust and stole from the taxpayers."

          Or is it the amount of money involved in the crime itself?  According to investigators/prosecutors Dr. Reed's 'investment' was $30,000 dollars of his OWN money.  (I realize that patients put their lives in Dr. Reed's hands and, if high/intoxicated, their lives/health could have been put at risk.  How do you put a price on that?)  Charlie Morris, on the other hand, is alleged to have stolen $1.2 million of TAXPAYER money.

          So you tell me, which crime was worse.   One guy who bought a snorted a bunch of cocaine, or another guy that stole a bunch of taxpayer money and blew it on cards, dice and roulette in Vegas or on the hounds and poker tables at a local dog track?

          I'm not saying either is less guilty.  Both have admitted they messed-up and both will pay dearly for their crimes (as if they already haven't, given the amount of news coverage, loss of job, reputation and eventually freedom).  In both cases, these men were highly successful, at the pinnacle of their careers.  Their falls are truly tragic and, quite frankly, a waste, not only of their own abilities, but to society as a whole.

          Having said all this, I still can't get over the fact that one man's guilt is not so severe as to allow him to remain free for a few months, to take care of whatever he needs to take care of, while the other's guilt is far enough over the line that he cannot  be afforded the time to refer his patient, with severe, chronic back pain, to another physician.

          I'm by no means a lawyer, legal expert or constitutional scholar.  I'm just a regular guy who yearns for consistency, fairness and 'Justice For All."