Ex-Glaxo Lawyer Says Prosecutors Misled Grand Jury on Obstruction

[Guest guest]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/indicted-ex-glaxo-lawyer-says-prosecutors-misled-grand-jury-on-her-defense.html

A former GlaxoKline Plc (GSK) lawyer, charged with obstructing a regulatory probe of the company, said U.S. prosecutors misled the grand jury that indicted her on the key element of her defense.

The lawyer, s, argued that prosecutors improperly told grand jurors that a defense of relying on advice of counsel "was not relevant" to their decision whether to indict, according to a filing by her attorneys. s asked U.S. District Judge Titus to dismiss the case at a hearing today in Greenbelt, land.

s, indicted in November on charges she obstructed a probe into whether London-based Glaxo marketed the antideprssant Wellbutrin for unapproved uses, has based her defense on the claim she took advice from the Atlanta law firm of King & Spalding in responding to a 2002 Food and Drug Administration inquiry, her attorney Reid Weingarten said.

"We have been troubled by the zeal and overzealousness of the effort to remove from this case the advice of counsel defense," Weingarten said today in court. "From the time the FDA sent the letter of inquiry to GSK, GSK retained the services of King & Spalding and they worked hand in hand with King & Spalding to respond."

Grand Juror's Question

Weingarten said the deceit occurred in the government's response to a question from a grand juror who asked whether it was relevant that s may have been getting direction on how to respond to the FDA from someone else.

The government "was not required to present the advice of counsel defense to the grand jury," Jasperse, a trial attorney in the Justice Department's Office of Consumer Litigation, said in court. He added that the government "could have been more articulate and complete" when answering the grand juror's question.

"What happened in this case is not misconduct," Jasperse said. "It was not the sort of grand jury abuse that warrants dismissal of the indictment."

Jasperse said if the judge decides to dismiss the indictment, the government should be allowed to seek another against s.

Titus did not rule on the request. He did ask the prosecutors whether they would be able to secure a new indictment against s by April if he rules against them.

s is scheduled to go to trial on April 5. Weingarten said she will ask for a bench trial.

Les Zuke, a spokesman for King & Spalding, didn't respond to messages left on his office and mobile phones. Anne Rhyne, a spokeswoman for Glaxo, declined to comment.

Concealing Documents

s is charged with one count of obstructing an official proceeding, one count of falsifying and concealing documents and four counts of making false statements.

The first two charges carry maximum prison terms of 20 years, and the others carry terms of five years.

Prosecutors contend that s, who lives in Durham, North Carolina, "engaged in a yearlong effort" to deceive the FDA about the company's off-label marketing campaign for Wellbutrin.

Under U.S. law, drug companies aren't allowed to promote a drug for any use not approved by the FDA.

In response to regulators' request for information about Wellbutrin's marketing in October 2002, s allegedly sent a series of letters "that falsely denied the company had promoted the drug for off-label uses, even though she knew" the drugmaker had sponsored such marketing programs, prosecutors said in court filings.

The case is U.S. v. s, 10-cr-694, U.S. District Court, District of land (Greenbelt).

To contact the reporter on this story: Tom Schoenberg in Washington at tschoenberg@...

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rovella at drovella@...

>> Boooooo!!!!! > > (At least if tossed, it won't be "with prejudice." BUT "good enough" will not suffice. These cases need to be to-the-letter.) > > Terry > Sent via BlackBerry by AT & T > > Judge mulls dismissing Glaxo lawyer indictment > > (Reuters) - A federal judge is considering whether to dismiss an > indictment against a former GlaxoKline PLC (GSK.L > </finance/stocks/overview?symbol=GSK.L> ) lawyer after new evidence > emerged about possible prosecutorial errors in her indictment. > The lawyer, s, was charged in November with obstructing a > Food and Drug Administration probe into Glaxo's marketing of its > antidepressant drug Wellbutrin. > > At a hearing on Thursday in Greenbelt, land, s' attorney asked > U.S. District Judge Titus to throw out the indictment, arguing > that prosecutors failed to properly answer a question raised by a grand > juror about s' defense. > > The question concerned whether it was relevant that s received > advice from others. s' defense lawyers have said she was acting on > the advice of Glaxo's law firm, King & Spalding, a so-called > advice-of-counsel defense. > > "The problems here are fundamental, obvious and I don't think they can > be defended," s' attorney, Reid Weingarten, said. > > At Thursday's hearing, Titus asked prosecutors pointed questions about > how they responded to the grand jury request. "The question is whether > the answer was correct, and if not, what's the remedy?" he asked. > > Titus did not say when he would issue a ruling, but raised the > possibility of throwing out the current indictment while allowing > prosecutors to start new grand jury proceedings and seek a new > indictment. > > Jasperse, a lawyer for the government, said that prosecutors > essentially fulfilled their duty before the grand jury and that it would > be "extreme" to throw out the indictment. > > "Could the answer have been more articulate and complete? Absolutely," > Jasperse said. "But the government basically got it right." > > After the hearing, Weingarten and Jasperse declined to comment. King & > Spalding spokesman Les Zuke declined to comment on the firm's role. > > Grand jury proceedings are typically secret, but some portions of this > one were made public in court filings that were part of the defense's > effort to dismiss the indictment. > > (Reporting by Carlyn Kolker of Reuters Legal; Editing by Eddie > <http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us & n=eddie.evans\ > & > ) > > > > http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN1\ > 726439120110317 > <http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN\ > 1726439120110317>>

[Guest guest]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/indicted-ex-glaxo-lawyer-says-prosecutors-misled-grand-jury-on-her-defense.html

A former GlaxoKline Plc (GSK) lawyer, charged with obstructing a regulatory probe of the company, said U.S. prosecutors misled the grand jury that indicted her on the key element of her defense.

The lawyer, s, argued that prosecutors improperly told grand jurors that a defense of relying on advice of counsel "was not relevant" to their decision whether to indict, according to a filing by her attorneys. s asked U.S. District Judge Titus to dismiss the case at a hearing today in Greenbelt, land.

s, indicted in November on charges she obstructed a probe into whether London-based Glaxo marketed the antideprssant Wellbutrin for unapproved uses, has based her defense on the claim she took advice from the Atlanta law firm of King & Spalding in responding to a 2002 Food and Drug Administration inquiry, her attorney Reid Weingarten said.

"We have been troubled by the zeal and overzealousness of the effort to remove from this case the advice of counsel defense," Weingarten said today in court. "From the time the FDA sent the letter of inquiry to GSK, GSK retained the services of King & Spalding and they worked hand in hand with King & Spalding to respond."

Grand Juror's Question

Weingarten said the deceit occurred in the government's response to a question from a grand juror who asked whether it was relevant that s may have been getting direction on how to respond to the FDA from someone else.

The government "was not required to present the advice of counsel defense to the grand jury," Jasperse, a trial attorney in the Justice Department's Office of Consumer Litigation, said in court. He added that the government "could have been more articulate and complete" when answering the grand juror's question.

"What happened in this case is not misconduct," Jasperse said. "It was not the sort of grand jury abuse that warrants dismissal of the indictment."

Jasperse said if the judge decides to dismiss the indictment, the government should be allowed to seek another against s.

Titus did not rule on the request. He did ask the prosecutors whether they would be able to secure a new indictment against s by April if he rules against them.

s is scheduled to go to trial on April 5. Weingarten said she will ask for a bench trial.

Les Zuke, a spokesman for King & Spalding, didn't respond to messages left on his office and mobile phones. Anne Rhyne, a spokeswoman for Glaxo, declined to comment.

Concealing Documents

s is charged with one count of obstructing an official proceeding, one count of falsifying and concealing documents and four counts of making false statements.

The first two charges carry maximum prison terms of 20 years, and the others carry terms of five years.

Prosecutors contend that s, who lives in Durham, North Carolina, "engaged in a yearlong effort" to deceive the FDA about the company's off-label marketing campaign for Wellbutrin.

Under U.S. law, drug companies aren't allowed to promote a drug for any use not approved by the FDA.

In response to regulators' request for information about Wellbutrin's marketing in October 2002, s allegedly sent a series of letters "that falsely denied the company had promoted the drug for off-label uses, even though she knew" the drugmaker had sponsored such marketing programs, prosecutors said in court filings.

The case is U.S. v. s, 10-cr-694, U.S. District Court, District of land (Greenbelt).

To contact the reporter on this story: Tom Schoenberg in Washington at tschoenberg@...

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rovella at drovella@...

>> Boooooo!!!!! > > (At least if tossed, it won't be "with prejudice." BUT "good enough" will not suffice. These cases need to be to-the-letter.) > > Terry > Sent via BlackBerry by AT & T > > Judge mulls dismissing Glaxo lawyer indictment > > (Reuters) - A federal judge is considering whether to dismiss an > indictment against a former GlaxoKline PLC (GSK.L > </finance/stocks/overview?symbol=GSK.L> ) lawyer after new evidence > emerged about possible prosecutorial errors in her indictment. > The lawyer, s, was charged in November with obstructing a > Food and Drug Administration probe into Glaxo's marketing of its > antidepressant drug Wellbutrin. > > At a hearing on Thursday in Greenbelt, land, s' attorney asked > U.S. District Judge Titus to throw out the indictment, arguing > that prosecutors failed to properly answer a question raised by a grand > juror about s' defense. > > The question concerned whether it was relevant that s received > advice from others. s' defense lawyers have said she was acting on > the advice of Glaxo's law firm, King & Spalding, a so-called > advice-of-counsel defense. > > "The problems here are fundamental, obvious and I don't think they can > be defended," s' attorney, Reid Weingarten, said. > > At Thursday's hearing, Titus asked prosecutors pointed questions about > how they responded to the grand jury request. "The question is whether > the answer was correct, and if not, what's the remedy?" he asked. > > Titus did not say when he would issue a ruling, but raised the > possibility of throwing out the current indictment while allowing > prosecutors to start new grand jury proceedings and seek a new > indictment. > > Jasperse, a lawyer for the government, said that prosecutors > essentially fulfilled their duty before the grand jury and that it would > be "extreme" to throw out the indictment. > > "Could the answer have been more articulate and complete? Absolutely," > Jasperse said. "But the government basically got it right." > > After the hearing, Weingarten and Jasperse declined to comment. King & > Spalding spokesman Les Zuke declined to comment on the firm's role. > > Grand jury proceedings are typically secret, but some portions of this > one were made public in court filings that were part of the defense's > effort to dismiss the indictment. > > (Reporting by Carlyn Kolker of Reuters Legal; Editing by Eddie > <http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us & n=eddie.evans\ > & > ) > > > > http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN1\ > 726439120110317 > <http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN\ > 1726439120110317>>

[Guest guest]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/indicted-ex-glaxo-lawyer-says-prosecutors-misled-grand-jury-on-her-defense.html

A former GlaxoKline Plc (GSK) lawyer, charged with obstructing a regulatory probe of the company, said U.S. prosecutors misled the grand jury that indicted her on the key element of her defense.

The lawyer, s, argued that prosecutors improperly told grand jurors that a defense of relying on advice of counsel "was not relevant" to their decision whether to indict, according to a filing by her attorneys. s asked U.S. District Judge Titus to dismiss the case at a hearing today in Greenbelt, land.

s, indicted in November on charges she obstructed a probe into whether London-based Glaxo marketed the antideprssant Wellbutrin for unapproved uses, has based her defense on the claim she took advice from the Atlanta law firm of King & Spalding in responding to a 2002 Food and Drug Administration inquiry, her attorney Reid Weingarten said.

"We have been troubled by the zeal and overzealousness of the effort to remove from this case the advice of counsel defense," Weingarten said today in court. "From the time the FDA sent the letter of inquiry to GSK, GSK retained the services of King & Spalding and they worked hand in hand with King & Spalding to respond."

Grand Juror's Question

Weingarten said the deceit occurred in the government's response to a question from a grand juror who asked whether it was relevant that s may have been getting direction on how to respond to the FDA from someone else.

The government "was not required to present the advice of counsel defense to the grand jury," Jasperse, a trial attorney in the Justice Department's Office of Consumer Litigation, said in court. He added that the government "could have been more articulate and complete" when answering the grand juror's question.

"What happened in this case is not misconduct," Jasperse said. "It was not the sort of grand jury abuse that warrants dismissal of the indictment."

Jasperse said if the judge decides to dismiss the indictment, the government should be allowed to seek another against s.

Titus did not rule on the request. He did ask the prosecutors whether they would be able to secure a new indictment against s by April if he rules against them.

s is scheduled to go to trial on April 5. Weingarten said she will ask for a bench trial.

Les Zuke, a spokesman for King & Spalding, didn't respond to messages left on his office and mobile phones. Anne Rhyne, a spokeswoman for Glaxo, declined to comment.

Concealing Documents

s is charged with one count of obstructing an official proceeding, one count of falsifying and concealing documents and four counts of making false statements.

The first two charges carry maximum prison terms of 20 years, and the others carry terms of five years.

Prosecutors contend that s, who lives in Durham, North Carolina, "engaged in a yearlong effort" to deceive the FDA about the company's off-label marketing campaign for Wellbutrin.

Under U.S. law, drug companies aren't allowed to promote a drug for any use not approved by the FDA.

In response to regulators' request for information about Wellbutrin's marketing in October 2002, s allegedly sent a series of letters "that falsely denied the company had promoted the drug for off-label uses, even though she knew" the drugmaker had sponsored such marketing programs, prosecutors said in court filings.

The case is U.S. v. s, 10-cr-694, U.S. District Court, District of land (Greenbelt).

To contact the reporter on this story: Tom Schoenberg in Washington at tschoenberg@...

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rovella at drovella@...

>> Boooooo!!!!! > > (At least if tossed, it won't be "with prejudice." BUT "good enough" will not suffice. These cases need to be to-the-letter.) > > Terry > Sent via BlackBerry by AT & T > > Judge mulls dismissing Glaxo lawyer indictment > > (Reuters) - A federal judge is considering whether to dismiss an > indictment against a former GlaxoKline PLC (GSK.L > </finance/stocks/overview?symbol=GSK.L> ) lawyer after new evidence > emerged about possible prosecutorial errors in her indictment. > The lawyer, s, was charged in November with obstructing a > Food and Drug Administration probe into Glaxo's marketing of its > antidepressant drug Wellbutrin. > > At a hearing on Thursday in Greenbelt, land, s' attorney asked > U.S. District Judge Titus to throw out the indictment, arguing > that prosecutors failed to properly answer a question raised by a grand > juror about s' defense. > > The question concerned whether it was relevant that s received > advice from others. s' defense lawyers have said she was acting on > the advice of Glaxo's law firm, King & Spalding, a so-called > advice-of-counsel defense. > > "The problems here are fundamental, obvious and I don't think they can > be defended," s' attorney, Reid Weingarten, said. > > At Thursday's hearing, Titus asked prosecutors pointed questions about > how they responded to the grand jury request. "The question is whether > the answer was correct, and if not, what's the remedy?" he asked. > > Titus did not say when he would issue a ruling, but raised the > possibility of throwing out the current indictment while allowing > prosecutors to start new grand jury proceedings and seek a new > indictment. > > Jasperse, a lawyer for the government, said that prosecutors > essentially fulfilled their duty before the grand jury and that it would > be "extreme" to throw out the indictment. > > "Could the answer have been more articulate and complete? Absolutely," > Jasperse said. "But the government basically got it right." > > After the hearing, Weingarten and Jasperse declined to comment. King & > Spalding spokesman Les Zuke declined to comment on the firm's role. > > Grand jury proceedings are typically secret, but some portions of this > one were made public in court filings that were part of the defense's > effort to dismiss the indictment. > > (Reporting by Carlyn Kolker of Reuters Legal; Editing by Eddie > <http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us & n=eddie.evans\ > & > ) > > > > http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN1\ > 726439120110317 > <http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN\ > 1726439120110317>>

[Guest guest]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/indicted-ex-glaxo-lawyer-says-prosecutors-misled-grand-jury-on-her-defense.html

A former GlaxoKline Plc (GSK) lawyer, charged with obstructing a regulatory probe of the company, said U.S. prosecutors misled the grand jury that indicted her on the key element of her defense.

The lawyer, s, argued that prosecutors improperly told grand jurors that a defense of relying on advice of counsel "was not relevant" to their decision whether to indict, according to a filing by her attorneys. s asked U.S. District Judge Titus to dismiss the case at a hearing today in Greenbelt, land.

s, indicted in November on charges she obstructed a probe into whether London-based Glaxo marketed the antideprssant Wellbutrin for unapproved uses, has based her defense on the claim she took advice from the Atlanta law firm of King & Spalding in responding to a 2002 Food and Drug Administration inquiry, her attorney Reid Weingarten said.

"We have been troubled by the zeal and overzealousness of the effort to remove from this case the advice of counsel defense," Weingarten said today in court. "From the time the FDA sent the letter of inquiry to GSK, GSK retained the services of King & Spalding and they worked hand in hand with King & Spalding to respond."

Grand Juror's Question

Weingarten said the deceit occurred in the government's response to a question from a grand juror who asked whether it was relevant that s may have been getting direction on how to respond to the FDA from someone else.

The government "was not required to present the advice of counsel defense to the grand jury," Jasperse, a trial attorney in the Justice Department's Office of Consumer Litigation, said in court. He added that the government "could have been more articulate and complete" when answering the grand juror's question.

"What happened in this case is not misconduct," Jasperse said. "It was not the sort of grand jury abuse that warrants dismissal of the indictment."

Jasperse said if the judge decides to dismiss the indictment, the government should be allowed to seek another against s.

Titus did not rule on the request. He did ask the prosecutors whether they would be able to secure a new indictment against s by April if he rules against them.

s is scheduled to go to trial on April 5. Weingarten said she will ask for a bench trial.

Les Zuke, a spokesman for King & Spalding, didn't respond to messages left on his office and mobile phones. Anne Rhyne, a spokeswoman for Glaxo, declined to comment.

Concealing Documents

s is charged with one count of obstructing an official proceeding, one count of falsifying and concealing documents and four counts of making false statements.

The first two charges carry maximum prison terms of 20 years, and the others carry terms of five years.

Prosecutors contend that s, who lives in Durham, North Carolina, "engaged in a yearlong effort" to deceive the FDA about the company's off-label marketing campaign for Wellbutrin.

Under U.S. law, drug companies aren't allowed to promote a drug for any use not approved by the FDA.

In response to regulators' request for information about Wellbutrin's marketing in October 2002, s allegedly sent a series of letters "that falsely denied the company had promoted the drug for off-label uses, even though she knew" the drugmaker had sponsored such marketing programs, prosecutors said in court filings.

The case is U.S. v. s, 10-cr-694, U.S. District Court, District of land (Greenbelt).

To contact the reporter on this story: Tom Schoenberg in Washington at tschoenberg@...

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rovella at drovella@...

>> Boooooo!!!!! > > (At least if tossed, it won't be "with prejudice." BUT "good enough" will not suffice. These cases need to be to-the-letter.) > > Terry > Sent via BlackBerry by AT & T > > Judge mulls dismissing Glaxo lawyer indictment > > (Reuters) - A federal judge is considering whether to dismiss an > indictment against a former GlaxoKline PLC (GSK.L > </finance/stocks/overview?symbol=GSK.L> ) lawyer after new evidence > emerged about possible prosecutorial errors in her indictment. > The lawyer, s, was charged in November with obstructing a > Food and Drug Administration probe into Glaxo's marketing of its > antidepressant drug Wellbutrin. > > At a hearing on Thursday in Greenbelt, land, s' attorney asked > U.S. District Judge Titus to throw out the indictment, arguing > that prosecutors failed to properly answer a question raised by a grand > juror about s' defense. > > The question concerned whether it was relevant that s received > advice from others. s' defense lawyers have said she was acting on > the advice of Glaxo's law firm, King & Spalding, a so-called > advice-of-counsel defense. > > "The problems here are fundamental, obvious and I don't think they can > be defended," s' attorney, Reid Weingarten, said. > > At Thursday's hearing, Titus asked prosecutors pointed questions about > how they responded to the grand jury request. "The question is whether > the answer was correct, and if not, what's the remedy?" he asked. > > Titus did not say when he would issue a ruling, but raised the > possibility of throwing out the current indictment while allowing > prosecutors to start new grand jury proceedings and seek a new > indictment. > > Jasperse, a lawyer for the government, said that prosecutors > essentially fulfilled their duty before the grand jury and that it would > be "extreme" to throw out the indictment. > > "Could the answer have been more articulate and complete? Absolutely," > Jasperse said. "But the government basically got it right." > > After the hearing, Weingarten and Jasperse declined to comment. King & > Spalding spokesman Les Zuke declined to comment on the firm's role. > > Grand jury proceedings are typically secret, but some portions of this > one were made public in court filings that were part of the defense's > effort to dismiss the indictment. > > (Reporting by Carlyn Kolker of Reuters Legal; Editing by Eddie > <http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us & n=eddie.evans\ > & > ) > > > > http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN1\ > 726439120110317 > <http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/glaxosmithkline-stevens-idUSN\ > 1726439120110317>>