To write the piece, I basically read a whole bunch of different articles, some of which I've linked to (and they're pretty interesting reading).  I don't think there are any "undisputed" facts.  Paey says he's completely innocent of wrongdoing.  The prosecutor would have you believe he's a one-man crime spree.

To stay completely on point, I guess it's not disputed that he actually had prescription medication.  He was convicted of possession, trafficking, and fraud.  The pills he had contained both the narcotic ingrediant and tylenol, totalling over the 28 grams which make it an automatic "trafficking" 25-year mandatory minimum sentence.

Paey and his family were surveilled for two months and he never sold any of the drugs.  The prosecutor's sole "evidence" was that he didn't believe anyone could take "that many" pills.  I don't know if the jury was convinced of that, or if they were just following the "letter of the law" about the 28 grams.

The fraud charge is more problematic -- the doctor at first verified all of the prescriptions, but when threatened with prosecution, testified that Paey forged them.  I did read one article that said, originally, that the police told Paey he could cut a deal if he would testify against the doctor and that he refused, at which point the tactic was reversed.  After reading everything, it's unclear to me whether Paey forged any prescriptions or not.  

In any case, he wasn't selling the pills, just trying to control his own pain.  I think it's ridiculous the medication is so tightly controlled and doctors are so fearful of the DEA that this situation arose in the first place.  If he is guilty of anything in this mess, it's trying to get more medication for himself.  

Nevertheless, his guilt or innocence is moot at this point, having been found guilty in a court of law.  It's now a matter of the governor showing mercy.  I focused my letter on the mandatory minimum aspect -- that a 25 year sentence for a disabled man who wasn't selling drugs is overly punitive and serves no purpose to society, and that he should be with his wife and children.  He's already been in prison too long.

Here's a link to another article by John Tierny of the NY Times via the November Coalition, in which he talks about the prosecutor.

Just doing his job

Tierny dismantles the prosecutor's arguments and the prosecutor himself says "I'm not thrilled about this case, I'm only proud that I did my job as a prosecutor."

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes