Pain pill indictment against Merrick doctor in question

Federal prosecutors may need to make their case again to a grand jury in order for their indictment against a Merrick doctor accused of overprescribing opioid pain medications to hold up.

Dr. Michael Belfiore is facing criminal charges that he improperly wrote thousands of opioid prescriptions, and his attorney, Tom Liotti, is blaming any wrongdoing on deceptive marketing by drug manufacturers and lax federal regulations.

At a recent hearing at the federal courthouse in Islip, however, Liotti raised issues with the way the Grand Jury, which handed down Belfiore’s indictment, was briefed, and Judge Joseph Bianco agreed on some points.

Liotti believes that if the Grand Jury was not instructed that Belfiore can only be convicted of a crime if he prescribed the drugs without a legitimate medical purpose, the indictment might be invalid.

“My guy can only be charged … if he prescribed without a legitimate medical purpose,” Liotti told the Herald. “[The prosecution] have a burden to show that as an element to the grand jury.”

Bianco agreed, at the recent hearing, that there is “some case law” that suggests that if the “legitimate medical purpose” element is a part of the statute Belfiore allegedly violated, then it also has to be contained in the indictment.

“Unless it is clear that this is not a problem, I’m going to make the government fix it,” said Bianco.

According to Liotti, grand juries generally only sit for 18 months, and a new one has been installed, which might require an entirely new presentment from the prosecution in order for the indictment to stand up.

Liotti and Belfiore are also attempting join a Suffolk County lawsuit against the major opioid manufacturer Purdue Pharma, in which the county is trying to recoup costs it has incurred in fighting the opioid and heroin epidemic. Liotti hopes that a settlement or victory for the county could help his defense of Belfiore.

Attorneys for Suffolk County and Purdue have argued against Belfiore’s intervention, saying that it would only further complicate the case, and would have no bearing on the criminal charges against him.

Liotti also has introduced marketing materials used by Purdue in the 90s in the criminal case in order to defend Belfiore and prove that he, along with many other doctors, was led to believe that opioid medications did not pose a significant risk to his patients.

Judge Bianco has ruled that Liotti will only be able to present materials that were produced before Belfiore’s alleged crimes, and that he would likely have been relying upon for information on at the time.

Two videos produced by Purdue, which the Herald has viewed and previously reported on, will be able to be shown to the jury, as long as Belfiore testifies that he depended on the information in them at the relevant time.

The video features patients and doctors extolling the virtues of oxycodone and reporting that the risk of addiction is “much less than 1 percent.”

Liotti said in an interview that he “absolutely” plans on showing the videos to the jury and bringing in experts to testify as to what doctors relied upon at the time.

According to Bianco, if the indictment against Belfiore is dismissed because of an omission, the government will have up to six months to re-indict.

Belfiore’s trial date is tentatively scheduled for the week of October 23.