PAGE. 64

 

Experts Gather
FAS Trial For.

Ogden Opens

Dr. Frank N. Ogden, 61, vete-
ran fire department physician, to-.
day went on trial in Criminal
Court in a case that is regarded
of paramount importance to the
medical profession and. which has
resulted in a large panel of medi-
cal experts sitting through the
proceedings to. express expert:
opinion.

Dr. Ogden previously had
pleaded innocent to the five
charges, which consist of four in-.
dictments: charging issuance of '
narcotics prescriptions which
were not in good faith and were
not in the course of proper pro-
fessional practice, as well as a
fifth charge of failing to keep
proper narcotics records.

A sidelight of the case deals
with the police use of a portable
recording device, which an addict |
wore concealed in his elothing
when he consulted Dr. Ogden last:
May as a agent for the police.

Device Protested

Defense .counsel, Edward A,
Smith and. G. C. ‘A. Anderson,
protested at the opening of the
trial concerning the use.of the
recording device, saying that. the
person who went into the doctor’s
office already. “bugged for sound” ,
had gone, so -far--as-the: doctor '
was concerned, in a “physician-
patient relationship.” . es

The individual carrying the.
concealed recorder was a seaman,
Marlin J. Parkhill.

The defense. lawyers. ‘also pro- —
tested that, ina prior demonstra-
tion of the recording, that was
played back for them at police
headquarters, the sound of the
supposed. dialogue “was Just Don-
ald Duck.” °~

A well-known nublie sient sten-
ographer, who had been engaged!
by the defense to make a tran-
script of the dialogue had report-
ed back that he was unable to
make such a transcript, the court
was told.

Treatment Criticized

The defense also criticized the
treatment of the doctor by the
police narcotics squad. In protest-
ing the type of treatment, includ-
ing the trap set for the recorded
dialogue, Mr. Smith called Lieut.
Joseph Carroll, “honest but pretty
enthusiastic.” :

John C, Weiss, assistant State’ $.
attorney, arraigned two addicts.
who figure in the Ogden case, on
separate charges of. their own
just before Dr. Ogden was called
i trial.aTtWe* cases“‘were not dis-

 

osed of,. although both men en-
tered pleas of nolo contendre,
which did not deny guilt.

The two were Parkhill, the man:
who had.carried the recorder into
the doctor’s office and who lives
in the 800 block South Bond

[Continued On Page 54, Column 2].
—— Oneness = = s

 

 

 

 

 
 

a VS WM ee

 

 

ee 2 ae

BOI Sac

“Porn {4
Dr Ogden’ sDope
Trial Starting

[Continued From Page 64]

‘street, and Grady Wilbert Morris!]
48, ship engineer, of the 1500
block. Lancaster street, for whom],
Dr. Ogden is charged with pre-
scribing large amounts of dolo-
phine, a synthetic morphine.

Not Soluble

The defense stressed the fact

'ithat most of Dr. Ogden’s prescrip-

tions were for dolophine. Dolo-
phine tablets are not soluble,
and therefore cannot be used by}|
the so-called ‘‘main-line shooter’’}.
drug addicts who usually melt
dope to inject it into their veins.

The charges assert that Dr.
Ogden prescribed quantities of
liquid dolophine to some patients,

According to the defense. the
case presents and accents some of
the differences of opinion con-
cerning the handling of the

See Cea ESTA
eferise expert is to be Dr.

Laurance Kolb, of Washington,
who some months ago in the Sat-

lurday Evéning Post discussed the
narcotics problem and proposed}

that addicts really should be han-

dled as sick people, not as crimi-
Ainals.

 

 

 

 

 

The-waryland statute says that
physicians may prescribe narco-|
tics, pointed out the defense law-
yers in urging that Dr. Ogden was} .
carrying out his duty as a physi-
cian in prescribing for, on a medi-
cal basis, the various addicts who.
came to him for help.

eet Hours Arranged
Revealing: that the trial is To be|

Lilong and drawn out, counsel for
_iboth sides made arrangements
[iwith the court for early sessions
tlbeginning at 9.15 A.M., and late

sessions running well after 6 P.M.

(\Because of health of some per-
isons’ attending, there was opposi-
ition to actual night sessions. ©

Mr. Weiss, in-his opening state-
ment before Judge Joseph L.
Carter, noted that periodic check-
ups by Federal authorities had
brought to light the large number.
of prescriptions issued to certain
addicts by Dr. Ogden.

In one instance, the prescrip-
tions were for an addict that the
Government, more than three
years ago, had cautioned Dr.

+Ogden about prescribing for.

Addresses. Cited

In many instances false ad-
dresses had been put down by the
doctor, Mr. Weiss asserted. .

He said that State witnesses
would quote Dr. Ogden as saying
that “names don’t mean anything
to him and that he would pre-
scribe for any patient that is ill.”

The State also contended that
in addition to the four persons
named in the indictments as re-
ceiving prescriptons, the police
had unearthed 41 other prescrip-
tions for various patients where
“phony addresses” were used.

The defense: protested against
the bringing in of any data .con-
cerning patients not actually
named in the narcotics indict-