Steroid shippers should choose FedEx over UPS

Millard

Elite
Staff member
10+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
It appears the government may possibly start going after the transport and delivery companies that steroid sources use to ship anabolic steroids (e.g. FedEx, UPS).

FedEx is speaking against the government action. But UPS is cooperating and upgrading its "compliance" to government demands.

The government's investigation "has now become absurd and deeply disturbing," said Patrick Fitzgerald, FedEx's vice president for corporate communications. He said the government wanted to "deputize" FedEx delivery people to help "catch criminals."

"We cannot do their jobs for them," he said.


UPS, by contrast, has disclosed that it is in talks with the Justice Department about settling the case. In filings this month with the Securities and Exchange Commission, UPS said it was cooperating with a DEA investigation involving the "transportation of packages on behalf of online pharmacies that may have operated illegally."

In its filing, UPS said it was exploring a settlement that would involve upgrading its compliance program and possibly paying a fine. A company spokesman said, "We won't have any further comment until the matter is closed."

[...]

"We are a transportation company," said Mr. Fitzgerald. "We are not law enforcement, we are not doctors and we are not pharmacists."

FedEx, UPS Probed on Drug Shipments - WSJ.com
 
Great info Millard, but I often use the US mail, whenever possible, especially for international delivery. That being the case, I guess "they" would have to investigate themselves, lol! I suspect this would approximate the impossible, considering the USPS processes more than ONE MILLION deliveries daily and at least 10% are parcels!
:)
 
Great info Millard, but I often use the US mail, whenever possible, especially for international delivery. That being the case, I guess "they" would have to investigate themselves, lol! I suspect this would approximate the impossible, considering the USPS processes more than ONE MILLION deliveries daily and at least 10% are parcels!
:)

WORD.
Only use USPS and am 96-96. also this time of year I order 3-4 times as much - Holiday help is trained to simply watch boxes buzz by on the Conveyor Belt.
 
Agreed Donzi, that's also what I'm told by my son who started working at USPS two months ago. Ya think the Feds are discouraging FEDEX and UPS for competitive reasons, since the US postal service has been abutting the red since it's inception? Why they just wouldn't! Hmm, well maybe not but I wouldn't be surprised if it was a primary ulterior motive, lol!
:)
 
2014: The feds indicted Fedex on conspiracy charges related to the distribution of controlled substances:

fedex-indictment.jpg

July 18, 2014
Contact: Casey Rettig
Phone Number: (415) 436-7994
For Immediate Release

FedEx Indicted For Its Role In Distributing Controlled Substances And Prescription Drugs​

SAN FRANCISCO - A federal grand jury in San Francisco indicted FedEx Corporation, FedEx Express, Inc., and FedEx Corporate Services, Inc., today, with conspiracies to traffic in controlled substances and misbranded prescription drugs for its role in distributing controlled substances and prescription drugs for illegal Internet pharmacies, announced United States Attorney Melinda Haag, Drug Enforcement (DEA) Special Agent in Charge Jay Fitzpatrick, and Food and Drug (FDA) Acting Director of the Office of Criminal Investigations Philip J. Walsky.

According to the indictment, beginning in approximately 1998, Internet pharmacies began offering consumers prescription drugs, including controlled substances, based on the provision of information over the Internet. While some Internet pharmacies were managed by well-known pharmacy chains that required valid prescriptions and visits to the patient’s personal physician, others failed to require a prescription before filling orders for controlled substances and prescription drugs. These Internet pharmacies filled orders based solely on the completion of an online questionnaire, without a physical examination, diagnosis, or face-to-face meeting with a physician. Such practices violated federal and state laws governing the distribution of prescription drugs and controlled substances.

According to the indictment, from at least as early as 2004, DEA, FDA and members of Congress and their staff informed FedEx that illegal Internet pharmacies were using its shipping services to distribute controlled substances and prescription drugs in violation of the Controlled Substances (CSA), Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FDCA), and numerous state laws. In 2004, FedEx established an Online Pharmacy Credit Policy requiring that all online pharmacy shippers be approved by the Credit Department prior to opening a new account. The stated reason for this policy was that many Internet pharmacies operated outside federal and state regulations over the sale of controlled drugs and many sites had been shut down by the government without warning, leaving a large balance owed to FedEx. According to the indictment, FedEx also established a Sales policy in which all online pharmacies were assigned to a “catchall” classification to protect the commission-based compensation of its sales professionals from the volatility caused by online pharmacies moving shipping locations often to avoid detection by the DEA.

According to the indictment, as early as 2004, FedEx knew that it was delivering drugs to dealers and addicts. FedEx’s couriers in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia expressed safety concerns that were circulated to FedEx Senior management, including that FedEx trucks were stopped on the road by online pharmacy customers demanding packages of pills; that the delivery address was a parking lot, school, or vacant home where several car loads of people were waiting for the FedEx driver to arrive with their drugs; that customers were jumping on the FedEx trucks and demanding online pharmacy packages; and that FedEx drivers were threatened if they insisted on delivering packages to the addresses instead of giving the packages to customers who demanded them. In response to these concerns, FedEx adopted a procedure whereby Internet pharmacy packages from problematic shippers were held for pick up at specific stations, rather than delivered to the recipient’s address.

FedEx is charged in the indictment with conspiring with two separate but related Internet pharmacy organizations: the Chhabra-Smoley Organization, from 2000 through 2008, and Superior Drugs, from 2002 through 2010. In each case, FedEx is alleged to have knowingly and intentionally conspired to distribute controlled substances and prescription drugs, including (Schedule III); Ambien, Phentermine, Diazepam, and (Schedule IV), to customers who had no legitimate medical need for them based on invalid prescriptions issued by doctors who were acting outside the usual course of professional practice. The indictment charges that FedEx conspired with these organizations to violate the CSA, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846, and the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. §§ 331, et seq.

According to the indictment, FedEx began delivering controlled substances and prescription drugs for Internet pharmacies run by Vincent Chhabra, including RxNetwork and USA Prescription, in 2000. When Chhabra was arrested in December of 2003 for illegally distributing controlled substances based on a doctor’s review of an on-line questionnaire, Robert Smoley took over the organization and continued the illegal distribution of controlled substances and prescription drugs through FedEx.

According to the indictment, FedEx began delivering controlled substances and prescription drugs for Superior Drugs in 2002. FedEx’s employees knew that Superior Drugs filled orders for online pharmacies that sold controlled substances and prescription drugs to consumers without the need for a face-to-face meeting with, or physical examination or laboratory tests by, a physician.

According to the indictment, FedEx’s employees knew that online pharmacies and fulfillment pharmacies affiliated with both the Chhabra-Smoley organization and Superior Drugs were closed down by state and federal law enforcement agencies and that their owners, operators, pharmacists, and doctors were indicted, arrested and convicted of illegally distributing drugs. Nevertheless, FedEx continued to deliver controlled substances and prescription drugs for the Chhabra-Smoley organization and Superior Drugs.

“The advent of Internet pharmacies allowed the cheap and easy distribution of massive amounts of illegal prescription drugs to every corner of the United States, while allowing perpetrators to conceal their identities through the anonymity the Internet provides,” said U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag. “This indictment highlights the importance of holding corporations that knowingly enable illegal activity responsible for their role in aiding criminal behavior.”

“Pharmaceutical drug abuse is a serious problem affecting millions of consumers in the United States,” said DEA Special Agent in Charge Jay Fitzpatrick. “While DEA is committed to ensuring patients receive legitimate prescriptions, today’s action should send a strong message that corporations that participate in illegal activity risk investigation and prosecution.”

“Illegal Internet pharmacies rely on illicit Internet shipping and distribution practices. Without intermediaries, the online pharmacies that sell counterfeit and other illegal drugs are limited in the harm they can do to consumers,” said Philip J. Walsky, Acting Director, FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations. “The FDA is hopeful that today’s action will continue to reinforce the message that the public’s health takes priority over a company’s profits.”

FedEx has been summoned to appear in federal court in San Francisco on July 29, 2014.

An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, the defendants face a maximum sentence of five years of probation, and a fine of between $1 and 2.5 million, or twice the gross gain derived from the offense, alleged in the indictment to be at least $820 million. The defendants are also liable for restitution to victims of the crime, as well as forfeiture of the gross proceeds of the offense and any facilitating property. However, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

Kirstin M. Ault and Kyle F. Waldinger are the Assistant U.S. Attorneys who are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Maryam Beros and Rawaty Yim. The prosecution is the result of a nine year investigation by the DEA and FDA, Office of Criminal Investigations.

Source: https://www.dea.gov/press-releases/...s-role-distributing-controlled-substances-and
 

Attachments

2016: The prosecution, in a surprise move a few days after the beginning of the trial, requested that all charges be dismissed. They provided no explanation and the judge summarily granted the dismissal.

Fedex celebrated the dismissal with a jab at the feds but didn't really provide insight to the exact reason why the prosecutors decided to give up a few days into the trial:

“The case should never have been brought,” said FedEx Senior VP of Marketing and Communications Patrick Fitzgerald in a statement on Friday. “The government should take a very hard look at how they made the tremendously poor decision to file these charges…. The power of the government was greatly misused when the case was initiated, but the government’s integrity was redeemed by the decision to dismiss the charges today.”


Meanwhile, legal experts cited a couple of different reasons...

For one thing, FedEx maintained that they were always willing to cooperate with the DEA in that they would stop providing shipping/courier services to any entity the DEA claimed was involved in illegal activity.

Apparently, DEA never once identified the name of any entity that was involved in illegal activity over the course of the government's 6-8 year investigation. Not once.

Fedex maintained that they would not and should take upon the job of law enforcement and criminally investigate their clientele. It the DEA's job to provide them with this information.

Experts are theorizing, however, that the decision to abandon the case could have stemmed from the pending testimony of two DEA officials, both of whom planned to testify about how they had spoken with FedEx officials over the years, yet never advised them to stop providing services for any online pharmacy.

Other experts think the sudden dismissal may have been due to a technicality where the government didn't properly identify the corporation structure of FedEx and allowed the statute of limitations to expire before identifying the correct subsidiary.

The sudden about-face from the DOJ came three months after FedEx won a motion to dismiss on a statute of limitations issue stemming from a series of tolling agreements. Specifically, FedEx Corp. (the parent company) and FedEx Corporate Services, Inc. (the company’s e-commerce services subsidiary) successfully argued that they were not bound by the DOJ’s agreement to extend the tolling the statute of limitations with Federal Express Corp. (the company’s expedited shipping subsidiary). U.S. v. FedEx Corp., et al., No. 3:14-cr-00380, 2016 WL 1070653, *3-5 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2016).

The DOJ argued that FedEx should have disclosed the error prior to the running of the statute of limitations. US District Judge Charles Breyer disagreed. “The government appears to have forgotten that in a criminal prosecution, the defendant is not required to make the government’s case,” wrote Judge Breyer. “FedEx’s corporate structure is clearly described on numerous public websites—including sec.gov—which the government could have used to check its work in drafting the tolling agreement that underpins this novel prosecution. But the government did not check its work.”

 

Attachments


This is an Eighth Circuit case.

A short quote showing that parcel interdiction operations at Fed Ex are nothing new (this case is from 2004):

On April 13, 2001, Hawthorne, California, police officer Melanie Newenham, who was participating in a “parcel interdiction” operation at a Federal Express (“FedEx”) facility in Hawthorne, removed a suspicious looking package from a conveyor belt.   After removing the package, she gave it to Detective Julian Catano, who, also believing the package to be suspicious, decided to submit it to a canine sniff.   The dog alerted to the package, signifying that it contained illegal drugs.   Detective Catano took the package to Lee Edwards, the FedEx facility manager, and told her that he suspected that the package contained drugs.   Edwards asked whether Catano wanted her to open the package.   Detective Catano testified that he told her that “if she wanted to open it that would be fine ․” Edwards opened the box . . .

FedEx employees may not act as law enforcement agents themselves BUT they apparently have a formalized process of inviting actual law enforcement officials into their facilities to investigate suspicious packages and also allowing law enforcement to dress up as FedEx drivers as @malfeasance pointed out in another thread. From one of those news stories:

"FedEx can control its own rights. It has Fourth Amendment rights, and it can invite the police in," says Orin Kerr, a law professor at Berkeley. Whether or not Green's constitutional rights were violated turns on the timing, he adds: "Normally it only implicates the sender and receiver of the package's rights if it delays the delivery."

In this case it did not. But the big story here isn't the technical query; it's FedEx's relationship with law enforcement. "It was new to me that there was this program that's so formalized," says Kerr.

[...]

But while the relationship between FedEx and police is far more obscure, is has quietly existed for some time, says John Wesley Hall, an expert in Fourth Amendment law and the former president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

"I don't agree with it. The difficulty is that FedEx lets them do that," he tells Reason. "They've always cooperated with law enforcement. Sometimes the cops are dressed like a FedEx driver delivering the package to the house. They've done that forever. And FedEx cooperates with them—even loans them the truck."

That is precisely what happened in Green's case, which, as Hall notes, doesn't raise specific Fourth Amendment objections no matter how unsavory it might be.

(Emphasis added)
 
FedEx employees may not act as law enforcement agents themselves BUT they apparently have a formalized process of inviting actual law enforcement officials into their facilities to investigate suspicious packages and also allowing law enforcement to dress up as FedEx drivers as @malfeasance pointed out in another thread. From one of those news stories:
Agents will also dress up as comcast/telephone company and power company workers even barrow vehicles.
 
i worked at fedex for years and it wasnt uncommon to see someone launch a 30 pound package and crush multiple smaller steroid sized packages. dunno if its like thats just as common at ups but it happens a lot at fedex and noone gave a shit either
 
i worked at fedex for years and it wasnt uncommon to see someone launch a 30 pound package and crush multiple smaller steroid sized packages. dunno if its like thats just as common at ups but it happens a lot at fedex and noone gave a shit either
I’ve heard many stories of this happening plus getting my own packages delivered that were crushed, broken open and etc etc and not necessarily illegal packages but any type of package
 
I’ve heard many stories of this happening plus getting my own packages delivered that were crushed, broken open and etc etc and not necessarily illegal packages but any type of package
the people who work there are either you know whats, criminals, or retards like me, and then girls working there cuz they want to get plugged up by the criminals and you know whats. They hire from within too so that goes all the way up to the top. It a very dark work environment most people dont stay long. but ya seeing someone lift a heavy box go "ahh sheeiit" and then dump it on a another package and completely destroy it is something i saw everyday.
 
I'm sure this varies State to State but Fed-Ex doesn't typically call the police/dea/dci/dtf for suspicious packages. They usually take care of the matter themselves. Now the USPS is a completely different story, as everyone knows.
 
Back
Top