Minimum requirements: Using 100 words or more, please discuss the legal concepts applicable to fraud for this post. Be sure to proofread and use at least 2 credible references.

The article I have chosen to write about is a Fallston, Maryland resident who was charged with defrauding Medicare, Medicaid and private insurers out of millions of dollars through several pharmacies in which he owned in several states including Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C. The case and charges were dismissed by U.S. District Judge George Russell against Reddy Annappareddy, he and his pharmacies were accused of refilling prescriptions for customers without there knowledge then charged insurers for the refills and then reused the medications when the prescriptions were not picked up by the customers who had no idea that it had not been filled, and also not paying back the insurers. The state had claimed that this act of fraud caused the insurers between $2.5 million to $7 million dollars. Four of Reddys former employees had already pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the fraud scheme and a jury had convicted Annappareddy, but he had hired new lawyers that argued the state had made misleading statements to the jury, presented erroneous evidence, and allowed the the destruction of documents and evidence that could have proven his innocence. The evidence that had been destroyed were pharmacy records and seized medications from the business was destroyed during a government motion for a new trial was pending.

When investigators began investigating this case their first mistake was that they tried to make more out of what was really there they tried to inflate the amount of money and the amount of medications that were involved in which that led to them being accused of presenting false evidence, the next thing that they did wrong was to not just present the truth of what evidence they had, and if they had just stuck to the facts they would have won, the most damaging thing that the government did was to allow the evidence to be destroyed during a motion, any lawyer anywhere knows that you never ever let any evidence at anytime allowed to be destroyed for any reason. What the prosecution did was they did the defendants job for them, they messed up with the evidence.

Now to understand this case you must understand the rules of evidence which is also known as the laws of evidence, it encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules of evidence apply in both the civil and criminal trials in United States federal trail courts. There are four types of evidence these include, real evidence, demonstrative, documentary, and testimonial, what happened in this case was the prosecution violated the rules of evidence by misleading the jury by presenting false evidence, and trying to suppress evidence by allowing evidence to be destroyed during a motion which is in effect during a trial.

Find Law, What are the rules of evidence?, (NA) (ND), Retrieved from:www.hirealawyer.findlaw.com

The Baltimore Sun, The Aegis, Judge dismisses insurance fraud case...., bye Allen Vought - Contact Reporter, September 6, 2016, Retrieved from:www.baltimoresun.com

Wikipedia, (NA) (ND), Retrieved from: www.wikipedia.com