Pittsburgh man pleads guilty to painkiller possession, health care fraud |

Pittsburgh man pleads guilty to painkiller possession, health care fraud


A Pittsburgh man described as one of the region’s largest illegal distributors of prescription painkillers could spend the rest of his life in jail after pleading guilty in federal court this week to health care fraud and illegally possessing large amounts of prescription painkillers.

William Richardson, 57, of Geyer Avenue pleaded guilty Thursday as his trial in federal court in Pittsburgh was beginning before U.S. Judge Mark Hornak, according to a release Friday from the U.S. Attorney’s office in Pittsburgh.

Richardson pleaded guilty to health care fraud and illegally possessing oxycodone or oxymorphone with the intent to distribute, as well as illegally having firearms, prosecutors said.

“William Richardson was among Pittsburgh’s largest illegal distributors of the prescription painkillers oxycodone and Opana, and the crime he perpetrated can be described as taxpayer-funded drug dealing,” U.S. Attorney Scott W. Brady said in a statement.

The judge also was told Richardson coordinated with many people who sold him the drugs for redistribution. Those drugs were bought through medical insurance programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.

Richardson also acquired prescription opiate medication from a large-scale illegal opiate pill distributor from Detroit and got opiate pills through his own opiate-pill prescriptions, which he obtained fraudulently, prosecutors said.

Pittsburgh police initiated a drug buy from Richardson in August 2014 and then seized his stash of painkillers and guns when they searched his home. More pills, a cellphone and cash were seized in a second raid on his home in June 2016, while Richardson was under house arrest, prosecutors said.

Richardson could be sentenced to up to 180 years in prison and be fined $10.7 million.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.