What fun would that be?He would have been better served if he met someone that was age-appropriate.
What fun would that be?He would have been better served if he met someone that was age-appropriate.
"you will always hear takes of hardship from individual prostitutes even if they practiced their trade legally. It's a tough job, but so are allot of careers in this economy."
Ask the guy who wrote that. Hint: it was not me.What does "this economy" have to do with it?
Thanks for the diagnosis. Sure sounded to me like you were equating Johns and prostitutes, and in an HT situation that is simply unfounded.
To be clear, this IS AN HT SITUATION. Funny, I have good friends who are Libertarians. MY take on what you said is that, like the Libertarians I know, you sometimes let the "no government" horse run off with the "fairness and decency" cart. Chances are pretty good that these "prostitutes" are in fact slaves, which in my view makes them not criminals but rape victims.
In my understanding, Kraft's alleged desire to get sexual favors for money in a strip mall makes him a definite part of the HT problem. So how about we treat the victim differently than the criminals who commit human trafficking and support it financially?
Do some women do this work willingly? Yeah, but their place of work gets busted, you dont see HT charges.
What does "this economy" have to do with it?
C'mon DEM. You make a career out of being logical and posing arguments. When I wrote that "... we should be able to distinguish John's and prostitutes from traffickers..." I did not in any way equate John's and prostitutes beyond the fact that they are, and should be treated, very differently from traffickers.
Was I really that far off in my "diagnosis?" What made you go off on a tangent so quickly?
The purpose of government is to protect its citizens from being harmed by others. It isn't to police the world, redistribute wealth, or dictate morality. Maybe I'm not like most Libertarians, because I do believe that in some areas, such as fraud prevention, product safety, and environmental protection, a large amount of government regulation is required to prevent one from harming another.
I do believe we can legislate and prosecute enslavement and/or rape without getting into the issue of "payment for sex" (morality). Law Enforcement can surely bust those who run an illegal establishment without busting those who provide or frequent its services. In this case we do have HT, but that isn't always true, and it's no reason to generalize with morality laws because we assume that HT could be part of it.
I'm not a libertarian, but do embrace some of the causes. On a related note, I thought video taping in situations like this (i.e, changing rooms, massage spaces, etc was illegal). Perhaps it depends on which state it is.The confusion arises from the fact that the term "libertarian" has been hijacked by the right, such as the Tea Party, Koch brothers, Rand Paul, the Cato Institute and others as a screen for their economic agenda. A true capital L Libertarian also takes social stands for privacy, abortion rights and same-sex marriage and against the death penalty. Try to find that in the speeches of most so-called "conservative libertarians".
I'm not a libertarian, but do embrace some of the causes. On a related note, I thought video taping in situations like this (i.e, changing rooms, massage spaces, etc was illegal). Perhaps it depends on which state it is.
I think when you are a John in a human trafficking case at a strip mall hand job salon, you are not exactly like a slave owner. You're more like a guy who rents a slave from her owner and then degrades her.
**** Bob Kraft. It is not like he rented a slave to have her wash dishes and weed his flower garden. He rented an unwilling slave to do the one thing that, once she is known as "one of those" women, her reputation is unlikely to be salvageable.
Assume the police were smart enough to get a court's permission.
And even if he did, how is it provable.I don't want to defend Kraft's choice here, but how would he necessarily know that the women involved were there against their will?
LOL.......this is just a bump in the road to his party itinerary.....as evidenced by the Oscar party sceneAt the end of the day how will he be able to show his face at football games next year? His going to be viewed as a desperate rich pervert who exploited young Asian girls in a massage parlor. Right now the legal battle is for that video to be kept out of the public eye.
Same way anyone suspects it. It can be possible in most any setting I suppose, but the more skeevy the setting, the younger the .women, the more likely it is. Btw, that needs to be precisely the risk HE takes.I don't want to defend Kraft's choice here, but how would he necessarily know that the women involved were there against their will?
Um, I guess the same way you prove anything. Evidence of his state of mind could include what he saw, heard, did, and even in some cases, what he should have known.And even if he did, how is it provable.
It’s hardly surprising that an NFL owner - a rich, white man in his 70s - solicited this kind of thing. What may be surprising is how deep (no pun intended) this goes and what else it exposes. Kraft doesn’t strike me as the careless type, a la Hugh Grant trolling for girls on the strip. This one may involve a high-stakes clientele and unearth some more dirt.
At the end of the day how will he be able to show his face at football games next year? His going to be viewed as a desperate rich pervert who exploited young Asian girls in a massage parlor. Right now the legal battle is for that video to be kept out of the public eye.
Just to clarify, at least in Kraft's case, there were no "young Asian girls" involved. The Sheriff has said there were no under age girls, and while know there is at least one woman whose age is not known, the three whose ages are known were 45, 46 and 59 years old. Let's not confuse the issue by adding another non-existent (and more serious) issue.At the end of the day how will he be able to show his face at football games next year? His going to be viewed as a desperate rich pervert who exploited young Asian girls in a massage parlor. Right now the legal battle is for that video to be kept out of the public eye.
I'm also kind of curious about this. So they got court permission to do video, but then how did they actually install it? Get the landlord's permission to enter after hours?Assume the police were smart enough to get a court's permission.
Same way anyone suspects it. It can be possible in most any setting I suppose, but the more skeevy the setting, the younger the .women, the more likely it is. Btw, that needs to be precisely the risk HE takes.
If they have a warrant, they don't need anyone's permission.I'm also kind of curious about this. So they got court permission to do video, but then how did they actually install it? Get the landlord's permission to enter after hours?
There is a long history all over the world of societies of all types treating Johns as though their criminal activity in support of Human Trafficking is embarrassing, but not really illegal. Meanwhile women are denounced as dangerous whores, even the ones who are not doing it willingly.So if I'm to understand here ..... paying for sex is illegal because we don't want the John's to be forced into a fuzzy value-judgment. Is she old enough? Is the establishment "clean" looking enough? This is the motivation behind having the laws. It isn't about legislating morality. It's not possible to simply go after the Human Traffickers.
Right, but if they knock on the door with a warrant during business hours, then the owners know that cameras have been installed and would shut down the illegal parts of their business (and possibly scatter any trafficked women) so as not to provide any evidence against themselves. That's clearly not what happened here. So did they take the warrant to the building owners who let them install cameras? I'm assuming the didn't break into the building....If they have a warrant, they don't need anyone's permission.
Gee, I don't know, after procuring warrants, did the FBI ask Gotti & associates permission to enter their covert activities to plant “bugs”?Right, but if they knock on the door with a warrant during business hours, then the owners know that cameras have been installed and would shut down the illegal parts of their business (and possibly scatter any trafficked women) so as not to provide any evidence against themselves. That's clearly not what happened here. So did they take the warrant to the building owners who let them install cameras? I'm assuming the didn't break into the building....
So they broke in? I'm honestly asking.Gee, I don't know, after procuring warrants, did the FBI ask Gotti & associates permission to enter their covert activities to plant “bugs”?
i like that, logical.More likely, the business was recording the sessions (potentially to blackmail clients if necessary) and the police confiscated the video as evidence via their search warrant.
PSU,So they broke in? I'm honestly asking.
If you read the police documents, that is not the case. They (LE) installed their own cameras.More likely, the business was recording the sessions (potentially to blackmail clients if necessary) and the police confiscated the video as evidence via their search warrant.
That is interesting...hadn’t read that report. I suppose it’s possible that they could’ve struck a plea deal with the owner in order to gather more evidence. Still, wouldn’t be surprised if some of the video was obtained via the search warrant.If you read the police documents, that is not the case. They (LE) installed their own cameras.
See page six:
https://ewscripps.brightspotcdn.com/74/98/64c708b942ac9a24ed0e40f57db0/hua-pc.pdf
Thoughts?So they broke in? I'm honestly asking.
I really don't see the establishment having their own video cameras within the rooms; why would you record yourself committing crimes?That is interesting...hadn’t read that report. I suppose it’s possible that they could’ve struck a plea deal with the owner in order to gather more evidence. Still, wouldn’t be surprised if some of the video was obtained via the search warrant.
I'm not talking about Gotti I'm talking about the Orchid Spa.Thoughts?
Carlo Gambino never even went to the movies! But Gambino was shrewd enough that he was never caught on tape talking about a crime. Neither was Chin Gigante. Neither was Anthony Spero.
John Gotti, in contrast, was recorded on tape committing crimes and acknowledging three murders. The FBI had a bug in the apartment above the Ravenite Social Club, and that's where Gotti admitted ordering the murder of porn king Robert DiBernardo, Louie Milito, and Louis DiBono. Bang! Three homicide counts in a rico conviction! Gotti's boastful lack of discretion is what ended his career. Old-schoolers like Gambino and Santo Trafficante were never convicted and died of natural causes as free men.
I would imagine there are variations of surveillance warrants/procedures that pertain to any level of crime, mob or human trafficking. I understand most states have similar surveillance laws. Start the research, the you question (a good one) may be answered.I'm not talking about Gotti I'm talking about the Orchid Spa.
...Gotti = mob; Orchid Spa = HT = Aisan mobI'm not talking about Gotti I'm talking about the Orchid Spa.