The Feds won’t release the client list, but local law enforcement wants to charge 28 of the men who frequented the Massachusetts brothels. There’s currently a case before the Massachusetts Supreme Court to decide whether or not the 28 alleged clients’ names will be released prior to charges being approved. That decision is due to be issued likely in January 2025.
So back last November we know about the bust of the BTT people. Just recently defense counsel and the US Attorney have told the court they're close to a deal. One of the co-conspirators has a hearing set for 10/1 to change plea. They sold his Corvette in July after seizing it during the arrests. The main defendant is undergoing interviews with Probation to prepare for a hearing to change her plea as well. The third co-conspirator is still requesting more time on the case, but that could be a function of counsel as all 3 of these people got public defenders because they said they couldn't afford private attorneys.
For a refresher, we went over the affidavit filed early November here and got some very interesting views from TER tough guys talking about how this case will go and how they'd handle prison. I found most of it laughable, mainly because of how many tough guys are on the TER forums but also how people think the justice system works.
In February this year a federal grant jury handed down an indictment and we have more details on all the evidence Justice has against these three. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/media/1336991/dl
They will all be more than happy to cooperate given the charges and what counsel is telling the courts. For some reason there are so many tough guys here but when actual charges are filed and people are actually in cuffs, all that toughness just seems to vanish. Weird huh? I also find it funny how guys on social security talk about how they'll hire counsel and beat federal cases out of sheer will but then the people who actually profit from setting up these operations somehow can't afford counsel themselves and need federal public defenders. I guess that's what happens when the persona of an internet tough guy somehow collides with the reality of being under federal indictment and looking at decades of time confined to a space the size of a bathroom for much of the day.
go back to the original thread and tell us just which "tough guy" was ever talking about the three charged with running the operation and which of the 28 customers that have been charged (have they even been charged yet? Or did they skip that part when they confessed during their interviews.) are facing decades of time confined?
Just as a reference for others, and I cannot verify as I've never been in jail or prison (but some friends way back in another life as it were have been and seemed consisten with the description here) but this seems to suggestion "most of the day" is not confined to some little room: http://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/07/12/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-prisoner
It's a money laundering and trafficking case. Customers aren't being charged. Customers who try and play tough with HSI get a trip to the jail and then are released without charge. They don't get a rebate for any legal fees or retainers given to counsel while they sit in jail for 10 hours because they refused to identify themselves in a criminal investigation. For your attorney to get in the car and just drive to county jail is probably a good $1,000 because they count drive time and the time they were mentally preparing for your case even though there is no case.
If the case went to trial then those 28 customers and that confidential informant on asylum could be called as witnesses to be cross-examined by defense counsel. This case is probably not going to trial so there wouldn't be a need to cross-examine any of them. In the case of a customer being put as a witness who doesn't want to cooperate, the US Assistant Attorney can grant that person transactional immunity and then they're forced to testify on the stand about their visit. If they refuse to testify even after being granted immunity, or if they lie under oath, they can be held in contempt of court. Which basically has no time limit, and in theory they can sit in jail until they agree to testify as ordered by the judge. This has happened to people who refuse to divulge where they have assets situated even with a court order. They are held in contempt and just sit there until they decide to speak. Which in this case that's worse than a solicitation charge where you have a 5th amendment right. As an uncooperative witness with transactional immunity, you enjoy no such protection from being put on the stand and put in jail for refusing.
In regard to prison being in a cell, I'm speaking of how long you're in the cell for a 24-hour period in a United States Penitentiary. Not a Level 2 low security prison in Michigan as you linked in your article. There's a big difference. Someone found guilty of trafficking at trial is going to be sent to a USP and given close to the max sentence. If the defendants cut deals and are sentences to prison, they can probably negotiate going to a FCI which is not as strict as a USP. And that would look more like your article where the author is in a Level 2 state facility. Also with federal sentencing there is no parole. You serve 80% of your sentence at the minimum.
that had the 3-week jail experience because you couldn't raise bail?
I didn't want to look back and research because this post isn't about Kgirl sessions!
No, I've never not been able to raise bail. But I have been to jail quite a few times and so that's why during the last post I found it comical that guys who've never been arrested had this whole narrative in their minds about what jail in LA is like and what they would do and what would happen, etc.
They have no clue how it works, they've never had to retain counsel and pay legal bills, and they've never been to jail. So it's people with zero background in anything speaking with a certainty on how things work. I guess they get their information from scripted dramas on Netflix or something?
you are!
This was copied 'n' posted, so don't jam me 'cause I didn't put up a link.
I didn't have money for bail, so I was in jail until trial, which was like 3 weeks.
My quotes and asterisks in the paragraph below highlighting the sentence.
TrailerparkRomeo10 months ago98 reads
Re: Agree with your last statement
You're not PD but I would not rule out your being an informant given your confession of multiple arrests where you were not ultimately charged/prosecuted for -- wonder just how you avoided that
One of them was a mistake in their computer and I spent the night in jail and was released without charge the following day. Another was a situation where it was an infraction I plead not-guilty "*but I didn't have money for bail, so I was in jail until trial, which was like 3 weeks.*" Officer didn't show and case was dismissed and I was released. Another was a verbal altercation with someone but I didn't break the law, but the cop was pissed and so took me to jail. I was released about 3-4 hours later with no charges. Another was I was arrested for a supposed battery, but then the victim immediately admitted she was lying and I was released later that night with no charge. She was never touched. She simply wanted to use law enforcement to win an argument.
I guess I did put in a link.
Why am I not surprised.
Yes, you're right I forgot about that one. That one was quite a long time ago. Anyways, I seem to wind up in jail quite a bit over the years.
new experiences in a jail system?
'Cause I gotta' say 3 or 4 hours, overnight and a max of 3 weeks just ain't really giving you all that much down time to be giving jail advice, of course that depends on the crowd you are addressing, just MO!
A long time ago? In the first sentence of this thread, you mention the post from last November!
So we get told about prison form a guy that has only been in jail.
We're also supposed to take the guy's advice about how to stay out of jail when he admits he finds himself IN jail a lot over the years. Seems like the guy that makes bad investments telling everyone else how to invest for their future.
Got a good laugh out of this, FUCKING FUNNY!!
The advice of others here is "Jail is nothing, I'll just go to jail. Contempt of court is nothing, I'll just stay in jail." They've never been so their idea of jail is probably very different than reality. It's TER tough guy talk. Most of the guys are not in shape and would get demolished in jail. Then there's a guy in his 30's who lets us know that if he just went missing 3-4 days in a row that no one at all would care. I found that part pretty depressing to hear.
I guess it was easier than I thought to search & link it up.
So all your rhetoric about the tough guy talk on the board here was just BS as no one ever said anything about what the 3 charged with running the operation should be doing. Though I suspect most would also agree that STFU is the right starting point even in that case.
No, it's not BS. It's a lot of people talking tough, you included, about how you'll just completely derail the justice system if you refuse to identify yourself. Like "there's this one trick that they hate!" and you're going to employ that to somehow skirt around being hammed up in a criminal investigation by HSI.
I'm showing that the tough guy talk, including one of the defendants here who had the Corvette seized, falls apart when they collide with the legal system. I illustrated above how you can be called as a witness, granted transactional immunity, and you'd be forced to testify. If you hired counsel they would tell you to testify to avoid being found in contempt and going to jail. It's real simple.
"No, it's not BS. It's a lot of people talking tough, you included, about how you'll just completely derail the justice system if you refuse to identify yourself. Like "there's this one trick that they hate!" and you're going to employ that to somehow skirt around being hammed up in a criminal investigation by HSI."
THAT is what you take from my saying that those that just confessed when asked should have just told the the agents they would only speak through their attourny and were not going to say anything until they spoke with an attourny? Really, THAT is suppose to "completely derail the justice system"??????
If you live in a state that requires the police to do more than just ask to see an ID then not showing it is a legal right People should take advantage of that. If you live in a State where you have to show ID when asked by police, then show it to them. But don't convict yourself of some consentual interactions just because you felt imtimidated by police. Police are expected to know, follow and respect the law. Demanding a legal right should not be an issue, even when they act like they want to make it seem like a big deal.
Last, while possibly a bit strong, I don't think anyone here really gives a shit about what the 3 who were arrested and charged with the federal crimes are doing. What I think EVERYONE here was concerned about was what is happening to the clients and the 28 who might be named.
However, that all changes for them if they were to be called as witnesses. Which is really only possible now that they confessed to the investigating agents. So the suggestion that it's good to talk with the feds if you only committed some local crime starts looking pretty bad in these types of cases. What everyone, pretty much, is really concerned about is their activites being made public -- which a trial and sitting on a witness stand will certinaly do for them. I suspect most here would say "I'll pay the 20K and keep my name out of the papers and local news and be happyer."
But sure, keep on telling everyone here to shoot themselves in the head by not just availing themselves of their legal rights. After all, it's not like your lawyer could never negotiate a deal where you might confess to paying for sex and then act as a witness for the DA in exchange for a closed door not name publicly released deal. I don't think that would be on the table at this point for any of the 28 should the 3 (or some subset) go to trial and they be named as witnesses.
That guy Rocket in here was talking about how he's in his 30s yet has no stable job that would wonder where he was if he went missing from work for 3 days. No family and no loved ones at all who would question his absence. Sounds like he would be able to just take the arrest and ride it out in jail without paying an attorney. As to how he would avoid being sexually assaulted in jail spending two nights in there is another matter I didn't cover, but his case is such an edge case. Most people have career responsibilities and friends and loved ones who would start to wonder why you vanished for several days. Going through all of that just to "stick it to the man" and refuse to identify yourself is stupid. You gain basically zero and you potentially sacrifice a lot.
There are nice ways to say things that get you a whole lot further than being a jerk, digging in your heels, refusing to show ID, and just generally being unpleasant. My responses above have never gotten me in any kind of bad faith dispute with police. They get it. But I'm also reasonable, I'm pleasant, and I don't sound like Robocop when I say I need to run these questions by counsel first.
TER tough guys don't have this nuance. They want to get in a battle with law enforcement, or at least think they do. But then the cuffs go on and grown men start sobbing.
It's weird how you have in your mind how you think this all works but it doesn't work that way at all.
"Identifying yourself when asked isn't convicting yourself. It's quite easy to find out who you are at some point. You also carry a device in your pocket that reveals more about you than anyone alive knows, and all that data is held in custody of companies."
Of course not nor did I ever say that.
"It's weird how you have in your mind how you think this all works but it doesn't work that way at all." If you don't mind my taking your own words you might decide to do a bit of self-reflection.
His advice seems to be - bend over to Leo's and take it.
He will post mounts of nonsense all to attempt to justify not exercising your rights.
And he will use his jail experience to pump fear.
I bet he thinks exercising Miranda rights is a stupid advice too.
He is an asset to cops who manipulate people into confessing.
I have friends and loved ones. Places to be. You don't, because you don't really matter to anyone, as you indicated yourself.
Man what type of nonsense is this?
In California you don't have to identify yourself to the police unless you're lawfully detained or driving a motor vehicle.
Refusing to identify yoy self is not "rude" or "hostile" but rather exercising your right.
I find it so bizarre you keep on hampering this point in this topic in this forum. All while conveniently forgetting the one time you didn't have money to post bail.
I can't help but think in back of my mind that it's possible youre trying to get future mongers who might get caught in a bust to cooperate with the police... please stop.
You're like the only one around who has no friends, no family, no dates, no job, nothing that would prompt someone to even ask where you've been. I would say yeah if you're 70 years old then perhaps everyone in your circle passed away, but in your 30's? Dude, fix your life. I mean is it just video games and then some incalls and then back home for microwave dinner?
If there's probable cause for arrest, then there is definitely cause for detainment, which means you have to identify yourself.
Why don't you actually try to reading what I write for once.
"In California you don't have to identify yourself to the police unless you're lawfully detained"
Being arrested is a big deal. Even being detained is non-trivial.
Especially in California where cops being liberal with arresting is heavily defeated and discouraged.
Simply asking am I under arrest, the cop must state if you're under arrest. If not under arrest, you ask if you're being detained. If not, you chuck up the deuce and walk your way.
If you're under arrest, you will be read Miranda rights. If not that's a violation that your attorney or acting attourney will be delighted to hear about. Under Miranda rights, you're entitled to a right to counsel and right to remain silent to avoid self incrimination.
If you're detained, you have the right to exercise the same right.
As far as your little manipulation technique trying to guilt me and saying shit that is untrue , I just have one word for it - lol.
It's clear you're trying to leverage fear of sitting in jail to avoid what any lawyer will advice to you - to not talk to police without an attorney. It's unclear to me why though. As far as I can tell, you don't visit kgirls (maybe I'm wrong) . You don't post on this board much besides this topic.. But you feel so strongly about this. It's peculiar.
As Jensen noted correctly, for someone who tries to frame his argument around "just cooperate and you won't have to sit in jail", you sure been to jail a lot. How much did you advice help you? You still have ended up in jail. Lol.
I was just bumping this timeless track
There is that video on Youtube about "Don't talk to the police" and the guy came out with a 2nd video a few years later saying the whole internet took him out of context and took him way too literally. And even he said what he's referring to is questions about the past. Where you were, the last time you went to X place. Not your name or you reporting a crime, or basic manners. That wasn't the point even though guys on TER think it was.
And yes, I've been to jail a lot. If you get accused of a crime, you're probably going. That's when I would say I need counsel because I need a law enforcement professional. The way I say it is never a problem. I don't sit there and repeat "Am I being detained?!" over and over because I don't have to. I have seen plenty of people go to jail for a completely avoidable reason just because the cops didn't like their attitude. Know what happened? They sat in jail for the day or for a 24-hour period, let go without charges, and that was that. Could have been avoided. But they wanted to be tough guys.
But then again they have friends and loved ones who miss them when they're gone. You have no one, as you've said previously, because you don't matter to anyone.
"They'll say "yep, you're detained until we figure out who you are. You're suspected of participating in criminal activity." It's real simple. They're not stopping you at Whole Foods. They're stopping you after observing you go in and out of a place under federal surveillance for criminal activity. I think you're losing the plot here. This isn't stop and frisk, this is an HSI investigation to human trafficking and money laundering."
Okay, then AFTER they say it you identify yourself. Then you dont say a word to their questioning and ask for a lawyer.
Whats so hard to understand here ?
Do you not understand simple flowchart of actions ?
Popo stops you.
They start asking questions.
You say - am I under arrest ? If no -> am I detained -> if no, you say bye and leave. never identifying yourself
Agreed ?
if they say yes youre under arrest, you identify yourself but dont answer questions without a lawyer. Same with detainment
"Wrong. Miranda rights apply to questioning, not to arrest. If they don't ask you anything then you don't have to be Mirandized. You can be arrested without them saying anything at all. Your attorney will be delighted to hear from you any time you call because they'll bill you in 15-minute increments of $500 - $700 hour for proper criminal defense. You don't get reimbursed for those bills because you made sure you got arrested. Attorney gets paid. And as of 2017 with the overhaul to the tax code, you can't itemize out legal expenses on your taxes. So you just pay."
I have no problem with paying for a lawyer. A lawyer while making money has at least monetary interest in helping me. A cop has zero of ANY interest in actually helping me.
And yes, Miranda rights apply to questioning. What else are they gonna do ? You're not making any sense.
"You can have a cordial conversation with the police about your name, address, what you do for a living, etc without answering things that relate to a criminal investigation. Since most people (many on this board) can't distinguish between being cordial and not going into any detail of an investigation, the advice is simply "don't say anything." But this doesn't apply in every scenario."
if youre *actually* under arrest, there is zero reason to withhold your personal information, I agree; that is - if youre actually under arrest.
"Everything I've said about you is true, either from this post or the post from last year. Unless you were making things up about yourself."
really ? lol
where do I say I eat microwaved dinners ? this is a lie
where do I say I have no friends or family or dates or no job ? this is just complete and utter lies based on absolutely nothing. how do you think I pay for pussy ? with my asshole ? lol
show me proof of this "truth". youre just a liar who employs manipulative techniques and makes up things to try to embellish your weak point.
you're trying to guilt trip someone who is ok with being absent from work/home due to arrest, because they seemingly have nothing to live for (not in those words, but I know what youre doing; I know most of manipulation techniques)
" I have seen plenty of people go to jail for a completely avoidable reason just because the cops didn't like their attitude. Know what happened? They sat in jail for the day or for a 24-hour period, let go without charges, and that was that. Could have been avoided. But they wanted to be tough guys."
oh ok. were their lives completely changed by sitting in holding cell for one fucking day ? boo hoo they spent a night in jail and were let go without charges. how awful and terrible.
note how I never said you should be rude to the cops or spit at them or whatever. I said, dont identify yourself unless youre arrested/detained. I said, dont answer any questions without your lawyer present to avoid self incrimination. its very simple.
Whats so hard to understand here ?
Agreed ?
Well that seems to make a really strong case to not talking to police when they are asking you question other than things like "Is there a 7-11 near here?"
Clearly most will answer some basic questions about traffic behavior or more general types of inquiry. But when in the position of walking about of an incall session and the police start asking you questions about what you were doing:
1) By your own statement, they don't have sufficent probable cause for charging you so they are fishing. STFU.
2) Nothing you might say then and there is good for you. If you tell lies you're just digging a deeper hole potentially. If you spill the beans you've just incriminated yourself needlessly.
That is why you get a lawyer to give you counceling during any talks with the police.
But like I said, with HSI you're either going to tell them what they want to know or you're going to spend the weekend in jail. You won't be charged in an HSI investigation, but if you give them a hard time it's not going to be fun. You'll still be booked and you'll incur legal bills if you hire counsel to try and get you out. And counsel can't really get you out until your time in there is close to expiring. Law enforcement has time where they can decide if they want to charge you with something. An attorney doesn't magically make that disappear.
Like I've said before, the attorney is to make sure your constitutional rights are protected. They're not there to make sure you don't face ANY consequences to being arrested. Because you absolutely will lose your job for one, and perhaps your family for another. That's why 99% of people cooperate. Most people have to be at work in the morning. And since it's federal, they know they're not after solicitation, they're after money laundering and trafficking.
You've never been to jail so you don't really know how any of this works.
will cost money, what doesn't^^!
Get a bondsman to file a writ.
Or is habeas corpus not part of the jail/court system anymore?
It could take a few hours, unless things have drastically changed, but you will get out.
-- Modified on 10/1/2024 12:33:50 AM
For some reason I'm imagining JailyardRomeo as the voice in this old chestnut:
https://youtu.be/yyCOfSCFE6k
Foolz say jail ain't nothing to sweat
But if you ain't got a rep
You gotta claim your set
Mad props on the link. That album is nice.
I imagine it more of a "scared straight" parody
Like this
That is not true. Apparently *you* don't understand the legal system. Miranda rights apply any time a cop is questioning you and suspects you may have committed a crime. Period. That's the standard. The trigger is NOT being in custody.
.
This is why cops came up with the label "person of interest", which is considered one step down from a suspect. They figure if you're not a suspect, you don't need your Miranda rights.
.
This is why TER tough guys get bad information, because someone just makes things up they see on television and repeat them as fact without any basis or any evidence.
I'm referring to the federal case. No customers are being charged federally by DOJ. Whatever the State of Massachusetts decides to do is not really compelling to me. States pass heartbeat laws. States are silly.
Your point is compelling, giving that 28 men are facing possible criminal charges. Had the ones approached by the law enforcement staking out the brothels kept their mouths shut, as entitled, they likely wouldn’t be facing charges.
I smell pork. Feds are wasting taxpayer's money on this silly case. I'd wish they would go after REAL criminals, like murders, rapists, and other violent crimes. SAD! Seems like a side show to distract from the FEDS shortcomings.
I'm referring to the federal case. No customers are being charged federally by DOJ. Whatever the State of Massachusetts decides to do is not really compelling to me. States pass heartbeat laws. States are silly.
Then you admit everything you've written was misdirected? Because literally every comment you've tried to argue are talking about what the clients / defendants in the state case should or shouldn't do.
.
In other words, everyone hear is saying "The customers who are facing state charges should shut up." And you, by your own admission, are addressing a completely separate point. You're talking about what the ringleaders in the Federal case should do.
.
Do you not see your mistake?
.
I don't see my mistake. The entire case I'm mentioning here, the indictment, and the affidavit from last November relate to the federal case. Comments that other people make about how Miranda warnings work and the process once you get booked I've commented on already. But this case and the penalties to the defendants if convicted are in a federal context.
Reuters just published a bit on this case too. (if I was one of the people 28 I might be starting to get worried -- some some of the high profile non 28 might be also at this point.)
"No client has been identified. Federal prosecutors after announcing the case pursued referrals to local authorities for potential state-level charges in Massachusetts and Virginia against the alleged customers.
In December, Acting U.S. Attorney Joshua Levy said authorities were seeking state-level charges against 28 alleged brothel clients in Massachusetts.
Those cases have been tied up in litigation now before the state's highest court over whether the media can attend so-called "show cause" hearings that are normally closed to the public in which a clerk-magistrate would decide whether probable cause exists to charge the men with misdemeanors.
Prosecutors in Virginia also received referrals but ultimately concluded they did not have sufficient evidence to make a case against any clients under the state's solicitation statute, said Laura Birnbaum, a spokesperson for Fairfax Commonwealth's Attorney Steve Descano."
Looks a bit like the federal authorities are doing more than just looking at the felony charges and moving on to other investigation too me. Plus given the on-going promotion of who might be involved -- politicians, high ranking militarty, professors and the like -- in both US and international papers one wonders if that will work in the favor of keeping the probable cause hearing private or make an exception and let it be public.
But for what it's worth, those in the DMV area can breath freely it looks like.
-- Modified on 9/28/2024 11:58:01 AM
I’m not reading the article the way you are.
As far as media influence on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court goes, I guess we’ll have to wait for the ruling (expected ~January 2025)
Sorry, that was not what I meant by my comment. I agree they are continuing their investigation in the clients. Just sounds like they will be more than happy to cooperate and support any local efforts so don't expect any stonewalling or reluctance towards sharing information already gathered.
So my impression was that it was a bit more than just now it's up to local and we have nothing more to do with anything there. Which was how it seems the initial view was -- feds only interest in the ML/trafficking so anything said to them by the clients would not be used against the client in a local investigation. I was less than clear on that point.
I think you missed the point: in the old thread, the so-called "tough guys" were talking about the customers, not the ringleaders. Everyone knew the ringleaders were in deep water.
.
To put it another way, nothing you wrote above disputes what the tough guys said because their comments were exlusive to the clients, while all of the stuff you described is specific to the ringleaders.
And one of the people charged in this case was a tough guy. He's lucky he's out on bail, but counsel filed a motion for a hearing to change plea, so I'm thinking he's about to unload every valuable piece of information he has to avoid a harsh sentence. That's what 99% of people do. It's actually extremely rare for someone to just keep quiet and take the time. Almost everyone tries to negotiate with DOJ.
Are they releasing the client list? What cooperation are they providing? Are they not going to prison?
DOJ has the client lists and everything. They seized all electronic equipment, ledgers and communications of this operation and related one. I don't think there is a reason to release a list, but they did get detailed information from clients about sessions and what goes on in them when they were conducting surveillance on the apartments. Those client names have to be released to defense counsel upon request through the discovery process because they're being used as evidence in the indictment.
If this case was going to trial, which it seems like it won't, then defense counsel could call these witnesses to testify and go under cross-examination. The cooperation they're providing isn't known yet, as they only have hearings scheduled to change their not-guilty pleas. But they usually are offering something to avoid the max prison sentence. You have to come with something to bargain with before the US Attorney will agree to let you plea out to a lighter sentence. Can't show up empty-handed.
I think they would go to prison unless they've got something really valuable. I would be shocked if they were able to plea out to multiple counts of money laundering and trafficking and avoid incarceration.
The Feds won’t release the client list, but local law enforcement wants to charge 28 of the men who frequented the Massachusetts brothels. There’s currently a case before the Massachusetts Supreme Court to decide whether or not the 28 alleged clients’ names will be released prior to charges being approved. That decision is due to be issued likely in January 2025.
https://apnews.com/article/massachusetts-brothel-network-suspect-guilty-plea-a30e89fc82df3e0047d3071960b69a70
Paid to take the fall?
Pleading guilty gives her a lesser sentence than being found guilty in a trial.
I read it as bargained to stay out of prison given the comment about getting deported if she plead guilty. Is that what you mean by "paid"?
I'm surprised a Chinese paper (SMCP in Hong Kong) would report but suspect it's due to the claims of politicians and other high ranking/social status people that were called out.
I'm telling you, they'd spring it on us the day after the election. lmao
I bet he's the dark cardinal behind BTT too. I hear they found communication between Hunter and BTT owner on Hunter's laptop but are keeping it close to the vest because the two had a conference call with Trump while Kamala is listed as part owner of BTT through some shell corporation in Panama.
Wait for it! It will all come to light on November 6. Guaranteed!
Watching local
Boston news. Guilty plea now
Link from Boston.com
https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2024/09/27/massachusetts-woman-accused-high-end-brothel-network-pleads-guilty/?p1=hp_secondary
Thanks for the, ughh, scoop?
The prior 2 articles posted 2 days ago said the exact same thing...just sayin'!
-- Modified on 9/29/2024 12:08:31 AM
Notice how a big part of the plea is enticing someone to travel across state lines to engage in prostitution.
A lot of simps who try and convince workers to "travel" and work are opening themselves up to possible felony charges federally. All it takes is one of these workers (who can either do this or work the cash register at Burger King) to claim they were being trafficked and make a deal for asylum. DOJ gets a bust on trafficking and the informant/victim gets asylum. Win-win for everyone except the simp.
I keep telling people to be careful but they don't listen. Do not accept money from a provider for anything. Do not advise on how they should work or what plans they should make regarding work. Do not assist them in working in any fashion. All they have to show is money from illegal means somehow going into an account you control and you're done. Or any communications saying someone should cross state lines for work.
I wonder how much longer it will continue.
...that press in this country can basically cause any tragedy, ruin lives, start wars all under cover of 1st amendment. "We are just doing our jobs"
These mongers are fucked. I guess we will now see whether they were randomly selected from those who talked... Like Jensen thinks they were... or if their names were taken from ledgers.
Yes, it always sucks to do illegal things and get caught, or admit to it and so screw yourself over. But your suggestion that for some reason these hearings should a barred from public, which is not the norm, seems to lack much justification. I'm sure every person ever charged with a crime would have like to be sure other never heard about it. But public and open trials and hearing is a two edge sword but very helpful for preventing innocent people from just being framed by LE or social elite/powerful.
In fact, if the list is truly just "wealthy and well connected" men the demand to escape from a public hearing would be all about differential treatment of some (the powerful, politically connected or whatever puts one in the upper rungs of society) while not others. Clear violation of the rule of law.
Rocket is right we will likely find out more about why and how the 28 got charged. He is wrong in that I never suggest it was random. I suggested that the one's being charged were the ones that confessed during the interviews and not selected off the customer contact list based on whatever criteria LE might have used. Though here I would agree that they are not going to charge one of the entries if they cannot directly link it to a real person.
[update to add: Looking at some of the reasons a judge might to have a closed hearing I think a person who just had their name or a phone number/email address on a contact lists and not other evidence would have a strong case that a public hearing would represent a great reputational risk even if they were innocent -- which they could claim if they never admitted to anything and were not observed entering and leaving the apartment. That the judge decided not to hold closed hearings suggests that such a defense is no present -- though perhaps it could be the judge has some bias to public hearing and let shit fall where it may for someone's personal life.]
Since the point Rocket is getting at related to giving up RL info in screening we might learn more about the actual risks people are taking from a legal perspective. Even outside legal charges, giving RL info exposes someone to some level of risk -- be it bad actors getting formation and using it to engage in some identify theft activity or bad actors stealing the data and blackmailing someone. (Bad actors could be internal or external in this case). If we find out all those charged gave up PII the case for worrying about legal problems and charges gets support. If they are a mixed bag, or maybe none gave PII then seems like the worries about giving RL info due to concerns about LE is just a hobgoblin in their mind. (I don't know about others but "wealthy and well-connected", and the earlier claims about high ranking military, all seem like people who would be very reluctant to leave a clear paper trail to their criminal activity. It also seems they would be smart enough to know how to avoid it and have the means of doing so. But I might be giving too much credit there.)
Will be interesting to see everything play out.
-- Modified on 11/14/2024 11:01:40 PM
-- Modified on 11/14/2024 11:14:27 PM
On the random part, not even sure why I wrote it this way.
So my apologies there. I did mean it in the way you clarified.
My point is related to rl info, but it's not like I think safety of info assessment is predicated on the result of this hearing. This hearing can just serve as proof.
I already think agencies lie too much when they say that your info will be dеleted, and that part needs to be communicated to the noobs who enter...That the info will never be dеleted and that's a common lie. And yet that part isn't communicated. It's swept under the rug for some reason.
I will never make a decision for anyone else, but I am a big fan of telling the truth and realistic risk assessment.
Whenever I read that your info will be deletеd, I roll my eyes. Yet I rarely seen anyone on this forum or other forms actually tell like it is and that your info won't be delеted.
So when people ask - and they always ask - about how safe giving your pii info is, I want real, honest answers and not sweeping shit under the rug.
And on a tangent - could someone fucking explain to me why you would need a meticulous list of all appointments each girl ever did for you and with whom in a ledger form, well after when all tricks have been turned?
Seems like an excellent tool to not just implicate someone, but selectively implicate someone based on frequency of appointments and length of appointments, etc.
What is the upside of having such a document? Now I've never ran a cr!M!Nal enterprise but it seems like the most idiotic thing to have. Might as well attach customers and girls Pics to each appointment. I'm not a racist in any way and I love Asian women. But this ridiculous bookkeeping seems like an Asian org thing. Heard similar stuff about ledgers of some corgs that were busted in the bay.
-- Modified on 11/14/2024 11:05:19 PM
Secondly, without reading this ruling, I don’t see how you can infer anything about law enforcement methods in identifying these suspects for investigation and charges (ledgers versus surveillance).
If that is the norm for MA okay. I agree it is about the media wanting to sell the story and get more ad revenue and I'm not sure I would agree with the decision to make the exception in this case. But am a bit interested in your views regarding the linked article. It does seem to suggest that the standard of closed hearing is not as strong as you claim, though I also realize that the source may well be "talking its book" as it were. I just found the references to the common law view of open courts interesting on that point -- accepting that common law has limited application in criminal law.
IIRC the original affidavit talked about interviewing the 28 people as they came out of the complex. Clearly some form of surveillance was in place. They didn't go off the client list and then go knocking at someone's home or workplace. That doesn't mean the contact list was not relevant. But I don't see that the list having real phone number and other PII or a burner number will matter here in most cases. It's not a binary either ledger or pure surveillance claim.
I’ll check out the linked article.
As far as surveillance versus ledger goes, it’s my opinion that the clients facing charges were snared up in the surveillance net. I just hadn’t seen anything in the latest round of news that lent credence to that viewpoint.
1st off the Feds will stack and rack charges and just go down the list. The feds dont lose, they might lose the first round, BUT WHEN THE BELL RINGS FOR THE SCOND, you are going down like a crackwhore on the 1st and 15th of the month.
Jail VS Prison,,, STFU huge and i mean huge difference,
But if you are going to do time, REAL TIME do fed time. The rights you do have are better and so is the food and living conditions, not to mention a better class of criminals.
The feds come at you in hopes of you rolling over like a puppy and pissing all over yourself turning on your co-horts if you will.
For the most part, tough guys in prison dont really make it out to well, they are too fucking loud and the one thing about prison is Politics, see this is real politics, not like the shit you have in Goverment, this is the kind of stuff that takes 30minutes to see who gets green lighted or who pays what.
White Collar crimes and those that do em, depending on the crime Well, they might not do so well inside,
Crimes against the elderly
Crimes against Kids
Crimes against Females
These are just a couple as we all have or had Grand Parents, Kids and sister and so on.
There are all kinds of folks that are green lit, Oh sure FCI and Camps are nice, untill a guy that is finishing up a 20plus stint shows up for his last 12 months to adjust and he needs something, or you think it cool to dispect him in even a minor way, the guards look the other way and you get fucking booked.
Prison is alot of things, but the one thing IT'S NOT,, is cool. Prison is not cool. From USP FLORENCE on down to the half way house,
The whole thing is set up for you to fail and if you do fail, the fuckers win again and you find yourself asking for your job back at UNICOR (Federal Prison Industries' ) if you are lucky..
These folks mentioned in this case are going down no question, as for using a public pretender (public defender) you might as well start doing what you can to be a self-surrender and get started on serving time, Public Defenders has no juice with Federal Prosecutor's , there will be no working with them UNLESS the lead Fed knows for a fact that you have information that brings other arrests and so on and so fourth..
P.S. once you start trial or making a plea, SEND money on your books right away and NEVER have more than a couple 100$$ at a time, Dont be stupid, get into a routine and stay with it and when doing Fed time, or State time, Do not get caught up in politics, Let the Shot Callers, the OG's and soldiers handle it,, Do your time and dont let it do you..
If you do decide to rat and live the life of a piece of shit, then to get to a Cheese Factory, where you live in the rat colony with the rest of cocksuckers
respect starts at 120 months, anything else is just passing thru
Transaction declined
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
We thank you for your purchase!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!