Except the government has been sued for this type of event and the plaintiffs have won nice settlements.
The government and policing authorities have legal requirements for protecting such information. Government immunity is not some carte blanch get out jail free card you seem to think it is.
Search for this headline on NBC News:
"Business is booming, until today," 3 charged with running sex ring with wealthy clients in Massachusetts, Virginia
.
"BOSTON - Three people were arrested Wednesday for allegedly operating a high-end brothel network out of apartment complexes in Cambridge, Watertown and Virginia. "This commercial sex ring was built on secrecy and exclusivity, catering to wealthy and well-connected clientele," the acting U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts said in a news conference in Boston. ..."
.
"They allegedly operated through two websites, reporting to advertise nude Asian models for professional photography at upscale studios as a front for prostitution. The three rented high-end apartments in Cambridge, Watertown and eastern Virginia as brothels, prosecutors said. ..."
.
In the meantime, this is a story from a few months ago:
http://www.nbcboston.com/news/politics/mass-lawmakers-weigh-bills-to-decriminalize-prostitution/3047780/
Mass. Lawmakers Weigh Bills to Decriminalize Prostitution
One bill under consideration in Massachusetts would decriminalize prostitution while maintaining legal consequences for pimps and johns; another would legalize the sex trade entirely
Published May 17, 2023, Updated on May 19, 2023 at 2:54 pm
.
"Prostitution would be decriminalized in Massachusetts under bills discussed before the Judiciary Committee this week, though there is a deep divide among sex workers and activists about how far that decriminalization should go. ..."
.
(I put this on K-girl because that was the target of this bust. If you think this should be moved to Legal, go ahead and ask TER to move it there.)
-- Modified on 11/8/2023 6:13:13 AM
It the talk on a few boards. Check the post from rocket on the DC board. The link he provided includes a line to the affidavit submitted. Interesting read on many levels.
CNN just did a story on it. They said that the high end ring were at DC, Boston, and even California. They stated the cost of services were around $350 to $600. No clientele list released. CN don’t think the clientele list will be released.
"The buyers are neither named nor charged at this point, but Levy emphasized that the investigation is just getting started. He noted that authorities are executing multiple search warrants in Massachusetts, California, and Virginia."
So does this mean that
1) all these buyers who talked to police weren't arrested/detained and just were persuaded give cops the info
2) other org places can be ransacked in near future
3) Johns are off the hook for now but not necessarily in the near future
Stay safe bros and gals. Might be dark times ahead.
Californians should be careful. The current Governor is most-likely going to run for president in the future. Busting K-Girl agencies in SoCal and NorCal would be a huge win for Christian voters.
A lot of Christian voters who would vote based on this issue probably aren't too likely to vote for him.
There is no way that Republican Christian fundamentalists would ever vote for Gavin Newsom. He is - in their view - wrong on abortion, guns, and gays and would presumably continue to be that way or risk being viewed as a traitor by Democrats and have a bad history by Republicans. Busting a few nice Korean ladies wont change that.
They would much prefer a hypocrite like Rep. Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee who is a serial sexual predator who took advantage of patients and staff as a doctor and medical administrator, and takes the view that abortion should be banned except for his wife and mistresses (and presumably any SBs or providers he has on the side - but they are at least presumably unpressured and consenting). Whatever his behavior, he votes the way Mitch McConnell and the MAGA House leaderships wants him to on abortion and Supreme Court justices just like their hypocritical MAGA leader. Because of this, DesJarlais keeps getting re-elected.
This whole subthread really belongs in the Politics and Religion forum as a separate posting.
Seem to me that most of the info came from a bust back in 2020 (I think someone has suggested the BL one here in DMV). Moreover, seems the a number of these buyers were interviewed long before the actual bust so I'm really curious about how that worked.
My take on the comment quoted, and the overall affidavit, is that they are much more interested in making this something of an "organized crime gets shutdown" than doing anything with any customers. Moreover, they would need to have some pretty damning evidence still available in the form of texts (which may well exists in archives of the telcos) but if all they have is a phone number in a contacts DB that is not going get anyone to court or even a visit. Does not seem like they attempted to take over the place to collect customers as they showed up for their appointments. They listed about 12 locations across three states and some known associates so multiple warrants would be expected.
The personal information of the clients COULD get posted. Just a thought.
By whom? I don't think the police would unless they have actually charged the person. Just look at the redaction in the publicly available affidavit.
Too much of a legal risk to release the list of Johns. It's just a detailed list at this point. People weren't caught in the act or admitted to anything. People on the list might sue the government for negatively impacting their personal/professional life if the list was ever released.
.
Deliberate leak is a different story though.....
Government has qualified immunity. You're not going to be able to "sue the government" because you got investigated or charged. That's the most silly thing I've ever heard. They have a right to investigate, indict, and try you in a court of law. If you're found not-guilty you just walk. You can't file a civil action for the inconvenience.
Except the government has been sued for this type of event and the plaintiffs have won nice settlements.
The government and policing authorities have legal requirements for protecting such information. Government immunity is not some carte blanch get out jail free card you seem to think it is.
Can you point me to a lawsuit where a suspect of a crime sued the government, bypassed qualified immunity, and won? Because when people are arrested, the PD Public Relations people release this information to the news and their name and photo is on TV. It's deemed there is a public interest that we don't have secret courts and secret charges in the US.
Why would I try to find that given that was not the claim. The claim was that those whose information gets collected during an investigation but are never directly charged with anything, and so never get their chance in court, enjoy the the presumption of innocence standard in our legal system. Releasing such personal information without ever charging the person is a violation of the due process protections in our legal system. Agents and officers know this as do all the people in their chain of command so doing something like that is rather rare. So anyone who has not been formally charged with a crime enjoy the right to privacy and police and other legal agencies have an obligation to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the information in their possession.
Again -- good job at creating a straw man to argue against rather than confronting the actual claim I made.
I suppose I'm feeling bored though. Since there was no way I would remember the details of some random news story that caught my interest 5 + years ago, a short time with ChatGTP produces (not particularly the 2018 case in Texas) Note, the lead in question related to personal information that came to light during investigation but the specific person was never charged:
"Yes, there are a number of known cases where people have filed civil suits against the police department for releasing their personal information without their consent and won their case. Here are a few examples:
In 2019, a woman in California won a $1.2 million settlement from the Los Angeles Police Department after they released her name and address to the media in connection with an investigation into a crime that she was not involved in.
In 2018, a man in Texas won a $1.1 million settlement from the Houston Police Department after they released his name and photo to the media in connection with an investigation into a crime that he was not charged with.
In 2017, a woman in Illinois won a $900,000 settlement from the Chicago Police Department after they released her name and address to the media in connection with an investigation into a crime that she was not involved in.
These are just a few examples, and there are many other cases where people have won lawsuits against the police department for releasing their personal information without their consent.
In addition to civil suits, there have also been a number of cases where people have filed complaints with the police department's internal affairs division for releasing their personal information without their consent. In many of these cases, the internal affairs investigation has found that the police officer violated the department's policy on the release of personal information. As a result, the police officer has been disciplined or even fired."
So you're conflating police department policy with the law. A police department can make a policy that you must smile every time you write a citation. But there is no legal requirement to do so.
No law is in place that prevents PD from releasing a suspect's information who is wanted in connection with a crime. They don't need to be charged later, they can just be wanted for questioning or labeled a person of interest.
People get interviewed by law enforcement all the time. If someone gets a DUI and was going to one of these places, they'll talk about it. If someone gets arrested for something else, they'll talk about it. If they have good information to give, they work out a deal where they provide HSI with information and those screenshots in the affidavit in exchange for making another charge go away or get the penalty reduced.
They have at least one confidential source who was talking to the main suspect about renting a location out. So that's probably someone who HSI nailed for something else and now they're a source and cooperating as part of their deal. I disagree that a phone number "won't even get a visit." It's not too hard to just comb the directory and see if you can stir anything up. Most people don't want these kinds of problems in their personal lives so it's easy to get some witnesses in exchange for keeping everything off the public record and quiet.
Well their main source for a lot of the information is that Korean woman who was busted on federal charges in 2020 and has since done a whole lot of work for law enforcement. She's been allowed to stay in the US as well as long as she keeps funneling information and recorded phone calls up the chain. That's right around the time their investigation and surveillance kicked off, which doesn't surprise me. I guess she'd do anything not to get deported and be sent back to Korea.
It looks like they've already identified a lot of the providers from digging through the trash and finding the boarding passes and other things that name them. It's pretty easy for HSI to contact them and basically tell them to either cooperate with the investigations or they can be charged, deported, and be banned from re-entry. Most will cooperate because they can testify as victims of coercion and inducement.
It's pretty clear that the 3 named suspects in the affidavit are looking at 50 years in prison I'd say. When DOJ indicts, it will probably be human trafficking, wire fraud, bank fraud, mail fraud, conspiracy charges, and money laundering. That 30 year-old guy is basically done for life unless he can cut some kind of a deal and only get 12 years.
I think you're mistaken about people not being arrested or detained. Typically HSI is going to work with local PD to identify people. When you're coming out of the building they can easily bring you over to a car down the street or have local PD pull you over. Then you get a choice to cooperate on the spot or get taken down to county jail where you can sit for a couple of days where you may or may not be charged with anything. Most people have to be at work in the morning or have a family they live with so it's easier to just give the information and phone screenshots and then they can go. If they want to be TER tough guys, they can spend the night in jail and have law enforcement contact their spouse or their workplace about an ongoing criminal investigation regarding human trafficking. 99% of people are going to just come clean. Might get a couple of elderly holdouts who don't have a job and have no one at home waiting for them who decide they want to ride out the weekend in jail. They'd pay a retainer fee and then get let go with no charges filed, a $2,500 attorney bill, and a jail experience, but most won't do that.
I think that Confidential Source is not even close to being done doing more recorded phone calls and information. I also think pretty much all of the providers they identified from the trash searches and video surveillance will also come clean to avoid any immigration ban. I think a very valuable lesson here, and one I've repeated here for what, 10-15 years now, is do not under any circumstance accept any kind of money from a provider, don't drive them anywhere, do not do anything that would have you in receipt of earnings from prostitution or be someone who is inducing, enticing, or persuading someone to commit prostitution. That's what makes it go from solicitation into felony territory and federal charges. So these clowns who talk about "moving in together" with their provider girlfriend need a serious wake-up call. Guys "counting the money" or "giving rides" need to really not do that unless they're ok with that risk. All it takes is for a "girlfriend" to decide she wants immigration status and now you're her pimp who coerced her into sex with strangers for money. Or not even her, but some other random person like the Confidential Source to implicate you in some way and you're finished. An attorney who knows federal court is going to be $800/hr easy. So even if no charges get filed and it goes away, that's not exactly free. Drafting a simple motion for dismissal is probably $4,000 just in paperwork. Not counting how somehow it takes an attorney 3 billable hours to read 2 pages of documents.
"I think you're mistaken about people not being arrested or detained. Typically HSI is going to work with local PD to identify people. When you're coming out of the building they can easily bring you over to a car down the street or have local PD pull you over. Then you get a choice to cooperate on the spot or get taken down to county jail where you can sit for a couple of days where you may or may not be charged with anything. Most people have to be at work in the morning or have a family they live with so it's easier to just give the information and phone screenshots and then they can go. If they want to be TER tough guys, they can spend the night in jail and have law enforcement contact their spouse or their workplace about an ongoing criminal investigation regarding human trafficking. 99% of people are going to just come clean. Might get a couple of elderly holdouts who don't have a job and have no one at home waiting for them who decide they want to ride out the weekend in jail. They'd pay a retainer fee and then get let go with no charges filed, a $2,500 attorney bill, and a jail experience, but most won't do that"
I don't think this is about being a TER tough guy, it's about knowing your rights and be able to stand up for yourself. Instead these dudes just snitched in a situation they didn't have to.
"When you're coming out of the building they can easily bring you over to a car down the street or have local PD pull you over.
You don't have to tell the cops a single thing. To arrest you, they need a warrant. In California, you don't even to have to identify yourself if you aren't driving a motorized vehicle and are not under arrest. A detainment will not lead you to spend a night in jail.
There are many reasons I've always tried to park at least a block away from the apartment, and one of them is if such situation occurs I'm not talking to cops but I'm also not going back to my car so they can tail me and then pull me over for some bs, where they have more power.
So you're wrong about a couple of things. First of all, a warrant is not required for an arrest. Just a suspicion that you committed a crime. A warrant is required to grab you out of your home or place of work, but if you're out in public and the police have probable cause, you can be arrested and held without charge for several days.
As for not needing to identify yourself, when you get a driver's license in CA you agree to follow the California Vehicle Code. In the Vehicle Code it says you have to present your driver's license when asked. Failure to do so means the DMV can suspend your license (if you have one). Driving without a license is another crime.
A detainment does mean you spend the night in jail if you're arrested at night and you can't realistically be arraigned or charged until the following day. If you're busted at 9pm, people don't get phone calls dragging them out of bed to come down at 11pm and draw up a criminal complaint, call a judge away, and have them do a midnight hearing. That's not how this works.
You can choose not to talk to cops and they can choose to put cuffs on you and put you in the back of a car for an hour while they try to identify you. Lots of guys talk tough, but they don't understand all the things law enforcement can do to mess with you that have about zero recourse. Have you even been to jail before? I've been several times. Most of the TER tough guy talk is people who've not really been to jail so they don't really understand how much power law enforcement actually has. It's not like TV where you say some magic words and the police say "Oh man, Rocket got us man! He knows his rights! Guess we can't touch him!!" They just laugh and take you in. Especially if it's a federal investigation and HSI is upset? Yeah that's not fun dude.
If the cops are going to arrest you, then talking is not going to stop arrest. Nothing good can come of talking. Be polite and ask for a lawyer. Otherwise, politely ask if you can leave.
That's not true. The 20+ guys who got interviewed by HSI walking out of the locations did not get arrested. So talking did actually stop an arrest because HSI is investigating trafficking, money laundering, and wire fraud. They're not investigating solicitation. A lot of times if you don't play ball, especially if it's federal, you'll ask for that lawyer and they'll say "No problem" and put the cuffs on you, take you down to the jail, book you, and let you sit in there for a day or so, you'll get the lawyer, pay the retainer fee, and they can just let you go without charge.
They know attorneys aren't free and they know most people need to make it to work the next day. "I was in jail" isn't exactly something that helps career longevity. They'll make sure you spend the maximum amount of money and have the maximum inconvenience for hampering their investigation. They are also more than happy to locate your spouse or adult kids and tell them to come get you from the jail because you've been in arrested in connection with a trafficking case frequenting buildings under surveillance. So there's that too.
Lots of guys talk tough on TER, but when those cuffs come on and it's already 8pm on a Friday night, the reality sets in really quick that you can be done with this in about 5 minutes or this can take 2 days and thousands of dollars in legal fees. Lawyer helps you not get charged with a crime or beat a charge. Lawyer doesn't help avoid your marriage going in the gutter, your job firing you, or people you know casting you out of social circles. That's not their job.
As someone pointed out some time back, police are trained to gather evidence and they are not talking to you for your benefit. They are talking to you for a reason and their question are aimed at getting you to say something they can use. STFU other than polite acknowledgement and confirmation as to your status -- are you you being arrested or otherwise detained or are you free to get on with your life.
It still boggles my mind thinking about how these interviews might have gone to get the information claimed to have been divulged.
I couldn't agree any more with you Jensen.
NOTHING good will come out from ANYONE talking to the cops. Even cops themselves say this. Even if you're innocent. And if you're guilty - for christ's sake just dont talk to the cops.
The funniest thing there - is that they have those mongers confessions and can indict them anytime they want even though they let them go for now.
Ive posted this video on this site before and I will again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
This whole video is excellent, including the cop saying he can follow someone on car legally and eventually they will do something illegal and he can pull them over. That's why walking off on foot is paramount if you think you're being trailed/followed or police is watching you.
The cop starts talking at around 27 minutes in
That's local PD. That's not FBI or HSI. When the FBI is doing an anti-terror case, or HSI is doing a trafficking case, or the DOJ is doing a wire fraud case, they don't care about your misdemeanor. They want information. They have unlimited resources to make your life a living hell.
The idea that nothing good comes of it is silly because we know that HSI's main source got HUGE benefits like immigration benefits, reduced sentencing, and all kinds of good stuff from talking and participating in the investigation. It's funny how guys all over the internet talk big about some street code, but then in real life over 90% of cases are solved because people cooperate.
This whole case would not exist without that informant. And the whole reason the informant exists is because yes, indeed, talking pays. Cooperating pays. If it didn't, no one would do it.
I'm just curious, how many times have you been to jail?
The informant - from what I gather - is far more likely to be a kgirl or an org contributor than an actual monger. They had deep "insider" info related to korg workings.
"The idea that nothing good comes of it is silly because we know that HSI's main source got HUGE benefits like immigration benefits, reduced sentencing, and all kinds of good stuff from talking and participating in the investigation. "
lol. I almost guarantee you that most of those "cooperating" have been just walked to and talked to and they spilled the beans. they have nothing on them, not even evidence of exchanging money for sex. about the biggest charge they can pin you on is frequencing a bawdy place. Class 1 misdemeanor at most. Get the hell out of here.
This isnt street code, literally law enforcement telling you do not talk to the LEOs without lawyer. And walk if youre not arrested or detained. It's so simple a caveman could do it. But here you are telling the mongers to spill beans. They self-incriminated themselves voluntarily. How stupid was it ? Very.
What does me being in jail have to do with anything ? Zero. Zero times. And I hope to keep it this way.
I've been to jail more than 5 times and it's awful. Avoiding going to jail is highly beneficial. Most people I know who have been to jail feel the exact same way. Unless you're being asked to testify against a friend or relative, most people will do anything to just go home and not go to jail. Which is exactly what happened in the cases of the people giving law enforcement information. And I can almost guarantee you that if someone didn't cooperate, then HSI told local PD to book them to just make their lives a living hell for the next 24 hours. Might be 7-8 hours before you can use a phone at all.
DOJ will often tie someone up just to get them to waste their money on legal fees. They know someone who litigates in federal court is $800/hr so they'll just bring you in repeatedly to make you rack up billable hours. Your attorney certainly likes it. And they think it's funny.
I see, you try to play the whole "tell them everything and self-incriminate yourself because jail is so scary".
Thats how cops play people into self-snitching.
One more time, heres a flowchart:
1. cops come up to talk to you.
2. ask if youre arrested if yes -> exercise your miranda right to silence and ask for an attorney. you will be away anyway. Talk to them only after consulting your attorney
3. if youre not arrested, ask if you can leave if no ->refuse to talk without lawyer present. a detainment will not last more than a few hours typically
4. if youre neither arrested nor detained you chalk up the deuce and walk away
the cops of course will try get information and they're good at it. the only words you need to say is "lawyer" until you're given one.
My educated guess is majority of these twenty mongers were not arrested and may have not even been detained. They just moving their mouths and confessing.
The smart guy says alright fine, here it is, and he goes home to sleep in his bed. The TER tough guy says "lawyer, lawyer" and gets sent to jail where he's sexually assaulted but hopefully not stabbed, has an attorney who invoices him for 5 hours of work at $600/hr, and then waits around for 2 months wondering if he'll be charged with anything. Lawyer keeps invoicing for that $600/hr every single time he answers the phone or sees an email from the TER tough guy. Charges are never filed, but TER tough guy needs therapy for his jailhouse assault and injuries.
That's how that works. You have a very television-like perception of how the cops work and what happens in jail. You've never been there so I'm not sure where you're getting the image from. I'm guessing television and movies, so I'll just go ahead and tell you that works of fiction are not going to give you an accurate picture.
TPR, Are you sure you're not in Law Enforcement yourself ? Or maybe you are one of the people who talked ? Just asking.
I have NEVER seen someone so ardent about self-incriminating themselves.
"we know why you're in there. We don't care about sex for money. We care about trаfficking and money lаundering. Just confirm what we already know and then get out of here. If not, local PD is going to take you into custody, process you, you'll sleep in jail, and we'll call your family and tell them where you are."
Please follow the flowchart. Ask if you're under аrrest. Yes ? Then I'll take my lawyer and I will exercise my right to council and my right to remain silent. I dont care if youre the FB_I with a 99.999999% conviction rate. I dont care if you're CI_A, KG_B or CC_P. My answer will be the same to all law enforcement within the United Stаtes.
Meanwhile I will not talk without a lawyer. If money is a concern - to me 600 dollars is not a problem - I'll go for a public defender. I'm single so who they gonna call ? My elderly parents ? Lol.
Repeat with me:
I. Will. Not. Self-incriminate. Myself.
Tell you what, while I havent been in Jail, I have been confronted by police elsewhere. Im talking about corrupt third world countries who dont care I have an american passport.
You know how I did there ? Just fine. Even without knowing their language. When people realize they have no leverage and are met with confidence of someone who isnt afraid to call their bluff, they tend to back off. Pumping feаr only works on people who feаr something or someone. Kinda like what you're talking about jail.
Now, nowhere did it say that any johns - or kgirls for that matter - were аrrested.
Some kgirls that were at boston agency already back elsewhere working. you think they talked too ?
-- Modified on 11/9/2023 8:58:16 PM
-- Modified on 11/9/2023 8:59:06 PM
I'm not saying you should just freely talk if the police are investigating the crime you committed. I'm saying if someone is hurting little kids inside that building, or there are hostages, and all you did was some misdemeanor and you wanna be a tough guy, they'll make sure you pay a price for that. HSI does not care about solicitation. So wanting a $3k legal bill plus 2 nights in jail for absolutely no reason is stupid.
All you presented is even more boogeyman. Be scared of hail, therefore you must confess. Which is about the worst advice you can give.
While the investigation is federal, buying sex is a misdemeanor and is at discretion of a state.
There is no way a customer wont be charged with anything higher than that. Obstruction of justice is the only charge I can think of. And that will come after you confer with your lawyer and decide what you want to talk about.
Most cops and law enforcement just wanna talk to you and use their position of power and fear to hear what they want to hear.
You know what is more likely to happen imo? That the feds who had surveillance for days wouldnt bother with one monger who wouldn't spill the beans right way. They could get through dozens of others who will cooperate much easier. Than to waste time.
I don't recommend anyone self-incriminates themselves simply because they want it to be over with. It's dumb and doesn't do anythimg good for you. Imagine you're one of the mongers who gave the info and you realized you could've have walked.
The affidavit is a document but it is also a sworn upon document. So anything in there should be truthful. They may play an angle there, and withhold some info. But what's in there should be truthful
Once again, your point revolves around fear of jail, which is what all cops want you to have. Plenty of celebrities, athletes, etc ended up being held in custody for something briefly.
They lived just fine.
And again, there's a huge chance those clients wouldn't even arrested and would be free to leave if they just asked. A lot of people have the irrational fear of cops so they just spill the beans immediately.
Self-incriminaiton is a terrible advice. Using convenience, discomfort and fear of jail as justification for self-incrimination is incredibly stupid imo. But you do you.
Whats crazy to me is that none of the interviewed clients cared enough to let people in private groups etc know that this was happening. There would be a way to relay this info. And if we're being honest the POs arrested goofed up when they were pulled over by the cops and didn't bat an eyelid. In fact, they seemed oblivious and not very careful about potential surveillance.
Now, Rocket’s suggesting that the 20 men referred to in the affidavit, cooperating witnesses, should have then committed a felony and impeded said investigation.
It's not a felony to refuse to answer questions. It's just dumb unless you're equipped to handle some jail time which would be payback for you giving HSI a hard time.
Rocket told us he basically has zero people in his personal life who care about him and he's ok with thousands of dollars in legal bills. But I think he's like old and he wouldn't last long in jail in Los Angeles. Something like 85% of the inmates are gang-affiliated and Rocket is like in his 60s or something. He's never actually been to jail, so he has no clue what he'd be in for. Which is why he can easily talk tough like jail is no problem because he's never been. He'd get absolutely demolished in jail which can have lifetime repercussions both physically and psychologically. You'd need to be like 60 and below and in tip top shape to be that confident. Anything less and you can get seriously injured. Let alone the trauma if they decide to humiliate you in jail which tends to happen to wannabe tough guys who think they can handle a gang of 22 year-old hardened criminals and you're eligible for Social Security.
Honestly I have no clue where all that confidence comes from. Can't be from anything real, that's for sure.
Cks, I didn't suggest we'd inform the org publicly or via text to a phone that are wired.
Obviously, you have to have some private group and some insiders.
It wasn't an advice either. I wouldn't advise doing that actually, unlike my advice to avoid self-incrimination.
I'm just amazed that with the fervor which people defend orgs none of them had the balls to try insider channels to at least top some ppl off.
"I'm just amazed that with the fervor which people defend orgs none of them had the balls to try insider channels to at least top some ppl off. "
I agree with both the observation that spreading the word about any non-publicly known investigation will likely be seen as interference with the investigation so chargeable and that one might expect some to spread the word. However, I think the above inference is flawed as it's relying on a very small sample size.
Second, someone did post something about big things going on but everyone largely assumed they had either passed on or that it was a bit of crying wolf when no wolf was present. I have no idea if the earlier warning had any knowledge of this particular type of investigation going on. But I also don't know that this federal case was not the reason for the warning.
What I am pretty sure of is that pretty much EVERYONE hates a snitch who provides information that might impact what one or the other side is doing -- in other words, which ever side is harmed by the disclosure of information really wants to get even. So I would think that anyone trying to warn others would do so very carefully. That means we will always have a problem of asymmetric information and trying to figure out when the warning about the wolf is real and when it's just someone (to mix things up) being chicken little claiming the sky is falling or playing a prank on others by calling wolf for any minor LE activity.
Like I've said obstruction of justice is a real charge there. And I wouldn't expect it to be anyone from mongers, so out of twenty chances were they weren't insiders or had some means of 100% safe warning.
Also agree with you on the boy who cried wolf construct. Actually I can see a lot of it now when people are paranoid right now after busts.
I'm not really trying to blame anyone here really or accuse anyone. Tbh, the org brass - ie the two POs and the lease guy - did not take great precautions and brushed off the strategic cop stops as trivial.
I think Rocket is kind of an edge case. He's in his 30s but is open that if he went missing for 2 days no one at all would care. I kind of feel bad for the guy. I'm not in my 30s anymore, but I matter to a lot of people. People would be looking for me if I just vanished. Rocket doesn't have that. He doesn't matter to anyone.
I thought before he is just some internet tough guy, but now it's apparent he's kind of a really sad case. I really do feel bad for him because if you're in your 30s (and he says looks 20s) and already you don't matter to anyone, that's going to be a lonely road if he lives into his 60s. He has 40 more years of being alone and not mattering to anyone of consequence. That's rough.
Huh? In my sixties? I'm in my thirties. And most people think I'm in late 20s.
Once again, plenty of people weaker, older etc than me have been jailed.
Did just fine.
Once again, there a very good chance they wouldn't even arrest you. Because when one monger outside of twenty won't talk, it's path of least resistance to get another monger who will talk rather than deal with someone who knows their rights and won't give into fear pumping.
Your point - once again - devlolves into "jail scary therefore you must talk". This is exactly what cops would do. Cops have a million ways to try to make you talk voluntarily. All of which can be avoided at least initially by simply invoking right to counsel and right to remain silent.
I already posted on this story on the GD board. I posted a quote from the US Attorney and then my opinion about the situation.
-- Modified on 11/10/2023 1:14:41 AM
TP Romeo, is what do you think are the innocuous questions that a guy leaving the incall could/would be asked that are harmless to him, at least at that time?
Harmless, because he would be let go.
And, all this anti-terror, sex trafficking and wire fraud, what's a Monger gonna' know about any of that?
What legal right do they have to look at your phone?
I actually never carry one!
Keep in mind, when you're a doctor, or have a security clearance, or you're in charge of something at work, you can't just go missing for 1-2 days while you're in jail for something silly. You have obligations and people who depend on you. So like I said previously, if you don't work, don't have a family, don't have loved ones, and have a lot of money, yeah I guess if you're also physically fit you can just risk the jail time and hope you don't get stabbed by gang members inside, but 99% of guys don't fit that description around here.
but I just asked a couple of simple questions.
Didn't need the repetitive stuff that you put out, way too much IMO.
Just wondered how you would answer my post, most of this stuff is common sense to me.
I think this is one of the really interesting areas. The bust does seem to be at the federal level and the interest is not really in the area of prostitution but the related federal level stuff. If FBI, DHS, SS (Treasury) or Federal DOJ are running the show what are the real risks related to the customer contact file? How much of an incentive do they have to disclose (even if there might actually be a requirement to share) such data to other agencies?
As for who you do or don't talk with depends on a lot of factors but I would certainly be very hesitant to talk about illegal activities without some legally reviewed and signed document granting me immunity and confidentiality related to any potential crimes or self-incrimination. But in general it's best to be very guarded in what you say to any law enforcement agents. Probably the best discussions to have are "What am I being detained for?", "Am I free to go now?", "I don't think it is wise for me to say anything more without legal advice from my attorney". Just do it all politely and in a calm, non-confrontational tone.
That said, I do agree that in general when legal agencies are investigation the things they think are most important and in their primary area of operation they tend not to care much about misdemeanors. Funny story from a past "life" of mine many years ago.
Get up one morning about 10 AM and just making some coffee to start the day. Someone shows up at the front door, before I've even had my first cup. Go open the door and a DOD investigator is there holding his ID up and asks if he can talk with me about one of my neighbors who is undergoing one of the periodic review investigations for a clearance renewal. I'm like, don't really know the guy but sure if you want lets have a chat. As I'm starting to suggest we go sit in the living room I notice that there is a bong on the side table. I think "well that's not good" so suggest I was just making coffee and lets sit in the kitchen. Go down the hall, away from the living room area, to the kitchen.
Well, shit. On the kitchen table is mirror, a razor blade and a rollup bill, and probably some like remains of the cocaine still on the mirror and rolled bill. The investigator is already there so no way to hide or avoid it. I say, "Let me just move this out of the way for you." He didn't even bat an eye. We finish the interview and he goes his way. Not that it would really matter at this point I then notice that where he was sitting at the kitchen table has a clear view of the bong through the door to the living room. Sigh.
I spend the rest of the day and some of the next wondering when perhaps the cops will show up with a warrant to have a look around. Never happens. May days of hanging out and partying with friends continues until I decide I want different type of life.
Now, I suspect that outcome was to some extent due to the individual. Someone else, perhaps with a real objection of drugs might have passed the tip on to the local police. But some disincentives in terms of paperwork and getting dragged away from a primary mission to answer question and give testimony that might be a bit frowned upon by higher ups in the organization he worked at likely were present as well.
This is just terrible advice.
"The answer will be "Yep, you're being detained and arrested in connection with a human trafficking investigation since you don't want to cooperate. " At which point you should definitely STFU and get your attorney to negotiate you position and give advice. Whoever is arresting you has absolutely NO INTEREST in considering your best options.
BTW, none of this occurred in LA, or even less California. If you're being arrested by federal agents you'll be transferred to the custody of the Federal Marshals Service which may or may not use a local county or state jail. But on what basis is the federal agent arresting these people they collect? The customers are not involved in any of the crimes like money transfers or trafficking so the fed investigation has no real interest in them, and that is a point you've repeatedly been making.
Beginning to think you do have a hidden agenda here.
the rest is a bunch of shifting BS to make you sound like you know anything.
Rocket was wrong though. 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. Clearly not on the basis of you outstanding command of criminal or Constitutional law.
That help? As you can see, they don't need a slam-dunk case to send you to jail for the night.
So now let's compare TER tough guys who have NEVER been to jail a single time talk about how they would handle it. They have zero clue. They watch Youtube videos and take guesses.
Have you ever been to jail?
-- Modified on 11/11/2023 9:12:42 AM
LOL
No, I've never gone to jail but I have been detained by the cops on several occasions. I would also suspect that the majority of people posting here will have no problem posting bail -- we're not all living and playing in trailer parks.
Of the times I was detained and questions only once did I self-incriminate myself there was indisputable evidence of the crime and not fessing up would have meant two other people who were completely innocent would be dragged in. But that situation was a bit different than cops questioning some John on suspicion of paying for sex while investigating some sex trafficking case. Another time, when the cops stopped me because they suspected I was in a car they had been chasing (I was not) I could have cracked and confess about the 1/8 gram of coke in my pocket. They asked for ID, I showed it. They asked if I was just in the car they were chasing. I said no. They started pressuring me with "things will be a lot worse if later we find you were" to which I said if someone accuses I want to meet them (i.e., right to confront my accuser). They decided I was free to go at that point.
But one thing is certain. Pretty much any of the "elite" customers in MA or VA we're going to be able to post bail easily and not pose some high risk of fleeing. Moreover, if, as you claim, they were going to be charged for trafficking and they know they are merely customers they absolutely do want to talk with their lawyer. First, the shift in charge is huge and second any decent attorney is going to eat the DA (should they be careless enough to move to that stage) and the cops lunch at the initial hearing.
So please stop pretending that everyone else is in your shoes, lacks money and needs to throw away their legal protections from such predatory behavior by cops and other investigators. That is exactly WHY we have these legal rights.
If you're being investigated, yeah, stay silent. But if you're just some throwaway client out of 100 for them to make a wire fraud case? Don't bother being a tough guy, just make it home where you can sleep in your bed instead of fighting in your cell for a blanket and a space not on the floor.
So "cops" meaning local PD is one thing. HSI is another. HSI is federal. They operate differently. You can ask for a lawyer and they can "sure thing", cuff you, and throw you in jail.
HSI is not investigating solicitation. They're investigating money laundering, trafficking, fraud, etc.
It's like if the FBI thinks there's a terrorist in the building you left and instead of cooperating with an anti-terror investigation you ask for an attorney and some jail time because of a possible solicitation charge. It's just disconnected from reality.
If "nothing good came of talking" then tell that to the Confidential Source who is assisting HSI who didn't get deported, got to get immigration status in the US, and avoiding a lengthy prison sentence for cooperating. Talking is helping her out tremendously.
Anyone who decides to talk should do so after being represented by an attorney when that attorney thinks it is a good time to do so. The attorney will work out whatever benefits a cooperator gets (assuming the atty thinks its a good idea to cooperate in the first place). Even if you are familiar with whatever situation you're in, and have an idea of what you should ask for; it should be done through a proxy. Whatever you say or don't say can and will be used against you. Even during negotiations during the cooperation arrangement, whatever you say can burn you. There is a huge difference between a potential target/subject of an investigation asking for a deal out of their own mouths and an a knowledgeable legal representative working out a deal for them. You aren't a target or subject? Well, blabbering can turn you into one in 0.1 seconds.
You are giving very bad advice.
The above is just general information that is available widely and should not be misconstrued as legal advice because it is not legal advice.
Yes you can be arrested on probable cause without warrant. And if you are you won't be able to talk your way out of it. Hence why you never talk to the cops.
"As for not needing to identify yourself, when you get a driver's license in CA you agree to follow the California Vehicle Code. "
This is false. http://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/do-i-have-to-identify-myself-to-police-in-california/
You do not need to identify yourself unless you're arrested or are driving a vehicle. This means you can walk off on foot unless they arrest you or detain you. And detainment without arrest should not last a day.
If you're arrested yes you can be held for 48 hours without charges. If you're arrested get your lawyer. And don't talk to the cops.
Detainment in this situation would be arrest because they have probable cause that you're visiting someone for commercial sex and might be involved in an HSI trafficking investigation. That's way more than enough to send you to LA County Jail.
Again, this idea of "Just get arrested, pay the $3,000 retainer, and get out of jail after 2 days" is something 99% of people here would not be willing to do. It's easy to sit on the TER forums and talk tough about just doing jail rotations without sweating it, but most people start hyperventilating when the cuffs go on and will do anything to get out of it. This means telling HSI what they want to know about their trafficking investigation. They don't care about a solicitation charge.
As for not needing to identify yourself, when you get a driver's license in CA you agree to follow the California Vehicle Code. In the Vehicle Code it says you have to present your driver's license when asked. Failure to do so means the DMV can suspend your license (if you have one).
.
California may argue that you need to show it if you're driving, as evidence you're entitled to drive. But a.) that's not the same as cops approaching someone walking down the street, and b.) even then, I suspected the Supreme Court would say you need to have committed a traffic violation for the cops to demand to see your ID.
I find this funny how people think cops are just completely brainless. Maybe that's what was on the TV when you were watching it daily, but that's not really reality. Especially HSI. HSI is a lot of ex-military. They know how to mess with you if it seems like you're going way beyond looking out for yourself and you're trying to jam up law enforcement. These aren't like a lot of FBI who wear glasses and were in the Beta club. These guys are more hardcore and have less patience.
Now that LA bookers seem to be booking everyone I miss the smaller boomers that only booked for 3 girls or so. Mow these guys are getting big and are making for a nice target.
The affidavit is very interesting to read. On affidavit 104, it looks like that buying food or groceries, driving these girls for transport, anything that helping these girl living in US are considered as "coercive tactics" to force girls do sex work.
On page 41, it stated that they have a CS (confidential source) that help them to investigate the case since 2020. The CS is a Korean lady who doesn't speak much English, and apparently is one of the persons that organize or manage the korgs because it states that the CS was involved in arranging the girls moving from Los Angeles to Boston. It's very likely that the CS is familiar with many korgs in Los Angeles where has most of the girls working.
Since this investigation is still ongoing and at the federal level, it's interesting to know how much they would like to investigate more and how many more people they would like to arrest? This would be a super easy case to investigate, no risk or danger to the law enforcement or agents, guaranteed to have some achievement. It's unbelievable that they would like to spend so much of our tax money, use so many peoples and resources, and spend so much effort on cases like this. Apparently DOJ hates people to buy pleasure from sex.
If he had just made a consulting company, made himself an employee, paid payroll tax and social security, and just rented out spaces this case would look very different. It would be on local PD who probably don't care about any of this. That informant must have really really been against the idea of moving back to Korea.
I suspect the point of the largely rhetorical question was that in this case people are not getting killed, robbed, defrauded of their life savings or confined as a sex slave. It's essentially a victimless crime in this particular case -- at least as victimless as other well paying job that most would not be interested in doing if the pay were they could make as an office worker or something like that.
Yes, the feds will go after the crimes you've mention but the other post was really asking why this activity is even a crime which was why the rest of the shit the feds are interested in even occurred.
Since when has fraud been victimless? Talk about good reasoning skills. Your attempt here is called a straw man -- no attempt to suggest we just don't enforce laws was present in my comment.
No straw man here. You said the only reason the feds are involved is because of the commercial sex. That's false. Wire fraud and mail fraud are still very there. He didn't have to use fake identities to obtain leases. He could have started a company, put himself as an employee, paid himself a salary, and avoided a whole lot of this.
But criminals usually aren't smart. That's why they commit crime to get paid, because getting paid legally requires more thought and patience. Doing circular nonsense transfers with money, buying 50 money orders in the same week all under $3k, these are rookie maneuvers. Just hire people on as employees, you dictate their salary, pay FICA, pay income tax, and you're good at least for a lot of this.
If what you said is true, then it's very likely that korgs in LA will be busted sooner or later
But she requested immigration benefits in exchange for testimony. Usually when you get deported you serve out your prison sentence first, then you get processed for removal and get a reentry ban. You can't just decide to not do the prison time and get deported instead because prison is inconvenient for you.
I do have a question(s)for TRP. I agree with most of what you said. With that said, does trafficking or coercion mean, at a federal criminal charge level, involuntary/non consensual/physically held against your will? Or something else entirely? I read the whole affidavit very carefully. I did not see any indication of coercion, or involuntary participation. Everything mentioned in the affidavit in that regard are actions to remain discreet. I also have some other questions: this bust sounds very similar to the one in Seattle, bellevue, where the prosecutors and cop brought charges, and in the press, called it human trafficking. Reason magazine did an amazing 5 piece to systematically break down how everything was consensual, and safe for the sex workers, including an interview with the cop who led the investigation. It also zero-ed in on a key point, that was never fully fully answered by the prosecutor or cop - did the women actually say in police investigations, that they were coerced into doing this, or held against their will? None of the women testified at trial. None have sworn affidavits to that effect. The head cop in charge said he never spoke to any directly, because they spoke very little English (there were also interpreter issues), and were free to
Go (one of them had all of her money confiscated by LE). Most charges against the Johns ended in plea deals ended up with misdemeanor charges, and that was because the prosecutor didn’t charge the clients with misdemeanor prostitution, they were charged with felonies and sex offender status - for facilitating prostitution or human trafficking, by writing reviews of providers they met, which is a pretty novel theory. But I would think if trafficking happened, which is heinous as fuck, as they claimed to the press, all plea deals would be off the table, and there would be a trial, with the victims as witnesses. Also, one thing never asked in that incident, to the cop or prosecutor, is if they are aware that some the victims, appeared again, months later, in other K girl ads, in different states. This current case seems awfully similar, except its the Feds involved. So i am Wondering, in this case, as I see all the statements about trafficking, by prosecutors, by certain anti-prostitution non profit groups, screaming to turn over the list of clients to the public, saying they fuel trafficking, i have not heard from. Anywhere that we will hear from the victims themselves at trial, which I’d think is a must to get a conviction for human trafficking, right to confront your accusers. Of course, behind the scenes, the victims may be right now being threatened with deportation and re-entry ban by the Feds if they do not agree to testify at trial they were coerced, while concurrently telling the accused they are risking decades in federal prison. But if truthfully, if no coercion/involuntary participation actually happened in this case, then its not factually true, is it? In all of these cases, because there is a built in stigma for sex work, providers want anonymity and aren’t going to challenge anything publicly, a law enforcement and certain groups self appoint themselves as these women’s spokesperson, saying they needed to be saved, they were victimized. Crimes were committed here, no doubt, but I am skeptical if trafficking, as in Stolen from Suburbia (2015 movie with Sydney Sweeney), took place here, which is heavily being implied by LE and the anti-prostitution groups. Seems like they are using that term to score brownie points with the public, and to eliminate any doubt like ‘hey, did they just devote all that time and money to bust consensual sex work, where by all accounts, the women were safe?’ I’d also like to know if federal LE plus the anti-prostitution groups think all paid sex work is trafficking, ie do they conflate the two?
I know US hookers, not just K girls, all Share a common motivation for voluntary participation into this: making fast cash, in a very short amount of time, to keep all to themself, minus the booker cut, unless they are independent. And the reason they get a booker is because its very time
Consuming to screen your own clients, make your own incall arrangements. They cannot make that money that way by legitimate means. Just my humble thoughts, welcome any feedback.
strictly focusing on the sale
of money for sex, not the other federal crimes alleged here (which I tend to think there is alot of evidence to support from
The affidavit) - exactly what makes this Boston brothel different, from say, a legal brothel, besides the fact that there is no brothel license? Bunny ranch in vegas, a legal brothel, has very similar advertisements for the women will and won’t do. Legal brothels have extremely similar advertisements for the women and screening for potential clients, specifically to drastically reduce or eliminate male clients who show up and try to get Girls things to do that she doesn’t want to do. Speaking to your reply on trafficking, what evidence from the affidavit shows that the women were held against their will? I didn’t read anything to that effect at all. And yes, Seattle was state police, not Feds, and they got zero trials and convictions on human trafficking. Reason did a fantastic 5 piece article, you should google it, totally showing that the Seattle police and prosecutors simply ruined clients lives, and took away the women’s income, who were NOT held against their will, and free to leave anytime. If there was human trafficking actually going on, and the women were ‘rescued’ by the busts, why would they go immediately back to work in a different agency just months later? It’s extremely relevant to determining whether the human trafficking narrative is actually real, or just made up, by the government at worst, and at best, conflating it with consensual sex work.
From a law/statute perspective "sex trafficking" does not imply coercion. See the link below and look at the "sex trafficking" entry. Contrast that with severe forms of trafficking in persons -- which I don't recall seeing any mention of in the affidavit.
Don't know if others will find it as amusing as I do but the definition for "commercial sex" is fun to read. I suppose one is expect to exclude a bunch of socially acceptable situations where both sex and something of value is given or received by someone. I suppose the argument might be that in a marriage the sex is incidental and not the main purpose of the relationship (though how one has children without it, for most people, is a bit hard to reconcile)
If you have ever seen ‘stolen from suburbia’, 2015 TV movie, that is the trafficking this affidavit, law enforcement, and anti-prostitution groups are heavily implying to the public took place here. Women being captured, chained up, forced to take ad pictures online, and held against their physical will. Or the Disney movie Pinnochio, what happens to boys that go t to pleasure island, very good example. The reason article on the Seattle bust enclosed an interview with the cop, which really pushed the cop to answer if the women were held against their will. He admitted no, but the coercion was ‘economic’.The reporter replied, both you and I are being economically coerced, that’s why we are at work today. The cop then said ‘the jobs we are stuck in are not illegal.’ He also said that the women MIGHT have been threatened with arrest or deportation if they didn’t play ball, which again, you have zero statements from the women to corroborate. But the bookers would have totally would have let them go if they wanted to leave. From what i have read, K-orgs are very, very strict, if girl doesn’t like a client, for ANY reason, he not only cannot see her again, he risks getting blacklisted by that agency, and possibly the whole community.
I suppose you could argue its unfair that people fall into debt, chained to it so they cannot escape, and resort to things like paid sex. But then again, are so, so many examples in society where that happens legally - usually off student loans, that can never be discharged, and is basically legal loan sharking. Porn, strip clubs, only fans. Or just people from any background, working a non-illegal job where they are seriously injured, physically or mentally, because they had to be at work.
To Respond to part of TRP’s last reply - and not disagreeing at all that they can charge you just to ruin your life - a federal agent saying a woman was held against her will, with nothing else in the affidavit, or evidence seized to corroborate that, is not very strong evidence. Real examples of withholding someone against their will could be proof of withholding the women’s passports, any type of threat made to stay against them or their family, or to pay off a loan, threatening to report their immigration status or escort status to the police, etc, blackmail, extortion. Without written proof AND sworn testimony from the women themselves, It is fairly easy to dismantle. Otherwise, It is an unsubstantiated assertion, that I do not see holding up in a court of law, because it has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. There is also 6th amendment, the right to confront your accusers. Which mean to prove up trafficking held against your will, Defendant can call the woman to the stand, who would swear under oath, and need to testify to that effect. If the Feds threaten her behind the scenes, be deported, or face a state misdemeanor charge if you don’t lie and say you were held against your will, that in itself, could present a host of other problems for the Feds case. Read the seattle case, all the articles from Reason, and come back and tell me of this case isn’t exactly the same, except Federal Charges are involved.
I like how we're calling $100k in legal bills, 6 months in jail while on trial, and a blacklist on your name for life is "fairly easy to dismantle."
Have you ever been charged with a crime? Do you practice law? Where do you get these conclusions that somehow being taken to federal court is easy at all? Unsubstantiated assertions get people indicted all the time. The threshold for indictment is not that high. Yeah famous people with millions of dollars can face a public accusation, hire a dream team, beat the charge, and then write a book. But I've seen most of the people who go to incalls and trust me, they don't have $50k in cash lying around. Lot of these guys are basically paycheck-to-paycheck and they set aside an amount for the hobby. Guys with real money are doing the $1,500/hr deal. Not $320 incalls and complaining about the price. These guys can't afford to be fired, sit in jail during trial, have a federal court litigator on payroll, beat a charge, and then have their life just resume where it left off with a lunch-time incall appointment next week. It's silly to suggest as much.
Getting indicted federally is almost a life-ender. And again, in this case, they already have these guys on wire fraud, mail fraud, and money laundering. So the whole talk about "Well that's circumstantial so that's easy!" Know what else is circumstantial? DNA evidence. Circumstantial doesn't mean weak.
I think I may have not properly expressed myself TRP. I am saying yes a federal indictment means you are fucked. No dispute there. I agree with nearly everything that you have posted. What I am saying is the Fed appear to be calling this human trafficking as propaganda, through indictment, but none of the evidence indicates that.
We haven't seen the evidence. All we know is what's in the affidavit to hold someone without trial. All they'll present are the minimum necessary facts to get him remanded without bail. Unless you work for DOJ or have intimate knowledge about the DHS investigation, then you have no clue what evidence they have and what they don't.
The DOJ almost never shows all their evidence even in an indictment, let alone something like this from an HSI agent. Even when the indictment comes down, DOJ will hold most of the evidence until discovery. They don't go and lay out every single piece of evidence they have in an indictment so that you can get your defense ready. They go with the bare minimum and then during federal discovery, you find out everything they have. That's after you've hired counsel, paid the $25k retainer, and signed the $800/hr fee agreement. Then you find out most of the evidence they have. And in federal court, the witness list can be 100 people deep. They don't have to tell you why a witness is on the list or what they'll testify to. They don't even need to call them. So you and counsel are trying to depo 100 people and the DOJ may only need 6 of them for trial and you don't know what for. So that's more $800/hr talking to all of those people.
I feel like a lot of you guys have a real hard time following how the legal process works. Like this is the very first federal criminal case you've ever paid attention to. This is basic stuff, guys.
First, like has already been posted earlier, you’re beating a dead horse.
Second, Feds aren’t going to charge a John for a local misdemeanor statute. There’s no need to depo hundreds of witnesses to work out a simple plea on a misdemeanor charge.
After reading more links commercial buying of sex is indicted on per-state basis and is at most a misdemeanor.
In one article they even said they are considering to pressure the elite clientele by threatening them to release their info, in exchange for cooperation. Even the investigators understand that the release of info is a lot more damaging to people with everything to lose.
If monger is single and retired and there is no leverage he's probably safe.
No one ever said they would. The people that don't cooperate get handed over to local PD. The part about the witness list is a response to someone claiming how "it's easy" to go ahead and get a federal case thrown out. I'm saying that's pretty ignorant and it's obvious they don't know how federal court works.
Fair enough. That makes perfect sense, I didn’t mean to sound like I was questioning you. Let me ask you this, and this is the million dollar Q. Could the Feds charge all of the johns that they did not catch in the act, with any federal crimes that they are charging the 3 main players with? Ie those who appear on a list, or perhaps they have evidence of past visits? And would they just release the list to the public for anyone they did not charge? Could they do this in every single state where their search is expanding to, effectively ensnaring ever single John that visited a K-org, where the bookers did not delete the info? Hearing it from you, this sounds like the complete end of K-orgs.
The people in this imaginary world who talk about attorneys have never been arrested and never actually had to hire a criminal defense attorney. So they have no idea what they're talking about.
Like I said in a different post, it's not lists and databases that will get clients in trouble. It's their awkward behavior going in and out of these buildings. They stick out like sore thumbs. I can spot them a mile away and I'm not conducting any surveillance or caring that much. HSI is chock full of ex-military who are pretty good at this, so when they see some busted up 58 year-old white guy in a Hawaiian shirt, cargo shorts, sandals, and a phone in his hand bolt towards the door at exactly 1pm and come out at 1:58pm it's pretty obvious where he was. Especially if he's carrying a little tiny water bottle and a fun size candy bar. I mean come on.
I mean mongers are not going to go anymore - the bookers did not destroy everyone’s number, personal information provided to them, and clearly kept a list.
Discretion is something that mongers thought was part of the deal. It’s a very powerful, unsaid assumption, that is incorrect.
Furthermore, technically, every org could be in violation of federal law. Combine that with the idea that many orgs ARE retaining your personal information, it does not seem to be worth it for anyone to go at all anymore. What happened to the clients who are cooperating could happen to anyone.
On your comment about 1 hour incalls, how a guy comes in and out exactly one hour later - I’ll say this - i have ALWAYS thought that is super dumb, to the neighbors, just seeing a revolving door. Every hotel and motel sting happens this way.
But sometimes the girls themselves cap your visit at one hour, even where clients want longer appointments. Never understand why that’s not extremely favored, by both mongers and bookers alike.
If it wasn't for these three named dim-wits and the confidential source, there would be no discussions about this. Agencies that don't destroy personal information of clients will end up like our four named dim-wits, charged with a boatload of evidence against them. Once you give the agency your personal information(your mistake/choice), the burden is on the agency. There are no additional assumptions.
I'm serious about it because this is absolutely serious. You go from customer to trafficker really really quick. All it takes is an incentive and a change of heart. Visa about to run out? Name a pimp and you get to stay and get favors from the cops. Score to settle against an old co-worker or booker? Just leak everything you have.
Then guys brag about being single with no family, no job, and no one who will think about them if they spend 2 nights in jail. Like that's something to be happy about? Got some real messed up people around here, that's for sure. "Look at me, I don't have anywhere to be, no one thinks about me, no one misses me, and I don't matter to anyone!" Good for you, dude. You won the Hollywood loner role competition, but in real life.
I think you may misunderstand what I am saying. I am saying prior to the bust, the bookers clearly kept the entire client list. I don’t think that was anticipated, if the clients gave their information just to be screened for safety. I thought once its verified a client is paying, safe, and discreet on repeat visits, it is in both the booker and clients best interest to destroy personal information, before any type of bust occurs.
Second, my question is, do you see the Feds trying to charge Johns for trafficking, just purely by being on the client list, or being caught in a sweep as 20 clients were here, just by participating in paid sex alone? Or charging other Johns in other states with HT, if they happen to appear on client lists, or some other proof showed they visited an org in the past.
NOT by having done the actions you say make you go from
John to trafficker real quick.
I take what you are saying extremely seriously, hence my questions. I cannot speak for anyone else here, but I am not playing some tough guy, and you seem very knowledgeable. Thank you.
I don't think clients are going to be charged with trafficking. They'll just be leaned on. The focus of the investigation is intelligence and evidence on people profiting from the activity. It takes about 5 minutes to hand over a mouthy client to local PD, but the operation doesn't derail because of a client.
Now what absolutely can happen is a Kgirl can get busted and threatened with deportation, but they'll imply very strongly that if ANYONE is profiting from her activity other than her, they'd really really like to know who that is. Furthermore, if she reveals who that is, they'll pause removal proceedings and let her remain in the US and probably let her continue to see clients as long as she's cooperative. The better the intel, the better the perks. They can basically make her immune from city and state prosecution as a key witness in a federal case. That decision takes about 5 seconds to turn over some client-boyfriend who she's splitting the rent with, or getting rides from, or who is "helping her count the money" as I've seen written on these boards. That guy will be charged either federally for trafficking or at the state level for pimping and pandering. Both are felonies.
-- Modified on 11/11/2023 11:24:09 PM
Should we change the board name? Perhaps The League of Extraordinary Dead Horse Beaters?
Feds peruse client list of powerful ‘johns’ after bust of high-end prostitution ring
From a thread in the Boston Forum:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/boston/news/cambridge-police-seek-charges-28-sex-buyers-brothel-bust/
And now those hearings are open to the media
Crazy times
From the article...
"Investigators said clients had to fill out a form with their name, work information, email address, phone number, and a reference before they could book appointments."
Who the F would do that? They claim these clients are doctors, lawyers and tech executives. Are they also stupid??? I hope guys learn from this fiasco. If everyone refuses to provide personally identifying information, the orgs won't be able to demand it anymore, and the entire thing will be safer for everybody. Not 100% safe. Nothing is. But definitely safer than this shit show.
Seems like a lot of people do that for kgirls in Cali, at least name, phone, work info seems like the norm to get in nowadays
Seriously? Well, I don't know when that happened, but if it's true, it's a real tragedy.
I wanna see some politicians names but i feel like they'll work their way out of that. Probably only see regular folks
The names of the accused have yet to be released, but the hearings will be open to the public after requests from NBC10 Boston and other news outlets. The hearings are set for Jan. 18, Jan. 19 and Jan. 22 in Cambridge District Court, starting at 10 a.m. each morning.
Will be interesting to see if the hearings get nearly the same level of attention or interest as the initial reporting on the bust. My guess is that unless there are some well known names (nationally, regionally or locally) that come up it's a largely back page story that is forgotten almost as fast as the ink dries.
Will still suck for the guys that are being charged but basically no different than if just just got busted as some standard vice bust.
is known to be a high volume lease co-signer of incall locations (apartments). To obtain multiple leases without creating suspicious with lease managers, he would use fake IDs and income documents. I'm guessing LE probably has a list of his "apartments." Heard at least one independent kgirl vacated her in-call and now the suspect is left holding the lease without receiving lease payment from the kgirl.
Is there any link between this and the Boston Top Ten federal case?
The LA suspect was one of the three individuals linked to the Boston case. Will LA local enforcement be investigating his apartments? Probably not a high priority.
is the resident of Torrance named in the Affidavit for the Warrant. It appears that they are related through shared DNA.
Then, of course, there is the idiot who recently outed himself as having leased an apartment for a Kgirl (link below) who I quickly called out.
Here it is.
If true, likely the independent is another target for the feds and all other agencies/indepedent that used his services. This guy has bigger problems on the horizon than his failed leases.
Those independent kgirls who are connected to him may have already vacated their incalls and found another one. which is the case of one of my regulars. Seriously, I doubt if the feds are interested in pursuing individual kgirls or agencies. I think most crackdowns by LE are the result of complaints from neighbors.
Correct on everything Except it was not a defendant, it was a woman who has been convicted a long time ago and is serving her sentence.
I've actually tried to get some folks with more inside info than me to brainstorm who this snitch might be. Whoever she contacted first to get the first tip must know her identity.
I'd be more worred about which of current three stooges flips. Also, why is it that the feds only released the driver's license of one and not the other two? Curious.
What are your thoughts on the 28 being charged and outed?
via a current dmv k-girl's reviews/profile to find this new site in BOS, https://www.geishastyles.com/geishas
after nov 2023 btt arrest, looks like k-org is going back ? any inside?
never mind, i found my answer in BOS local
https://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/boston-9/re-geishastylescom-has-taken-the-place-of-boston-top-ten-225465?page=1#225934
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!