[URL]http://www.whdh.com/story/30679082/6-people-arrested-after-police-raid-peabody-home[/URL]
These girls posted on backpage often. Stay safe my friends.
[URL]http://www.whdh.com/story/30679082/6-people-arrested-after-police-raid-peabody-home[/URL]
These girls posted on backpage often. Stay safe my friends.
A grim reminder of the risks of going to an incall at a trap house. My rule of thumb, which has served me well so far, is to never go to an incall where more than one person has ever been reported to be hanging around or receiving guests, whether male or female. For this reason I also tend to avoid menage a trois, although I have occasionally been lured into them. In the strict interpretation this would include knocks on the door, something being handed off under the door, girl leaving the room and returning, etc. Sometimes I've allowed the little head to do the thinking, often resulting in some of my most memorable dreams. However, this news item is a reminder that the risks of doing so are immense.
[QUOTE=LordOfThEeyes;2709195][URL]http://www.whdh.com/story/30679082/6-people-arrested-after-police-raid-peabody-home[/URL]
These girls posted on backpage often. Stay safe my friends.[/QUOTE]
A Patch link with more details and the LEO app used:
[URL]http://patch.com/massachusetts/peabody/house-ill-repute-raid-nets-six-arrests-peabody-0[/URL]
[QUOTE=LordOfThEeyes;2709195][URL]http://www.whdh.com/story/30679082/6-people-arrested-after-police-raid-peabody-home[/URL]
These girls posted on backpage often. Stay safe my friends.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Kuro4;2709142][URL]http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/12/04/revere-woman-chelsea-man-charged-prostitution-case/JtsOyPFkxUTs5UMhIZkdDP/story.html[/URL][/QUOTE]Dana at tempu.
That's big. That may send a chill through all the agencies in the Boston area. I wonder how they were able to get the goods on Dana?
The news item mentions trafficking, but I doubt they will be able to prove that, unless one of the girls has flipped, but even then may be impossible to prove under the statute.
[QUOTE=Jafo101;2711655]Dana at tempu.[/QUOTE]
Tempu has been around for years, wonder why all of a sudden "issues". Trafficking is almost always alleged, but to the best of my knowledge has never been proven.
Jack.
That's big. That may send a chill through all the agencies in the Boston area. I wonder how they were able to get the goods on Dana?
The news item mentions trafficking, but I doubt they will be able to prove that, unless one of the girls has flipped, but even then may be impossible to prove under the statute.
One of the girl's mother was on the tv news saying that her daughter is innocent. She said that when the cop came in the house all her daughter did was do a touch test, and when she reached towards the cops' groin, he pulled her away. Don't want her as a witness.
[QUOTE=JimMack;2712850]One of the girl's mother was on the tv news saying that her daughter is innocent. She said that when the cop came in the house all her daughter did was do a touch test, and when she reached towards the cops' groin, he pulled her away. Don't want her as a witness.[/QUOTE]I love it how LEO wants to protect the community and some bs like that. Yes this was a drug nest. But let's put all the names of the girls out there so crazies can track them down and also let all the dirty laundry out the window. They was to destroy the girls lives and use them as an example. It's sick. Keep them safe from the public at least until proven guilty.
It's a sad world but it's the world we live in. If someone wants to sell themselves and it's not against there will then it's there choice.
[QUOTE=Longjblues;2712642]That's big. That may send a chill through all the agencies in the Boston area. I wonder how they were able to get the goods on Dana?
The news item mentions trafficking, but I doubt they will be able to prove that, unless one of the girls has flipped, but even then may be impossible to prove under the statute.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Member#4063;2712674]Tempu has been around for years, wonder why all of a sudden "issues". Trafficking is almost always alleged, but to the best of my knowledge has never been proven.
Jack.
That's big. That may send a chill through all the agencies in the Boston area. I wonder how they were able to get the goods on Dana?
The news item mentions trafficking, but I doubt they will be able to prove that, unless one of the girls has flipped, but even then may be impossible to prove under the statute.[/QUOTE]
I always took human trafficking to mean girls forced into prostitution not when girls choose to work as an escort for a legit agency. Am I wrong? Does it not matter if a girl is doing this stuff of her own free will? I'm assuming if no one was forced that a good lawyer could get that particular charge dropped.
[QUOTE=Kuro4;2715443]I always took human trafficking to mean girls forced into prostitution not when girls choose to work as an escort for a legit agency. Am I wrong? Does it not matter if a girl is doing this stuff of her own free will? I'm assuming if no one was forced that a good lawyer could get that particular charge dropped.[/QUOTE]If you read the state statue they including everything but rotating your tires as human trafficking. The word "recruits" and "transport" are in there as well. Which means pretty much anything they want it to mean. No where in the statute does it require a victim which I find suspiciously troubling. This means in my humble opinion that even if you are the escort and don't claim to be forced into doing anything, the charge can still be filed against anyone who has demonstrated in some form any of the catch words used in the statute.
[blue]In some states the language says "transporting for the purposes of prostitution." That means, you pick up a SW, drive to your spot, have sex, give her money, you are a human trafficker.
Bullshit is what it is
A2/blue]
[QUOTE=Kuro4;2715443]I always took human trafficking to mean girls forced into prostitution not when girls choose to work as an escort for a legit agency. Am I wrong? Does it not matter if a girl is doing this stuff of her own free will? I'm assuming if no one was forced that a good lawyer could get that particular charge dropped.[/QUOTE]For those who works in human traffic enforcement, especially if it's a woman, it probably doesn't. I think that for many women, especially more feministically inclined ones (degree of militancy in that regard is directly proportional to the degree of religious fervor), human traffic enforcement in large part is a source of self-affirmation. Many of them are on a very high horse and deny outright the existence of volunteerism in the world oldest profession. For many of them every prostitute has been coerced into being that by definition and that's that. That by itself often prevents them from going after cases where coercion indeed does play part, which make no mistake do exist, albeit they're not as frequent as the establishment human trafficking enforcement industry would make us believe.
After all human trafficking enforcement industry by now is indeed "an industry", the industry that already long turned itself into a self-feeding monster. Jobs are dependent on it. The less human trafficking there are, the lower are the government grants to fight it, the more human trafficking enforcement specialists get to wait tables.
The fact that many women of the 3rd world countries often prevent their whole families (sometimes even their whole villages) from starving to death with their prostitute' income (in the places where it's the only viable of which there are many, if not most) and that many girls in those parts would likely be starving themselves if they haven't had such an opportunity, gets conveniently bypassed or pivoted to more general economic topics, which most of the time realistically unattainable especially in the short term.
I've always heard stories about human trafficking from Russia and former USSR countries. I've met many Russian pros here in the states and outside and I can assure you that not a single one of them was coerced into prostitution. I suspect the life's circumstance forced some of them into it but not a pimp or a person.
Well actually it may not be necessarily true. But judge for yourself. I knew this one girl from this very nice middle class family who began dating a pimp who eventually coerced her into the prostitution but! I've known her since we were both 17 and always thought of her as a crazy but good-natured chick that always gravitated (and severely so) to the dark side. In fact she became a junkie way before hitting the streets, even before meeting her future pimp-husband. I suspect many of the old timers may even remember the Russian blonde that used to work Hemingway and Combat Zone in late 80's-early 90's. Would you consider a person like that being trafficked? Coerced? Technically maybe yes, but boy was she ready and inclined to be coerced for a long time by that point or what!
I think you yourself should define what it is that you consider human trafficking and stick with that criteria but always remember that human traffic enforcement may have a definition different from yours and they're the ones that have power to make your life miserable.
[QUOTE=Kuro4;2715443]I always took human trafficking to mean girls forced into prostitution not when girls choose to work as an escort for a legit agency. Am I wrong? Does it not matter if a girl is doing this stuff of her own free will? I'm assuming if no one was forced that a good lawyer could get that particular charge dropped.[/QUOTE]It all comes down to the level of control the alleged trafficker has over the alleged victim. Does the accused control where the victim works, lives and sleeps, her transportation? Does the victim have valid identification (meaning, is she in the country legally)? They have a checklist and if they think they can answer yes to enough of the questions there's a trafficking charge. As well, cops are trained to charge an accused with as many crimes as they can find even a little evidence to support. They throw everything and see what sticks. It's a lovely tactic which makes life more difficult for EVERYONE else involved, including the prosecutors, and bogs down the criminal justice system.
[QUOTE=Nrlmus;2715721] life's circumstance forced some of them into it [/QUOTE]Feminists blame men for the fact that starving women from 3rd world nations have resorted to what is truly, a difficult and thankless job.
Feminists blame men for wanting sex.
Feminists and the law enforcement establishment shame and blame everyone involved in prostitution in countries like the USA where its not legal.
Feminists "rescue" women who are making $1200 a DAY from being "trafficked" and then the women get deported and have to go elsewhere.
Nobody considers that the rabid application of "human trafficking" instead "pandering" or "sexual service for a fee" turns a lonely guy into a monster in the eyes of the public.
It would be nice if as in Nevada, Canada, and most of Europe, legislation more clearly defined the difference between prostitution and "human trafficking".
Because, like, ya know, its only the difference between having to pay for it and kidnapping.
[QUOTE=HowardSprague;2715867]It all comes down to the level of control the alleged trafficker has over the alleged victim. Does the accused control where the victim works, lives and sleeps, her transportation? Does the victim have valid identification (meaning, is she in the country legally)? They have a checklist and if they think they can answer yes to enough of the questions there's a trafficking charge. As well, cops are trained to charge an accused with as many crimes as they can find even a little evidence to support. They throw everything and see what sticks. It's a lovely tactic which makes life more difficult for EVERYONE else involved, including the prosecutors, and bogs down the criminal justice system.[/QUOTE]Most certainly true on all sides. But even then prosecutors, judges and other attorneys that all comes later. Human trafficking professionals have ways to make your life irreversibly miserable irrespective of whether charges are filed and often even after that too. Those people work with conviction that would make Cotton Mather feel more like Mother Theresa in comparison. It's not a job for them, it's a mission. You're not even "plaintiff and defendant" to them, or "the accuser and the accused" you're "an abuser and a victim". That by itself underscores the attitude. Then even if you were to get acquitted of everything it at best is an "oops sorry".
Moreover, in America people rarely get acquitted anyway. Cases are encouraged to plea and strongly so. As part of the plea bargain the accused would usually have to admit to something. Whether they're actually at fault or not is not really relevant; it would take way too much resources from all sides in order to arrive to a reasonable conclusion in that regard and we all know that resources are always limited for everybody. So the system is very aggressive in trying to discourage the accused from going the distance. More often then not it succeeds. And then whether you were actually at fault or not your life will never be the same.
[QUOTE=Britaly;2715497][blue]In some states the language says "transporting for the purposes of prostitution." That means, you pick up a SW, drive to your spot, have sex, give her money, you are a human trafficker. Bullshit is what it is [A2/blue][/QUOTE]Not sure if you stated the above or if A2 did.
Regardless I've yet to see any place where this has happened, I could've have missed it though.
Not to say that the DA wouldn't try to charge someone as being a human trafficker, just saying that I've yet to see it happen with a SWer.
On the flip side I've seen those charged with human trafficking a lot within MPs & the escorting venues, very few convictions though.
[QUOTE=Spectator;2715885]It would be nice if as in Nevada, Canada, and most of Europe, legislation more clearly defined the difference between prostitution and "human trafficking". Because, like, ya know, its only the difference between having to pay for it and kidnapping.[/QUOTE]Agree 100%, to me the only known cure is legalization.
When anything is suppressed legally or not it's usually to the detriment of those the law is trying to protect.
[QUOTE=Skatar018;2443475]"Sex trafficking will end only when men stop buying sex".
This will never ever happen till payment for sex is legalized, & I do not believe legalization will happen here in the USA, with Nevada the current exception.
Legalization is the only logical long term solution to sex trafficking, just as legalization of alcohol was to prohibition.
People will never stop paying for what they want no matter how many laws are made & what the punishment or ramification are, it's like shoveling shit against the tide.
I know I may take shit for this but human & sex trafficking happen every day all over the world including here in the USA.
The other deterrent is the billions of dollars involved, from over inflated LE budgets, which the taxpayers pay for to every other low life parasite trying live off what others generate.
Want to stop it, legalize it, & while it won't totally stop it will reduce trafficking significantly.
As for the exploitation of minors & forcing sex work against a persons will, well public execution with a bullet to the back of the head may work.
There will be & are opposing views & I'm no expert, just my 2 on how I see things.[/QUOTE]