News and Media Reports

Just saw this article. Also pasted some interesting quotes from it. First question is how will probable cause be proven? It sounds like it's all unfolding now!

[URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12881139/high-end-brothel-busted-Massachusetts-Washington-DC-unmasked-feds-seek-charge-TWENTY-EIGHT-people-buying-sex.html[/URL]

Until probable cause has been found, no names will be released.

'If probable cause is established and criminal charges are issued by the Court, referrals will then be made to the Middlesex District Attorney's Office.

'In addition, we are working closely with Virginia authorities to begin the referral process of sex buyers from the Virginia locations in this case.

'The referral processes will remain ongoing.'

'They are doctors, they are lawyers, they're accountants, they are executives at high-tech companies, pharmaceutical companies, they're military officers, government contractors, professors, scientists.

Levy continued: 'We're committed to working closely with our federal, state and local partners to hold accountable the people who both ran this ring and the people who fueled the demand for this ring.'

[QUOTE=TomMcAn;6722119]The news report states the potential referrals for prosecution are taking place in Massachusetts. I've yet to read or hear about any similar referrals in Virginia. Keep in mind that the general statute of limitations for federal prosecutions is five years. Hopefully, someone with a much better legal mind than mine can clear up which would prevail in this instance.

For now, the best advice is to keep aware but don't panic. In the future, avoid giving out personal identifying information (PII) when seeking out agencies or providers.[/QUOTE]The press release states they are working with VA as well.

[URL]https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/statement-acting-us-attorney-joshua-s-levy-criminal-complaints-against-alleged-sex[/URL]

"In addition, we are working closely with Virginia authorities to begin the referral process of sex buyers from the Virginia locations in this case.

The referral processes will remain ongoing".

[QUOTE=TomMcAn;6722119]The news report states the potential referrals for prosecution are taking place in Massachusetts. I've yet to read or hear about any similar referrals in Virginia. Keep in mind that the general statute of limitations for federal prosecutions is five years. Hopefully, someone with a much better legal mind than mine can clear up which would prevail in this instance.

For now, the best advice is to keep aware but don't panic. In the future, avoid giving out personal identifying information (PII) when seeking out agencies or providers.[/QUOTE]Federal statute may be five years but would the VA state or Fairfax the be able to prosecute with the referrals if the crime was over a year ago?

It's clear that the cases against the clients will be handled down at the state or below levels (middlesex the's office which is state of MA).

[QUOTE=JmSuttr]Two things stand out from that release: 1. The relatively small number (28) of sex buyers against whom they say they'll be pursuing further action. 2. The fact that they came right out and admitted that they don't yet have probable cause for any of those 28.

Probable cause is the minimum requirement for an arrest, or issuance of a search warrant. If they don't have probable cause at this point in time, it's hard to imagine what missing piece might magically fall into place to meet the required standard.

I could be wrong, but that statement almost seems like a face-saving measure intended to placate the "What about the Johns?" crowd. Otherwise, what's the point of saying that you're going after 28 guys, but you can't name them because you don't yet have the evidence. That's a real head-scratcher, IMO.[/QUOTE]These government prosecutors are following in their heroes' footsteps, Lavrentiy Beria, Stalin's secret police chief "Show me the man and I'll find you the crime".

[QUOTE=SNE1124;6722253]The press release states they are working with VA as well.

[URL]https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/statement-acting-us-attorney-joshua-s-levy-criminal-complaints-against-alleged-sex[/URL]

"In addition, we are working closely with Virginia authorities to begin the referral process of sex buyers from the Virginia locations in this case.

The referral processes will remain ongoing".[/QUOTE]Thank you for posting this. Of course, I'm not surprised that a Boston station concentrated its report on the investigation as it pertains to Massachusetts.

One piece of advice I perhaps should have mentioned: if the authorities call you in for questioning, that's when you need to hire a lawyer. Don't talk to investigators without one. Take advantage of your constitutional rights.

[QUOTE=SNE1124;6722253]The press release states they are working with VA as well.

[URL]https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/statement-acting-us-attorney-joshua-s-levy-criminal-complaints-against-alleged-sex[/URL]

"In addition, we are working closely with Virginia authorities to begin the referral process of sex buyers from the Virginia locations in this case.

The referral processes will remain ongoing".[/QUOTE]The Feds can make all the statements they want, and they can say they're "working closely" with whomever they want. BUT, it's all smoke and mirrors until a specific Local agency, with Local charging authority, makes a definitive public statement on the matter.

Considering the way past releases have gone, here's what I would have expected to see with respect to local charges: A full-blown press conference featuring the local District Attorney as the lead character, flanked by the local police chief (or sheriff) and relevant feds standing behind them. Then, with great fanfare and solemnity, announcement of the charged individuals along with comments detailing how prominent they are and what kind of evidence has been uncovered that led to the charges.

Now THAT would be a major fucking deal! That would be the kind of "we got you by the balls, sucka!" big splash event that would demonstrate that there's some serious shit going on! In comparison, these nothingburger statements are not only rather vague and tame, but they also send a signal that the Feds (at least currently) don't have the goods to deliver on their rhetoric.

And I repeat my earlier point that (IMO) it's highly significant that all we're getting at the local level is radio silence. IF the locals were on the cusp of bringing charges, there would be zero downside to joining the anti-trafficking pool party and making splashes of their own. Things could obviously change, but the current state of affairs makes me think the Feds are writing checks that the locals aren't sure they can (or want to) cash.

Anyone well versed in VA laws pertaining to possible charges?

In MA:

The crimes of prostitution, pimping, and solicitation are governed by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 53 A. In order for an individual to be convicted of one of these crimes, the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

(The prostitute).

An individual engaged, agreed to engage, or offered to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.

OR.

(The John).

An individual paid, agreed to pay, or offered to pay another person to engage in sexual conduct or agreed to engage in sexual conduct with another natural person.

It is important to note that sexual conduct does not have to occur for an individual to be convicted of one of these crimes.

For the 28 that are pending a probable cause hearing, based on the above laws, it seems that payment, offer of payment, or agreement of payment would trigger legal action towards a misdemeanor charge. My best guess is that the 28 paid through electronic and verifiable means and that only those 28 can be possibly charged.

Thoughts? What's probable cause like for VA?

[QUOTE=JmSuttr;6723051]The Feds can make all the statements they want, and they can say they're "working closely" with whomever they want. BUT, it's all smoke and mirrors until a specific Local agency, with Local charging authority, makes a definitive public statement on the matter.

Considering the way past releases have gone, here's what I would have expected to see with respect to local charges: A full-blown press conference featuring the local District Attorney as the lead character, flanked by the local police chief (or sheriff) and relevant feds standing behind them. Then, with great fanfare and solemnity, announcement of the charged individuals along with comments detailing how prominent they are and what kind of evidence has been uncovered that led to the charges.

Now THAT would be a major fucking deal! That would be the kind of "we got you by the balls, sucka!" big splash event that would demonstrate that there's some serious shit going on! In comparison, these nothingburger statements are not only rather vague and tame, but they also send a signal that the Feds (at least currently) don't have the goods to deliver on their rhetoric.

And I repeat my earlier point that (IMO) it's highly significant that all we're getting at the local level is radio silence. IF the locals were on the cusp of bringing charges, there would be zero downside to joining the anti-trafficking pool party and making splashes of their own. Things could obviously change, but the current state of affairs makes me think the Feds are writing checks that the locals aren't sure they can (or want to) cash.[/QUOTE]The way I understand it in MA is that when they issue a summons for a misdemeanor, it goes straight to the clerk magistrate's office to determine if there is enough probable cause. If there is it then gets sent to the courts. So I don't read that as them not having probable cause. Just that it has to be confirmed by the clerks office.

I'm assuming that the 28 people are the ones that they pulled over and not strictly from PII but it's anyone's guess at this point.

[QUOTE=Comcast7777;6723370]The way I understand it in MA is that when they issue a summons for a misdemeanor, it goes straight to the clerk magistrate's office to determine if there is enough probable cause. If there is it then gets sent to the courts. So I don't read that as them not having probable cause. Just that it has to be confirmed by the clerks office.

I'm assuming that the 28 people are the ones that they pulled over and not strictly from PII but it's anyone's guess at this point.[/QUOTE]The investigation, as outlined in the original affidavit, interviewed "approximately 20" men. The list of 28 accused might encompass these men, alongside frequent patrons, notable figures, or those who transacted via Zelle. But that's all conjecture.

Monday's press release said "The referral processes will remain ongoing" so this could be the first of multiple batches of charges, reminiscent of the 2012 Zumba case in Maine.

This entire case stems from a tip received by the Cambridge Police Department, who spoke at the original press conference alongside the feds, and submitted the actual applications for complaints against the 28 men.

The Cambridge Officer who filed the charges was a member of a "Homeland Security Investigations Task Force. " Doesn't seem anyone from Virginia was on this task force. The feds are "working closely with Virginia state authorities to begin the referral process. " Exactly what that means, I'd love to know. As JmSuttr mentioned, Virginia state and local authorities have been very quiet.

The Boston Globe reports the 28 accused "will be summoned to Cambridge District Court for hearings before a magistrate on whether there's evidence to support charges" and that "Until probable cause has been found, no names will be released. ".

What's confusing is me is that, as I read the procedure and Comcast7777 referenced, typically the police go to the magistrate, get probable cause, Then issue a summons.

So what I'd love some clarity on is the expected chain of events for the criminal procedures in both MA and VA.

Will a magistrate sign off on probable cause, with the name getting released and summons going out at the same time?

Or will the men have a chance to defend themselves in court before their names are released?

To answer Budentist's question, the relevant Virginia law is:

18.2-346.01. Prostitution; solicitation; commercial exploitation of a minor; penalties.

Any person who offers money or its equivalent to another for the purpose of engaging in sexual acts and thereafter does any substantial act in furtherance thereof is guilty of solicitation of prostitution, which is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.

They major difference between MA and VA seems to be the statute of limitation for misdemeanors - 1 year for VA vs 6 for MA.

[QUOTE=TommyDawson;6723907]The investigation, as outlined in the original affidavit, interviewed "approximately 20" men. The list of 28 accused might encompass these men, alongside frequent patrons, notable figures, or those who transacted via Zelle. But that's all conjecture.

Monday's press release said "The referral processes will remain ongoing" so this could be the first of multiple batches of charges, reminiscent of the 2012 Zumba case in Maine.

This entire case stems from a tip received by the Cambridge Police Department, who spoke at the original press conference alongside the feds, and submitted the actual applications for complaints against the 28 men.

The Cambridge Officer who filed the charges was a member of a "Homeland Security Investigations Task Force. " Doesn't seem anyone from Virginia was on this task force. The feds are "working closely with Virginia state authorities to begin the referral process. " Exactly what that means, I'd love to know. As JmSuttr mentioned, Virginia state and local authorities have been very quiet.

The Boston Globe reports the 28 accused "will be summoned to Cambridge District Court for hearings before a magistrate on whether there's evidence to support charges" and that "Until probable cause has been found, no names will be released. ".

What's confusing is me is that, as I read the procedure and Comcast7777 referenced, typically the police go to the magistrate, get probable cause, Then issue a summons.

So what I'd love some clarity on is the expected chain of events for the criminal procedures in both MA and VA.

Will a magistrate sign off on probable cause, with the name getting released and summons going out at the same time?

Or will the men have a chance to defend themselves in court before their names are released?

To answer Budentist's question, the relevant Virginia law is:

18.2-346.01. Prostitution; solicitation; commercial exploitation of a minor; penalties.

Any person who offers money or its equivalent to another for the purpose of engaging in sexual acts and thereafter does any substantial act in furtherance thereof is guilty of solicitation of prostitution, which is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.

They major difference between MA and VA seems to be the statute of limitation for misdemeanors - 1 year for VA vs 6 for MA.[/QUOTE]Two items to consider:

1) for criminal charges to be brought, in VA there needs to be an "offer for sex" and then "any substantial act in furtherance thereof. " Thus, the prosecutor must show that you did more than just offer.

2) the more likely damage is by release (either intentionally or accidently) to the public the names of the patrons even if no charges can be brought. Irreparable public damage to individuals who simply got screened but never visited, or the not insignificant number of people who truly like visiting with escorts but have no sexual contact at all. Imagine all the people who set up appointments and then don't show up. Or I have heard of people doctoring their PII in screening to be an alternative person, e. G. , their boss, and that alternative person is then going to be harmed. Perhaps they release a list of phone numbers, and some poor soul is going to get a new phone number associated with someone on the leaked list. And hopefully "Mike Jones" or "Jim Smith" is not on the list as there are dozens of each in the DMV and they are all going to be suspected of being a patron. Some road-weary news reporter will think they are spreading salacious "news" when in reality many people who are not criminally accused (and in many cases even completely innocent) will have the lives destroyed.

I feel like Mass cares more about the BEG bust than VA does. VA attorney general is more concerned with getting NCAA to make JMU a full FBS member than this case. The AG is literally threatening legal action against NCAA (guy is a JMU alum). BTW, why is Mass only pursuing 28 guys if they are in possession of the appointment books, as the article indicates. Where did that random ass number come from? They only want to get the big dogs? Is it bc those hobbyists have TS / SCI clearance? I do see the article mentions that Mass stated "more people accused of buying sex from the brothels may face criminal charges down the line". Interesting stuff.

[QUOTE=TommyDawson;6723907]
This entire case stems from a tip received by the Cambridge Police Department, who spoke at the original press conference alongside the feds, and submitted the actual applications for complaints against the 28 men.
[/QUOTE]The entire case ACTUALLY stemmed from a confidential source that ratted from a prior bust. My guess is that they'll flip 2 more and try to come after everyone else, seems to be the pattern.

[QUOTE=KylerMurray;6724212]I feel like Mass cares more about the BEG bust than VA does. VA attorney general is more concerned with getting NCAA to make JMU a full FBS member than this case. The AG is literally threatening legal action against NCAA (guy is a JMU alum). BTW, why is Mass only pursuing 28 guys if they are in possession of the appointment books, as the article indicates. Where did that random ass number come from? They only want to get the big dogs? Is it bc those hobbyists have TS / SCI clearance? I do see the article mentions that Mass stated "more people accused of buying sex from the brothels may face criminal charges down the line". Interesting stuff.[/QUOTE]Speculation - 28 people were dumb enough to implicate themselves when stopped and questioned by LE. Hence the reason why it's a Probable Cause hearing before the magistrate and not straight to criminal complaint. A name on a list isn't probable cause and the US Attorney knows that which is why he explicitly said that in his statement.

Just following up on the recent topic. But just read now that the probable cause hearings are now open to the media. If that means the alleged perpetrators will remain out of the public pending a judgement of probable cause at the hearing or not I'm not sure. If that's the case I guess the media would just be reporting on generalities more than specifics.

Too bad Boston nuked their thread as it would be interesting to see if any developments on that side.

[QUOTE=JayJae69;6724919]Just following up on the recent topic. But just read now that the probable cause hearings are now open to the media. If that means the alleged perpetrators will remain out of the public pending a judgement of probable cause at the hearing or not I'm not sure. If that's the case I guess the media would just be reporting on generalities more than specifics.

Too bad Boston nuked their thread as it would be interesting to see if any developments on that side.[/QUOTE]What a week.

- homeland security task force urges states to press charges.

- Cambridge Police Officer on said task force files 28 charges in Mass.

- Because it's a misdemeanor that occurred without a police officer present, these charges start with a closed door "show cause" hearing where a magistrate (not a judge) determines if probable cause exists.

- Names aren't to be released unless a magistrate determines probable cause exists.

- Media petitions for exception to "closed door" nature of magistrate hearings in the name of public interest.

- Magistrate complies with request, making the "show cause" hearings open to the media.

Major questions: Can media release names from Massachusetts "show cause" hearings even if probable cause isn't found?

What is the criminal procedure in VA for misdemeanors that occur without a police officer present?