News and Media Reports

[QUOTE=Davidonecall; 1205271]This happen at another location in IL. It would be nice if others lawyer could help her our. There is not that many that could help us hobbies.

I hope she don't lose her practice because she worked so hard (studies) to earn that. It don't matter how she got the money to pay for it but she did the studies and she could be a valuable asset to defending us hobbies. I hope things go real good for her.

[url]http://www.daily-chronicle.com/2011/...arges/abz6y3e/[/url][/QUOTE]Hi,

The link goes to a "404". Don't suppose you could PM me the link, or give me any info on when this story ran?

[QUOTE=Davidonecall; 1205271]This happen at another location in IL. It would be nice if others lawyer could help her our. There is not that many that could help us hobbies.

I hope she don't lose her practice because she worked so hard (studies) to earn that. It don't matter how she got the money to pay for it but she did the studies and she could be a valuable asset to defending us hobbies. I hope things go real good for her.

[url]http://www.daily-chronicle.com/2011/...arges/abz6y3e/[/url][/QUOTE]Like the title says, ignore it. Found the 'rest of the story' on the DeKalb / Sycamore thread. Replied there. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

OK, so if prostitution was legal this wouldn't be happening as frequently. What the'ya say we sue Tom Dart for promoting this activity? Poetic justice?

[url]http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/06/09/women-seducing-scamming-elderly-men-in-western-suburbs/[/url]

Now this is MY kind of lawyer!

[url]http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-lawyer-prostitution-charges-20110609[/url]

[QUOTE=F Blaster; 1211887]Now this is MY kind of lawyer!

[url]http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-lawyer-prostitution-charges-20110609[/url]

0, 5845541. Story[/QUOTE]Dear Trib, please post a picture.

[QUOTE=High Riser;1211896]Dear Trib, please post a picture.[/QUOTE]Here's an article with what appears to be her mug shot as well as her picture from her legal website:

[url]http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/more-about-reema-bajaj-the-lawyer-accused-of-prostitution/[/url]

My retainer offer stands!

[QUOTE=F Blaster; 1211903]Here's an article with what appears to be her mug shot as well as her picture from her legal website:

[url]http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/more-about-reema-bajaj-the-lawyer-accused-of-prostitution/[/url]

My retainer offer stands! [/QUOTE]Your a smart man. I'll follow your lead.

[QUOTE=F Blaster; 1211903]Here's an article with what appears to be her mug shot as well as her picture from her legal website:

[url]http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/more-about-reema-bajaj-the-lawyer-accused-of-prostitution/[/url]

My retainer offer stands! [/QUOTE]This is a very good article. I really wish we (hobbies) have someone who we can retain now and give you personal advice. We have so menu attorneys who don't take cases solicitation.

The case against this woman appears to be circumstantial and seems to be nothing more than hearsay. Regardless, this woman's reputation is now ruined and her legal career in serious jeopardy.

Being a cop in a suburban town is the most overrated job in the world. 99% of these guys are never in a remotely dangerous situation. The main focus of their job is to write tickets and direct traffic when necessary. They run prostitution stings so they can justify their salaries and exorbitant benefits.

"Hey, look! We've arrested these guys who never would have come to our town if we hadn't enticed them into doing so! What a great job we're doing!"

Prostitution stings are a low risk operation. If you've ever seen one on TV, there's never any danger. The cops by far outnumber the person arrested. All the while, they turn a blind eye to the growing gang and drug problems in their communities. The gangs flock to the suburbs because it's low risk for THEM because local le wastes their time on these stings.

[QUOTE=F Blaster;1212028]Regardless, this woman's reputation is now ruined and her legal career in serious jeopardy.[/QUOTE]I hope she prevails and, if she's able to do so, think she could be an asset to the legal profession.

[QUOTE=Raoul Duke;1212190]I hope she prevails and, if she's able to do so, think she could be an asset to the legal profession.[/QUOTE]I saw her pic on one of the links below and I would love to tap that ass (et).

HB

[QUOTE=F Blaster; 1212028]The case against this woman appears to be circumstantial and seems to be nothing more than hearsay. Regardless, this woman's reputation is now ruined and her legal career in serious jeopardy.

Being a cop in a suburban town is the most overrated job in the world. 99% of these guys are never in a remotely dangerous situation. The main focus of their job is to write tickets and direct traffic when necessary. They run prostitution stings so they can justify their salaries and exorbitant benefits.

"Hey, look! We've arrested these guys who never would have come to our town if we hadn't enticed them into doing so! What a great job we're doing!"

Prostitution stings are a low risk operation. If you've ever seen one on TV, there's never any danger. The cops by far outnumber the person arrested. All the while, they turn a blind eye to the growing gang and drug problems in their communities. The gangs flock to the suburbs because it's low risk for THEM because local le wastes their time on these stings. [/QUOTE]She wasn't caught as part of a prostitution sting, she was caught because one of her "customers" was also dealing kiddie porn. When they did a search of his computer, they found emails from her as well as photos of her. Evidently she was dumb enough to discuss the details of what they would do along with how much she wanted for the services in the emails. Given that, I think they have her pretty much nailed. Here's an article from a more local newspaper about it all:

[url]http://www.rrstar.com/news/betsylopez/x41283587/Attorney-faces-prostitution-charges[/url]

[QUOTE=Castlerae; 1212587]She wasn't caught as part of a prostitution sting, she was caught because one of her "customers" was also dealing kiddie porn. When they did a search of his computer, they found emails from her as well as photos of her. Evidently she was dumb enough to discuss the details of what they would do along with how much she wanted for the services in the emails. Given that, I think they have her pretty much nailed. Here's an article from a more local newspaper about it all:

[url]http://www.rrstar.com/news/betsylopez/x41283587/Attorney-faces-prostitution-charges[/url]

[/QUOTE]Depends on the parameters of the search warrant. The "evidence" might not be admissible.

Even if it is, they still have to prove she went through with the acts at the times and places specified. There isn't anyone posting on this forum who hasn't made an appointment with a provider that never wound up taking place. I myself had a conversation with a "provider" today for an appointment that I had no intention of keeping because I was certain it was a prostitution sting.

The media has gone out of their way to sensationalize this story and embarrass this poor young woman before she has even gone to trial. If she's found not guilty, it doesn't matter. Her reputation and legal career are in ruins. All because this story has generated a lot of webpage hits.

On a side note, the felony charge is the result of one of the most ridiculous laws on the books. The "1, 000 foot" rule is a joke. Most of the mongers on this site have probably violated that law without even realizing it. No one wants prostitution taking place by school grounds, but this law is too vague. An act that takes place inside a home or motel room that's a block and a half away from a school in the middle of the evening is a lot different than a street pickup on a school corner during school hours, yet both are classified as felonies.

"Even if it is, they still have to prove she went through with the acts at the times and places specified. There isn't anyone posting on this forum who hasn't made an appointment with a provider that never wound up taking place. I myself had a conversation with a "provider" today for an appointment that I had no intention of keeping because I was certain it was a prostitution sting."

Nope. In Illinois the crime of prostitution is made out by 1) an offer. 2) an agreement, or 3) an act. Proving an act of prostitution is almost a rarity. The case is nearly always made out by an offer or agreement, whether it's the arrest of an alleged prostitute or an alleged john.

As a general comment, I must say that you are offering some REALLY BAD advice, which a reader would be ill-advised to follow.

[QUOTE=F Blaster;1212623]Depends on the parameters of the search warrant. The "evidence" might not be admissible.[/QUOTE]If LE had a valid reason to search the computer, then admissibility of the email evidence will likely not be a problem. LE does not have to turn a blind eye if they unexpectedly happen across incriminating evidence.

[QUOTE=F Blaster;1212623]Even if it is, they still have to prove she went through with the acts at the times and places specified. There isn't anyone posting on this forum who hasn't made an appointment with a provider that never wound up taking place. I myself had a conversation with a "provider" today for an appointment that I had no intention of keeping because I was certain it was a prostitution sting.[/QUOTE]Not true! You do not have to actually commit a sex act to be charged with a prostitution offense. The way that you make an appointment that avoids getting yourself nailed is to avoid being explicit about the purpose of the appointment. Since you were apparently suspicious when you discussed the appointments, it would seem unlikely that you would have said anything that have given LE valid cause to arrest you.

[QUOTE=F Blaster;1212623]The media has gone out of their way to sensationalize this story and embarrass this poor young woman before she has even gone to trial. If she's found not guilty, it doesn't matter. Her reputation and legal career are in ruins. All because this story has generated a lot of webpage hits.[/QUOTE]What I find surprising is some of the comments here from people who express "shock" that someone in her position would be practicing the "learned profession" while also practicing the "world's oldest profession". This kind of thing is a lot more common than I suspect some of your realize. Women who otherwise have careers get into this for easy money, a feeling of sexual control, and all kinds of reasons. What makes this case noteworthy is that she apparently got caught.

[QUOTE=F Blaster;1212623]On a side note, the felony charge is the result of one of the most ridiculous laws on the books. The "1, 000 foot" rule is a joke. Most of the mongers on this site have probably violated that law without even realizing it. No one wants prostitution taking place by school grounds, but this law is too vague.[/QUOTE]I *strongly* recommend that you not test this law for "vagueness" if it's your ass on the line.

[QUOTE=F Blaster;1212623]An act that takes place inside a home or motel room that's a block and a half away from a school in the middle of the evening is a lot different than a street pickup on a school corner during school hours, yet both are classified as felonies.[/QUOTE]I very much doubt that LE would set up a sting to catch "customer" that was near a school. The reason why they do these things is to look good before the public. If it came out that they set up a sting operation near a school, it would probably cause considerable public outrage, and would defeat the purpose of the sting in the first place. I would imagine that the only stings that would be done near a school would be to catch "providers".