News and Media Reports

[QUOTE=Robespiere;2650734]According to court testimony, there was an instance of where one of these girls was taken across state lines (North Carolina). That. Is a whole new ball game. That falls under the Mann Act.

Bottom line. These human scum are finished for a long time. That you can take as Gospel. Not "maybe", not "kinda", not "sorta". Kaput.[/QUOTE]Nothing in my post (or anyone else's that I can see) was meant to imply that child sex-trafficking, or adult sex-trafficking for that matter, isn't a heinous crime and that perpetrators don't deserve to rot in jail.

My only point is that there's a self-serving agenda on the part of LE and the media to try to portray all prostitution as trafficking. It serves LE because it keeps the grant and task force dollars flowing and it serves the media because the more salacious they can make any story, the higher their ratings. So I take any announcements made by those two entities with a giant boulder of salt, especially when the report is so vague as far as details, numbers, etc.

Another thing that makes me skeptical is that all the videos I've seen online from this operation look like the typical LE sting where a decoy female is used to get a male to make incriminating statements, after which LE rushes in from an adjacent room to make the arrest. I have no idea if this is archival footage of past stings or if this is actually from the current operation. But how exactly does this square with fighting child trafficking? The decoy is obviously LE and the arrestee is going to be an adult male 99% of the time. So, if a regular sting operation wasn't going to attract their target audience, then how exactly did they find the 149 children they reported rescuing?

[QUOTE=JmSuttr;2651760]Nothing in my post (or anyone else's that I can see) was meant to imply that child sex-trafficking, or adult sex-trafficking for that matter, isn't a heinous crime and that perpetrators don't deserve to rot in jail.

My only point is that there's a self-serving agenda on the part of LE and the media to try to portray all prostitution as trafficking. It serves LE because it keeps the grant and task force dollars flowing and it serves the media because the more salacious they can make any story, the higher their ratings. So I take any announcements made by those two entities with a giant boulder of salt, especially when the report is so vague as far as details, numbers, etc.

Another thing that makes me skeptical is that all the videos I've seen online from this operation look like the typical LE sting where a decoy female is used to get a male to make incriminating statements, after which LE rushes in from an adjacent room to make the arrest. I have no idea if this is archival footage of past stings or if this is actually from the current operation. But how exactly does this square with fighting child trafficking? The decoy is obviously LE and the arrestee is going to be an adult male 99% of the time. So, if a regular sting operation wasn't going to attract their target audience, then how exactly did they find the 149 children they reported rescuing?[/QUOTE]The point of the post was that if indeed these girls were taken across state lines (in this case North Carolina), then there is a whole new additional aspect to the situation, and that is the Mann Act. That is serious matter and in most cases it results serious time if you are convicted of it.

I don't know how many of you participated, but the Reston weekly gangbangs have come to an abrupt end: [URL]https://www.restonnow.com/2016/01/22/police-bust-alleged-prostitution-club-on-northgate-square/[/URL].

I will admit that I signed up and got as far as the parking lot on one occasion. His MO was to have everyone show up at about the same time during the day at the same place. I watched as all of the guys got out of their vehicles at the same time and go into the same door of the apartment complex. The visibility was way too much for me to handle, and, fortunately, the Big Head prevailed.

The article says that he's already a convicted felon, so he paid a huge price.

[QUOTE=Max#01;2772632]I don't know how many of you participated, but the Reston weekly gangbangs have come to an abrupt end: [URL]https://www.restonnow.com/2016/01/22/police-bust-alleged-prostitution-club-on-northgate-square/[/URL].

I will admit that I signed up and got as far as the parking lot on one occasion. His MO was to have everyone show up at about the same time during the day at the same place. I watched as all of the guys got out of their vehicles at the same time and go into the same door of the apartment complex. The visibility was way too much for me to handle, and, fortunately, the Big Head prevailed.

The article says that he's already a convicted felon, so he paid a huge price.[/QUOTE]I'm glad the little head prevailed for me too. I think he was advertising on CL. I came close to going once, only because of the convenience of location.

Damn! Just a reminder why many providers are so skittish and defensive when meeting clients for the first time.

From the details of the story, it appears the intended victim turned the tables on the predator and sent him to that special place in hell that waits for serial killers.

[URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/neal-falls-las-vegas-dismemberments_us_55b08bc4e4b0a9b94853b60c?[/URL]

I guess this shows how the Man can get you if he really wants you.

Here's the news story:

[URL]http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2016/03/14/ags-office-announce-charges-against-prosecutor-dunnings/81758756/[/URL]

And here's the LE affidavit:

[URL]http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Stuart_Dunnings-Affidavit_-_54A_-_Dunnings_516941_7.pdf[/URL]

Not sure how misdemeanor charges work in Michigan when the act isn't witnessed by LEO (as it would be in a sting operation). But the real hammer is the accusation of using his position to entice someone into prostitution.

Any legal beagles care to offer an opinion?

[QUOTE=JmSuttr;2840584]I guess this shows how the Man can get you if he really wants you.

Here's the news story:

[URL]http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2016/03/14/ags-office-announce-charges-against-prosecutor-dunnings/81758756/[/URL]

And here's the LE affidavit:

[URL]http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Stuart_Dunnings-Affidavit_-_54A_-_Dunnings_516941_7.pdf[/URL]

Not sure how misdemeanor charges work in Michigan when the act isn't witnessed by LEO (as it would be in a sting operation). But the real hammer is the accusation of using his position to entice someone into prostitution.

Any legal beagles care to offer an opinion?[/QUOTE]It's not about "the man" getting someone. This is a prosecutor who denounced prostitution, took away mongers' cars and charged them with felonies, while at the same time taking a woman who came to him for legal help and protection and turning her into his unwilling sugar baby.

[QUOTE]He is facing a total of 15 criminal charges in Ingham, Clinton and Ionia counties, the most serious being a felony charge of prostitution-pandering for allegedly using his position to coerce a woman who came to him for help with a child custody case to have sex with him for money, according to court records.[/QUOTE]The investigators were put onto him by the FBI after hearing chatter about him during a human-trafficking investigation. The FBI isn't bothering with plain-old hobbying; they were looking into a serious case, and when the local prosecutor's name came up, a public-corruption investigation was absolutely needed.

[QUOTE=BunkerBuster;2841210]It's not about "the man" getting someone. This is a prosecutor who denounced prostitution, took away mongers' cars and charged them with felonies, while at the same time taking a woman who came to him for legal help and protection and turning her into his unwilling sugar baby.

The investigators were put onto him by the FBI after hearing chatter about him during a human-trafficking investigation. The FBI isn't bothering with plain-old hobbying; they were looking into a serious case, and when the local prosecutor's name came up, a public-corruption investigation was absolutely needed.[/QUOTE]I hope my post didn't come across in any way as though I have any sympathy for this guy. I absolutely agree he crossed the line and needs to go down for using his position of authority and trust to entice a vulnerable woman into prostitution.

But what I found fascinating, and why I posted it as a cautionary tale, is the way LEO chose to expand the case and bring in many separate misdemeanor non-trafficking sex charges against not only him, but his brother.

From my reading of the affidavit, it looks like LEO was building a straight commercial sex and neglect of duty case against the guy when they discovered the sugar baby woman (listed last, as W-6). Even if she hadn't been part of the picture, they still would have gone forward because of the public corruption aspect, as you rightly pointed out. They may have had a felony angle already, because they could say they were looking for trafficking activity, but they definitely had it once they could tack on the pandering charge. With that in their pocket, LEO could look at bank, phone, text and email records which, combined with the statements of W-1 thru W-6, allowed them to build a strong circumstantial case on the misdemeanor charges.

So the cautionary element for DMV mongers, IMHO, is how aggressive and expansive LEO can get, even when it comes to misdemeanor violations, if you happen to get in their cross-hairs. One analogy to local conditions would be if some hobbyist with a govt job and security clearance gets identified as a client of a provider who gets swept up in an investigation involving any kind of alleged (and we all know how expansive the definition can be) trafficking. Once that hobbyist gets on the radar screen, maybe the FBI or local LEO refer the matter to whatever investigative agency covers that hobbyist's department. Since Michigan was able to build what looks like a strong case on non-Federal misdemeanor sex charges, even without LEO having to directly witness the violation, could that also happen in DC, MD or VA? I think many mongers believe that, as long as they steer clear of obvious stings, they're safe, but maybe not. I'm not saying it's a likely scenario, but it certainly seems more possible than I thought before reading about this case. And to me it highlights the importance of doing good homework and sticking with established and well-reviewed providers.

One thing that's not clear is whether the misdemeanor charges will stick or whether they were tacked on in a "kitchen sink" approach. That's why I would be interested in the opinion of any forum members with legal knowledge.

[URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/senate-votes-to-hold-website-in-contempt-over-sex-ads/2016/03/17/8f3bf1ce-ec6e-11e5-a9ce-681055c7a05f_story.html[/URL]

That would suck if BP caved under pressure and did away with adult ads like CL did. I'm sure another website would take up the slack since there's no way the hobby will ever go away but there's always an inconvenient adjustment period.

Hey Congress, get a clue and legalize consenting adult behavior like most of the civilized world has already done!

[QUOTE=JmSuttr;2842402][URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/senate-votes-to-hold-website-in-contempt-over-sex-ads/2016/03/17/8f3bf1ce-ec6e-11e5-a9ce-681055c7a05f_story.html[/URL]

That would suck if BP caved under pressure and did away with adult ads like CL did. I'm sure another website would take up the slack since there's no way the hobby will ever go away but there's always an inconvenient adjustment period.

Hey Congress, get a clue and legalize consenting adult behavior like most of the civilized world has already done![/QUOTE]That's up to the states. Congress only has power when it crosses state lines, which involves legitimate questions about trafficking.

[QUOTE=JmSuttr;2842402][URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/senate-votes-to-hold-website-in-contempt-over-sex-ads/2016/03/17/8f3bf1ce-ec6e-11e5-a9ce-681055c7a05f_story.html[/URL]

That would suck if BP caved under pressure and did away with adult ads like CL did. I'm sure another website would take up the slack since there's no way the hobby will ever go away but there's always an inconvenient adjustment period.

Hey Congress, get a clue and legalize consenting adult behavior like most of the civilized world has already done![/QUOTE]It would be great if it went to the Supreme Court and ruled protected speech under the 1st.

Much thanks to JmSuttr for bringing this case to light for those of us in the DMV area. I certainly would have missed it. Mr. Suttr is correct, this kind of broadening investigation should give many of us pause. This case heightens my concerns for the overall risk involved, particularly due to my job. Any time LEO can expand an investigation, they probably will about 99% of the time for a variety of reasons (E. G. making a splash in the media, seeking a feather in their cap, some simply have misguided morality in mind, and some are just assholes).

As well as being a world-class hypocrite, this guy primarily falls into the asshole category. The fact that he goes after other guys for doing the exact same thing he did makes me feel unconcerned that they are throwing the book at him. But it definitely makes me concerned about using those tactics on the "average Joe", or average "John" in this case.

However, the coercion he used to get W-6 to basically become a "sugar baby" is certainly not uncommon. The fine line here that he definitely crossed is he had a position of power over W-6. A position of power in the community that he exploited. Had it not been for that, he might engender sympathy from those of us in this fraternity. But I detest hypocrites!

As for the takeaway: Use extreme caution, limit the number of women one interacts with, make sure they are vetted through reviews or come from referrals from one's bretheren, and ALWAYS remain as anonymous as possible. Use a hobby phone, create an alias, never host incall at one's home, and never ever give out personal info for screening, especially work information!!

Many in this area have too much at risk to be careless or let their guard down. It will limit the experiences one might have, missing out on some talented ladies, but for some of us it is just a condition of the employment we have chosen. The best advice is cliche, "Always think with the big head".

Stay safe,

Derringer.

[QUOTE=JmSuttr;2842090]I hope my post didn't come across in any way as though I have any sympathy for this guy. I absolutely agree he crossed the line and needs to go down for using his position of authority and trust to entice a vulnerable woman into prostitution.

But what I found fascinating, and why I posted it as a cautionary tale, is the way LEO chose to expand the case and bring in many separate misdemeanor non-trafficking sex charges against not only him, but his brother.

From my reading of the affidavit, it looks like LEO was building a straight commercial sex and neglect of duty case against the guy when they discovered the sugar baby woman (listed last, as W-6). Even if she hadn't been part of the picture, they still would have gone forward because of the public corruption aspect, as you rightly pointed out. They may have had a felony angle already, because they could say they were looking for trafficking activity, but they definitely had it once they could tack on the pandering charge. With that in their pocket, LEO could look at bank, phone, text and email records which, combined with the statements of W-1 thru W-6, allowed them to build a strong circumstantial case on the misdemeanor charges.

So the cautionary element for DMV mongers, IMHO, is how aggressive and expansive LEO can get, even when it comes to misdemeanor violations, if you happen to get in their cross-hairs. One analogy to local conditions would be if some hobbyist with a govt job and security clearance gets identified as a client of a provider who gets swept up in an investigation involving any kind of alleged (and we all know how expansive the definition can be) trafficking. Once that hobbyist gets on the radar screen, maybe the FBI or local LEO refer the matter to whatever investigative agency covers that hobbyist's department. Since Michigan was able to build what looks like a strong case on non-Federal misdemeanor sex charges, even without LEO having to directly witness the violation, could that also happen in DC, MD or VA? I think many mongers believe that, as long as they steer clear of obvious stings, they're safe, but maybe not. I'm not saying it's a likely scenario, but it certainly seems more possible than I thought before reading about this case. And to me it highlights the importance of doing good homework and sticking with established and well-reviewed providers.

One thing that's not clear is whether the misdemeanor charges will stick or whether they were tacked on in a "kitchen sink" approach. That's why I would be interested in the opinion of any forum members with legal knowledge.[/QUOTE]

[URL]http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/online-site-where-men-rated-prostitutes-is-shut-down-charges-to-be-filed/[/URL]

[URL]http://www.johntlaw.com/promoting-prostitution[/URL]

It's getting nasty out there, folks. I know this is about the Seattle area, not the DMV, but it's still worth a post because sh*t can happen anywhere. At a minimum, it should serve as a caution to stay far away from anything or anyone that could even remotely be connected to alleged "trafficking" (real or imagined).

From News Accounts: "Two men were assaulted and robbed in the Lincolnia neigh-borhood early Monday morning by a female escort and several of her male accomplices. Officers from the Alex-andria Police epartment re-sponded to the 100 block of Bragg St. At around 5:21 am March 21 after two men met with a woman they knew to be an escort and she took them to a hotel room in the area. Police spokeswoman Crys-tal Nosal said once inside the hotel room, the men were beat-en and robbed by upwards of three unknown male suspects. ".

You realize sometimes its just better to jerk off at home. !