Boston Top Ten

A couple of thoughts on BTT. I was never a client of BTT, you can look thru my prior posts for my reasons but TL / DR as with many others I wouldn't trust strangers with info that can be so damaging. As with prior busts, what comes out shows that they were careless with personal info and it was very easy for LE to get client lists etc. So the I'd requirement puts all the risk on the client with little advantage.

I feel for those who are reading the articles with anxiety, it must suck. I don't want to raise the level of worry unreasonably but the handling of this case seems to have a different tone from others. With earlier similar busts there was not so much discussion of the clients, such as the professions they come from and so on. In this one we can see a ramping up of LE and prosecutor talk about the need to make the clients share the pain. My guess is that they may be developing certain targeted cases as examples that they have gathered enough evidence for more charges than have been announced. It could be that they have cooperation from a provider, or even more than one. What we know is that the feds' takedown was more sophisticated than usual. They could have brought charges much earlier and with much less evidence than they seem to have gathered here. The question that seems hard to answer is why they didn't close it down right away? They were monitoring the apartments for a full year. What was that for? It's a lot of resources to throw at a single prostitution operation.

So yeah, no reason to flee to Brazil perhaps, but I think if you feel exposed and if there is even a chance that you could be the kind of client that could be targeted, maybe get a lawyer ready. Some of the reports talk about a monthly membership set-up. I'm no expert but again if you were more than an occasional client you'll have to expect that the feds were tracking your use of BTT services and that might expose you legally. At least you might be worried that a reporter or activist manages to get a leaked copy of client names or phone numbers etc. It wouldn't be the first time.

I'm not trying to stir the pot here, but I think that just saying it will go away and to deny deny, etc. , isn't the best advice now. I'd take reasonable measures to be protected in case of either a leak or in case of further charges against clients.

FWIW, events like this should steer us all away from these bigger multistate networks. I agree that "trafficking" is not really a good explanation of how they work, but at the end of the day they are overseeing women working in pretty exploitative conditions and raking in millions. I'd think we all might want to spend our hard earned dollars elsewhere, on indies in particular.

[QUOTE=KashkaiBoy;6676557]A couple of thoughts on BTT. I was never a client of BTT, you can look thru my prior posts for my reasons but TL / DR as with many others I wouldn't trust strangers with info that can be so damaging. As with prior busts, what comes out shows that they were careless with personal info and it was very easy for LE to get client lists etc. So the I'd requirement puts all the risk on the client with little advantage.

I feel for those who are reading the articles with anxiety, it must suck. I don't want to raise the level of worry unreasonably but the handling of this case seems to have a different tone from others. With earlier similar busts there was not so much discussion of the clients, such as the professions they come from and so on. In this one we can see a ramping up of LE and prosecutor talk about the need to make the clients share the pain. My guess is that they may be developing certain targeted cases as examples that they have gathered enough evidence for more charges than have been announced. It could be that they have cooperation from a provider, or even more than one. What we know is that the feds' takedown was more sophisticated than usual. They could have brought charges much earlier and with much less evidence than they seem to have gathered here. The question that seems hard to answer is why they didn't close it down right away? They were monitoring the apartments for a full year. What was that for? It's a lot of resources to throw at a single prostitution operation..[/QUOTE]There is ALWAYS theatrics involved in cases like this. They always throw 'TRAFFICKING' into the headlines because it's sexy and gets attention. If you follow every case such as this, it goes away quietly. The US Attorney is part politician. Remember that.

For what it's worth there have been only 13 charges of solicitation in Middlesex County since 2018 to June of this year ([URL]https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/11/10/metro/brothel-bust-massachusetts-legal-system/?p1=StaffPage[/URL]).

I'm not saying there isn't an inherent risk to doing something like this. I'm just saying based on current Federal and State law and knowing how the system operates. It's still on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did this and that is incredibly difficult when all you have is a name on a list and a text (both things which can be easily faked). As show by the fact that one of the people got leases with fake ID's and bank statements.

They went out of their way to name professions without naming people because they still need to prove that people did these things, there's no slander in naming a profession.

I'll tell you a hypothetical story and draw whatever conclusions you will. Back in the BAD days, someone was stopped after leaving the apartment. Cops did their routine of 'We know more than we think we do' routine of trying to get a person to talk. Person STFU and said nothing, later they were called to come down to the station for to answer questions. Said person declined and said 'talk to my lawyer' then proceeded to get subpoenaed to testify in front of a grand jury. Lawyer did their job and said, unless my client gets a deal they are going to plead the 5th. AUSA then withdrew the subpoena because it was a waste of time.

Nothing happened to this person. BAD got busted, same MO and same headlines you are seeing now.

There is no federal provision that prosecutes state level offenses such as this. Even if you read of novel untested methods in news articles that sensationalize this, there is no precedent. It's still a state level action and at best if you have shitty luck a MISDEMENOR which rarely gets prosecuted.

But if you feel like you have exposure, consult with a criminal defense attorney, the majority of them offer free consultations.

Reply to the poster below who wrote a great post. First, I also was never of a member of these agencies and would steer clear of any sort of operation or provider who asked for verification and personal information. It's just bad policy to give this information and leave a digital footprint behind, since it can easily fall into the wrong hands. I agree with Kashkai that at least some client information will be leaked. Most likely from political pressure from activists. I personally find real human trafficking abhorrent (the real kind, not where the government slaps that label on it to have charges stick) Of course if a provider is doing things through her own free will, I have no issues with that, I'm on this site after all.

Another red flag is when you have agencies that have almost 100% foreign women like Asians or Brazilians. These women have a higher chance of being legit trafficked because in most cases in their own countries nobody gives a shit. This in turn gives LE more resources and motivation to bust them. That's a reason I've also avoided the tons of Brazilian agencies operating in Massachusetts because I suspect some are being pimped or trafficked. In fact, I am almost near sure of it and it's a matter of time.

So for the guys with anxiety what do you do? First lawyer up ASAP. Regarding a data dump ala Robert Craft or Ashley Madison, the good news is in this fast paced internet world data becomes old quick. Most people do not go past the first page on a google search and after some time it will be forgotten and you can use services to boost your internet cred so to speak.

Again, I hope that they do not list any names, but they might. I think they will stick to the bigger targets or people the state has a grudge against. I don't know. The flip side of the coin is if some high ranking politician is on the list he may try to pull strings to stop its release. But overall, remember this too shall pass and in a 6 months, 1 year, or a few years nobody will even be thinking much of it anymore.

Lastly, the laws must be changed. If a women wants to do this to make extra money out of her own free will, she should have every right to do so.

But if the names of clients are released, for the regular johns, like us, this will basically destroy families, and leave many without jobs and without friends. And then people will forget and we will remain fucked for many years to come to find a new job and keep our lives going. Also, this will never stop. People will find new ways to keep buying sex. The women in this Korg were not there against their will, they needed money to survive. From what I can see, feds already got what they wanted -- the three mother fuckers involved in the ring not paying taxes and money laundering. While LE were looking at the trash for condoms full of cum, more important things were happening in the country like gun violence, real human trafficking, murders, political corruption, women possibly underage gangbanged online by 6 men on * etc.

The fate of the list is on the hands of MA and VA government, and the fucking press is not helping. They just want to expose names because it brings readers so that they profit from the bunch of advertisement on their poor shitty work as journalists. Nowadays the journalism is so shitty, that they have to rely on this shit to survive.

Finally, it's unbelievable how every time this happens people assume that all sex workers are victims. Do people really read books or resources about this fucking matter at all? And don't get me wrong, human trafficking exists and is real but it is also true some men and women work as sex workers because they want to work on that. So what? We are accepting people identifying however the fuck they want to, why can't we accept and respect those who work as sex workers? Fuck this shit.

Good luck to everyone, this is getting to my nerves, but we have to wait and possibly talk to criminal lawyers to understand how fucked is if your name appears in such a list.

[QUOTE=KashkaiBoy;6676557]
FWIW, events like this should steer us all away from these bigger multistate networks. I agree that "trafficking" is not really a good explanation of how they work, but at the end of the day they are overseeing women working in pretty exploitative conditions and raking in millions. I'd think we all might want to spend our hard earned dollars elsewhere, on indies in particular.[/QUOTE]The problem is that it's hard to know which agencies are operated by one person across multiple state lines.

This case blew up as big as it did because:

1. The booker operated in multiple states which drew the attention of the Feds.

2. It sounds like some of the higher up clientele were extorted for more information. We don't know if this is necessarily true, it might just be a cover for why the Feds are involved.

3. The bookers were already on the radar because of the excessive amount of money they tried to launder.

4. The mongers they implicated were part of major public branches of government or part of the military.

The professions they listed in the affidavit are likely just the 20 people they got to give them information. They state that there are likely hundreds more customers that they don't know about which means they don't have the client list. Can they still get it? Yes. But is the list exposed? Not yet.

The mongers they have a case against gave up information voluntarily, likely under duress. Those people will probably get outed in one way or another even if they cooperate with the authorities because they have to be identified to testify. They screwed up, because even if they took plea bargains, if their names are made public, they will be identifiable by the public regardless of how reduced their charges may be. There's no reason to implicate yourself before you have sought out counsel.

[QUOTE=CityboysUp;6676763]The problem is that it's hard to know which agencies are operated by one person across multiple state lines.

This case blew up as big as it did because:

1. The booker operated in multiple states which drew the attention of the Feds.

2. It sounds like some of the higher up clientele were extorted for more information. We don't know if this is necessarily true, it might just be a cover for why the Feds are involved.

3. The bookers were already on the radar because of the excessive amount of money they tried to launder.

4. The mongers they implicated were part of major public branches of government or part of the military.

The professions they listed in the affidavit are likely just the 20 people they got to give them information. They state that there are likely hundreds more customers that they don't know about which means they don't have the client list. Can they still get it? Yes. But is the list exposed? Not yet.

The mongers they have a case against gave up information voluntarily, likely under duress. Those people will probably get outed in one way or another even if they cooperate with the authorities because they have to be identified to testify..[/QUOTE]How many places do we go to rotate girls. I think Angel who was on Beale st and the don't waist your time new own and a hand full of others actually live in the state. So many shop's even walking distance from a couple BTT girls have been around years if not decades. Something put BTT on the radar. BTW I only know of the walking distance after being told by others I never tried to contact them due to the I'd thing. Over the decades I had been to AMPs that did have cameras that were shut down and nothing came of it. Been in this long enough you see a crackdown, everyone laid low for a bit and then it's business as usual. The oldest profession is not ending soon.

The state / feds only name and shame when they press charges. Otherwise, you're just slandering someone without any proof. The media has always called for the client lists, that hasn't changed. There's a reason why the Fed's were cagey about sharing the names, it's because the state needs to be the one to level charges. The only exception would be the ones with Federal Security clearances. Those people fucked themselves on that one.

If someone blindly shared a list and a media outlet shared it, then the slander lawsuit would be a slam dunk.

The Heidi Fless list was because she shared it after she got out of jail. Not because the authorities shared it.

The Maine Zumba list was shared because they charged all the people on it.

They called for the lists when Chloe's Companions got busted. Never Happened.

They called for the lists when bad got busted. Never Happened.

Any lawyer worth their salt will say this to the prosecutor. Texts and ID's can be faked, Photos can be faked, LinkedIn profiles can be faked. What proof do you have that my client actually solicited sex?

There's a reason why they have to setup stings for prostitution. They need to catch a person in the act.

I hear what you're saying and generally I agree that overall the challenge prosecutors face to bring charges against johns is pretty high. What seems different here is that they were monitoring the organization for more than a full year. I can't imagine that they weren't able to gather the basic evidence to close it down and charge the local actors after a couple of weeks of gumshoe and getting search warrants for bank info and phone records. So what were they waiting for? Either they are trying to get more info higher up the chain (given that organizations like BTT are part of bigger Korean mafia syndicates that are based in Korea). Or maybe they have an interest to do what they keep saying that they want to do, which is build up some charges against johns, to be able to say that they are upping the ante on stopping trafficking etc. They are the ones that are hinting at this. But maybe you're right and it's just a lot of talk. I'm just saying that the profile of this bust seems different from BAD and others we have read about. But we'll just have to see.

[QUOTE=Bosnas;6677207]The state / feds only name and shame when they press charges. Otherwise, you're just slandering someone without any proof. The media has always called for the client lists, that hasn't changed. There's a reason why the Fed's were cagey about sharing the names, it's because the state needs to be the one to level charges. The only exception would be the ones with Federal Security clearances. Those people fucked themselves on that one.

If someone blindly shared a list and a media outlet shared it, then the slander lawsuit would be a slam dunk.

The Heidi Fless list was because she shared it after she got out of jail. Not because the authorities shared it.

The Maine Zumba list was shared because they charged all the people on it.

They called for the lists when Chloe's Companions got busted. Never Happened.

They called for the lists when bad got busted. Never Happened.

Any lawyer worth their salt will say this to the prosecutor. Texts and ID's can be faked, Photos can be faked, LinkedIn profiles can be faked. What proof do you have that my client actually solicited sex?

There's a reason why they have to setup stings for prostitution. They need to catch a person in the act.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=KashkaiBoy;6677277]I hear what you're saying and generally I agree that overall the challenge prosecutors face to bring charges against johns is pretty high. What seems different here is that they were monitoring the organization for more than a full year. I can't imagine that they weren't able to gather the basic evidence to close it down and charge the local actors after a couple of weeks of gumshoe and getting search warrants for bank info and phone records. So what were they waiting for? Either they are trying to get more info higher up the chain (given that organizations like BTT are part of bigger Korean mafia syndicates that are based in Korea). Or maybe they have an interest to do what they keep saying that they want to do, which is build up some charges against johns, to be able to say that they are upping the ante on stopping trafficking etc. They are the ones that are hinting at this. But maybe you're right and it's just a lot of talk. I'm just saying that the profile of this bust seems different from BAD and others we have read about. But we'll just have to see.[/QUOTE]This is the Bad news article. Same MO from the Feds / State.

When the Feds pull the trigger, they don't want to miss which is why they take their time.

Nothing I say will change the anxiety level, I get it.

Damn, I'm on a business trip to DC and was just about to go to the Tyson's corner location. Happen to come across this bust, and came here to inform everyone about BTT, but seems like everyone knows already.

Did ma angels get busted too? Their site is gone.

[blue][Deleted by Admin][/blue]

[b][u]EDITOR'S NOTE[/u]: [/b] [blue]This report was edited or deleted because it appeared to be a public effort to [u]discourage members from posting information[/u]. Please read the Forum's Posting Guidelines for further information.[/blue]

[blue][Deleted by Admin][/blue]

[b][u]EDITOR'S NOTE[/u]:[/b] [blue]This report was deleted because it contributed nothing of value and in fact constituted a complete waste of bandwidth.

The purpose of this Forum is to provide for the exchange if information between men on the subject of finding women for sex. Let's stick to the subject.[/blue]

[QUOTE=Viger99;6679306]This is not helpful and you are completely wrong. You should go and educate yourself on Canada Bill C-36.[/QUOTE]I use to travel to Montreal regularly for work and would have the agency girls to my room every night while I was there. If it wasn't legal one would never know. All you had to do was pick out the girls from a line up and call in the time. Best $180-200/ hr ever spent whenever I was there.

[QUOTE=MABooster;6679166]Yo are fun. Based on your record, you also visited BTT several times.[/QUOTE]Incorrect. I was _close_ though. I tried to get in with references and considered faking some papers, but that was as close as I got.