General Reports

[Andir]

Met a guy at a dinner party at friends' house who turned out to be a sinologist (studies Chinese culture and traditions, generally speaking). Had an interesting conversation with him, and among other things he was talking about cultural differences between an averaged Chinese person and a generalized westerner. According to him, one of the biggest differences is the social acceptance of lying in Chinese culture while it's not the case in Western culture. Apparently the Chinese person doesn't see lying as a bad thing at all if it's done to gain something and especially to save face. So, if you start calling your Chinese gf a lying liar, she wouldn't even understand what you are talking about.

[JmSuttr]

So they have names in a calendar book and perhaps text messages. What other evidence do they have? They don't have any witnesses or physical evidence. Doubtful they have video evidence after so much time elapsed. It seems the for cause hearing would divulge 100% of the circumstantial evidence. I wonder if the prosecution is rethinking some of this.

The prosecution generally never shows its cards until it has to. So, whether it's an indictment, or preliminary hearing, or probable cause hearing, they will show the bare minimum they feel is needed to move things to the trial phase.

At that point, discovery and pre-trial motions take place and a good defense attorney should be able to figure out if prosecutors have a strong or weak hand. Then they can advise their client as to whether they should seek a plea deal or fight the charges.

But the evidence against each defendant will be different, so it's hard to make any kind of blanket statement. That being said, we're now almost two months after the initial announcement about going after 28 clients. One would think that, before making so specific a statement, LE would have had all their ducks in a row with respect to those 28 cases. The more that time passes, and especially if it seems like that original number could be reduced, the more it makes you wonder about what's going on behind the scenes.

[Ezra007]

So they have names in a calendar book and perhaps text messages. What other evidence do they have? They don't have any witnesses or physical evidence. Doubtful they have video evidence after so much time elapsed. It seems the for cause hearing would divulge 100% of the circumstantial evidence. I wonder if the prosecution is rethinking some of this.

I responded to Hyperion in a separate post as to why I don't agree with his theory re lawyers and the missing 14 appeals. I do agree with your point that there's no incentive, at this point, for LE to drop any of the cases, which makes the current state of affairs even more strange. Also, your mention about the constantly changing numbers is one of the most interesting points to consider. We don't have enough info to know, but the shift from 28 to 18 to 14 is certainly evidence that something odd appears to be happening in the background.

If everything was going according to LE's plan, the 28 clients they announced as being referred for prosecution would likely have all received a summons. And all of them, or at least the vast majority of them, would have hired lawyers. Any lawyer worth his salt would have either filed their own appeal or would have joined with an appeal filed by one of the other lawyers. The logical end result would therefore have been reports of 28 (or close to that number) defendant appeals filed (separately or jointly).

The absence of 14 appeals is therefore quite a puzzle. I don't pretend to have any explanation but am just pointing out that it may be an indication of problems behind the scenes. Of course, it's also worth noting that all we're going on are media reports. But the local media attention has been so intense that any mistakes would likely be corrected promptly. It'll be interesting to see what kinds of reports come out in the coming days.

P.S. It occurs to me that it is possible that, after making the announcement about 28 clients, LE could have decided to go after 14 in one batch and delay the other 14 until later. But that's pure speculation on my part, and LE hasn't made any announcement along those lines. And that also doesn't explain the 18-to-14 number shift you mentioned. So, for the moment, it remains an unsolved puzzle.

[JmSuttr]

I lean this way as well. I can't imagine they dropped 14 cases as there's no reason for it at this juncture. Might as well see it through to the show cause hearing and go from there.

One thing that is strange though is the initial appeal to the SJC had 18 (I believe) alleged clients appeal. I wonder why that number dropped from 18 to 14 for this appeal.

I responded to Hyperion in a separate post as to why I don't agree with his theory re lawyers and the missing 14 appeals. I do agree with your point that there's no incentive, at this point, for LE to drop any of the cases, which makes the current state of affairs even more strange. Also, your mention about the constantly changing numbers is one of the most interesting points to consider. We don't have enough info to know, but the shift from 28 to 18 to 14 is certainly evidence that something odd appears to be happening in the background.

If everything was going according to LE's plan, the 28 clients they announced as being referred for prosecution would likely have all received a summons. And all of them, or at least the vast majority of them, would have hired lawyers. Any lawyer worth his salt would have either filed their own appeal or would have joined with an appeal filed by one of the other lawyers. The logical end result would therefore have been reports of 28 (or close to that number) defendant appeals filed (separately or jointly).

The absence of 14 appeals is therefore quite a puzzle. I don't pretend to have any explanation but am just pointing out that it may be an indication of problems behind the scenes. Of course, it's also worth noting that all we're going on are media reports. But the local media attention has been so intense that any mistakes would likely be corrected promptly. It'll be interesting to see what kinds of reports come out in the coming days.

P.S. It occurs to me that it is possible that, after making the announcement about 28 clients, LE could have decided to go after 14 in one batch and delay the other 14 until later. But that's pure speculation on my part, and LE hasn't made any announcement along those lines. And that also doesn't explain the 18-to-14 number shift you mentioned. So, for the moment, it remains an unsolved puzzle.

[JmSuttr]

I would rather think that the other 14 don't have an attorney (yet). Maybe they cannot afford one? Or maybe they're just waiting to see what happens. Whatever decision is taken, will apply to all 28 anyway, so maybe they don't see a point in paying attorneys at this time.

All of the alleged clients had enough discretionary income to (allegedly) spend on visits to the agencies. And it's doubtful that LE, at least with this initial tranche, would be targeting clients with just a few visits or anyone who doesn't meet the criteria they laid out when they made a big deal about how agency clients included prominent individuals.

All things considered, it's hard to imagine any defendant in this first group being someone who can't afford to hire a lawyer. And, considering the fact that their lives are at risk of being ruined, it's hard to imagine any defendant not hiring an attorney immediately after receiving a summons. Would you sit back and wait to see what happens? I certainly wouldn't. I'd not only hire a lawyer but I'd also be making a Plan B, Plan C, and a plan for as many scenarios as I could think up.

Maybe what you point out might possibly apply to one or two, but to fourteen? I think not. Also, the reason why every summoned defendant needs a lawyer now is because, no matter what the SJC decision is, the probable cause hearings will still take place. The only issue in dispute is whether they'll be public or private. So, IMO, any summoned individual who hasn't already hired a lawyer is a certifiable idiot.

[Comcast7777]

I would rather think that the other 14 don't have an attorney (yet). Maybe they cannot afford one? Or maybe they're just waiting to see what happens. Whatever decision is taken, will apply to all 28 anyway, so maybe they don't see a point in paying attorneys at this time.

I lean this way as well. I can't imagine they dropped 14 cases as there's no reason for it at this juncture. Might as well see it through to the show cause hearing and go from there.

One thing that is strange though is the initial appeal to the SJC had 18 (I believe) alleged clients appeal. I wonder why that number dropped from 18 to 14 for this appeal.

[Hyperion11]

The Federal case against the 3 primary defendants is a slam dunk, IMO. But the local cases against alleged clients seem to be turning into a can of worms. From the 28 enumerated in the initial press release, we're now apparently down to 14. At least 14 is the number of due process appeals that have reportedly been filed. What's become of the other 14 is anyone's guess.

I would rather think that the other 14 don't have an attorney (yet). Maybe they cannot afford one? Or maybe they're just waiting to see what happens. Whatever decision is taken, will apply to all 28 anyway, so maybe they don't see a point in paying attorneys at this time.

[JmSuttr]

I read both doj reports. Check online, they're viewable to the public. The main handler Han or Hana is a woman the other 2 are men. The providers were paid 50% of the fees and kept all tips. The providers were concerned about being caught not about being forced to prostitute. No one is being charged with trafficking. Media outlets are never going to report on most of the facts that don't portray the women as victims.

The Federal case against the 3 primary defendants is a slam dunk, IMO. But the local cases against alleged clients seem to be turning into a can of worms. From the 28 enumerated in the initial press release, we're now apparently down to 14. At least 14 is the number of due process appeals that have reportedly been filed. What's become of the other 14 is anyone's guess.

DOJ isn't technically responsible for the local prosecutions, but they'll still lose face if anything goes wrong. They need the media to help sell the "trafficking" narrative so they'll both work together to keep that going, no matter what. And the media smells blood because they know publicly revealing the identities of the defendants will be a major coup (for them) and they don't care how many lives are ruined.

The only hope for any of the defendants is that there's a favorable ruling from the SJC on the due process and privacy issues. As I've posted previously, there may be a route into the federal court system on Constitutional grounds. But that's too far down the path to see right now. I'm sure at least some of the defense attorneys will make the attempt if and when that time comes.

Consider this as one of the scenarios DOJ and LE might be worried about: The number of potentially prosecutable cases drops (for whatever reason) from 28 to 14. Then, whether via public or private court hearings, only a few are found to meet the probable cause standard. After the media finishes crucifying those poor bastards, their attention will turn to LE and will ask WTF happened to the "strong" cases. And, IIRC, when the initial busts happened the Feds were trumpeting the large number of clients each agency had. So, if they've raised expectations and don't deliver, or under-deliver, negative public opinion is inevitable.

No "trafficking" convictions + very few (no?) "buyers of sex" convictions = major DOJ heartburn. Lots still to unfold, of course, so stay tuned.

[Katokay]

I read both doj reports. Check online, they're viewable to the public. The main handler Han or Hana is a woman the other 2 are men. The providers were paid 50% of the fees and kept all tips. The providers were concerned about being caught not about being forced to prostitute. No one is being charged with trafficking. Media outlets are never going to report on most of the facts that don't portray the women as victims.

[Comcast7777]

Shame there isn't a better use of the courts time and resources. I also saw there was a doctor in the group. The guy probably works 80+ hours a week giving back to the people and is faced with losing his career and reputation for letting off a little steam so he can keep going. Do we really want less doctors and divorces for a headline? This is beyond crazy at this point.

It really makes no sense. They're arguing for access because of all the media attention. The reason why it got so much attention is because of the media. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. All they have to do is stir up interest and then they get special access to material that they wouldn't otherwise? Fucking insane.

[EireAnn]

Shame there isn't a better use of the courts time and resources. I also saw there was a doctor in the group. The guy probably works 80+ hours a week giving back to the people and is faced with losing his career and reputation for letting off a little steam so he can keep going. Do we really want less doctors and divorces for a headline? This is beyond crazy at this point.

[JmSuttr]

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/02/...d-brothel-sjc/

https://archive.is/pvocO

Looks like the privacy and due process arguments will be decided by the full court, assuming the SJC doesn't reject the appeals. That's pretty much what I expected.

Now it'll be interesting to see with what sense of urgency (or lack thereof) the SJC addresses the issue. And also whether they schedule any oral argumentation or simply decide based on the briefs submitted by all the parties. One other item of note is that, per the report, only 14 defendants filed appeals. Does that mean only 14 (alleged) clients are in legal jeopardy? If so, that doesn't square with earlier numbers (28, IIRC) that have been floated out there. Not sure what that means, exactly, but we'll learn more as the saga unfolds! Also, not sure how things work in MA, but it's possible there could be amicus briefs (from the media, and others), which could turn this into a real three-ring circus! Get the popcorn ready.

P.S. H / T to the Boston forum member who sent me the article. I don't have permission to divulge his handle, but I wanted to say a public thanks that I'm sure he'll see.

P. P.S. Second link to the article bypasses the paywall.

[Matty1169]

And although I do definitely agree with you, I just thought they were entertaining vids, that's all. But everything you said was spot on man and you are 100% correct. I certainly wouldn't go around doing that shit, it's extremely risky. You do that type a stuff and it makes you a target with your local law enforcement. LMAO, a officer will be like "oh yeah fellas let's rough this joker clown up for taping us". You basically become a mark at that point. Me personally, I just like to avoid Drama with any LE people and just let them b. But it's always funny when the guys out here get smart aleck with the cops or they post about how they did before. I'm like "bro you're crazy, LMAO, but at the same time respect for having balls to be a wise ass to them". Even if you out school them at their own Game, it's best to not be a shrewd about it. I don't even bother with that shit, plus lot of you out here are smarter than me when it comes to stuff.

[Bosnas]

Interesting that the primary investigating law enforcement agency was Homeland Security, and not the FBI or another more established federal agency.

HSI always takes the lead on things like this.

[SalamanderFour]

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/o...ted-grand-jury

They couldn't make a case for Human Trafficking.

It's always about the money.

Interesting that the primary investigating law enforcement agency was Homeland Security, and not the FBI or another more established federal agency.