I'm referring to the federal case. No customers are being charged federally by DOJ. Whatever the State of Massachusetts decides to do is not really compelling to me. States pass heartbeat laws. States are silly.
So back last November we know about the bust of the BTT people. Just recently defense counsel and the US Attorney have told the court they're close to a deal. One of the co-conspirators has a hearing set for 10/1 to change plea. They sold his Corvette in July after seizing it during the arrests. The main defendant is undergoing interviews with Probation to prepare for a hearing to change her plea as well. The third co-conspirator is still requesting more time on the case, but that could be a function of counsel as all 3 of these people got public defenders because they said they couldn't afford private attorneys.
For a refresher, we went over the affidavit filed early November here and got some very interesting views from TER tough guys talking about how this case will go and how they'd handle prison. I found most of it laughable, mainly because of how many tough guys are on the TER forums but also how people think the justice system works.
In February this year a federal grant jury handed down an indictment and we have more details on all the evidence Justice has against these three. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/media/1336991/dl
They will all be more than happy to cooperate given the charges and what counsel is telling the courts. For some reason there are so many tough guys here but when actual charges are filed and people are actually in cuffs, all that toughness just seems to vanish. Weird huh? I also find it funny how guys on social security talk about how they'll hire counsel and beat federal cases out of sheer will but then the people who actually profit from setting up these operations somehow can't afford counsel themselves and need federal public defenders. I guess that's what happens when the persona of an internet tough guy somehow collides with the reality of being under federal indictment and looking at decades of time confined to a space the size of a bathroom for much of the day.
go back to the original thread and tell us just which "tough guy" was ever talking about the three charged with running the operation and which of the 28 customers that have been charged (have they even been charged yet? Or did they skip that part when they confessed during their interviews.) are facing decades of time confined?
Just as a reference for others, and I cannot verify as I've never been in jail or prison (but some friends way back in another life as it were have been and seemed consisten with the description here) but this seems to suggestion "most of the day" is not confined to some little room: http://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/07/12/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-prisoner
It's a money laundering and trafficking case. Customers aren't being charged. Customers who try and play tough with HSI get a trip to the jail and then are released without charge. They don't get a rebate for any legal fees or retainers given to counsel while they sit in jail for 10 hours because they refused to identify themselves in a criminal investigation. For your attorney to get in the car and just drive to county jail is probably a good $1,000 because they count drive time and the time they were mentally preparing for your case even though there is no case.
If the case went to trial then those 28 customers and that confidential informant on asylum could be called as witnesses to be cross-examined by defense counsel. This case is probably not going to trial so there wouldn't be a need to cross-examine any of them. In the case of a customer being put as a witness who doesn't want to cooperate, the US Assistant Attorney can grant that person transactional immunity and then they're forced to testify on the stand about their visit. If they refuse to testify even after being granted immunity, or if they lie under oath, they can be held in contempt of court. Which basically has no time limit, and in theory they can sit in jail until they agree to testify as ordered by the judge. This has happened to people who refuse to divulge where they have assets situated even with a court order. They are held in contempt and just sit there until they decide to speak. Which in this case that's worse than a solicitation charge where you have a 5th amendment right. As an uncooperative witness with transactional immunity, you enjoy no such protection from being put on the stand and put in jail for refusing.
In regard to prison being in a cell, I'm speaking of how long you're in the cell for a 24-hour period in a United States Penitentiary. Not a Level 2 low security prison in Michigan as you linked in your article. There's a big difference. Someone found guilty of trafficking at trial is going to be sent to a USP and given close to the max sentence. If the defendants cut deals and are sentences to prison, they can probably negotiate going to a FCI which is not as strict as a USP. And that would look more like your article where the author is in a Level 2 state facility. Also with federal sentencing there is no parole. You serve 80% of your sentence at the minimum.
that had the 3-week jail experience because you couldn't raise bail?
I didn't want to look back and research because this post isn't about Kgirl sessions!
No, I've never not been able to raise bail. But I have been to jail quite a few times and so that's why during the last post I found it comical that guys who've never been arrested had this whole narrative in their minds about what jail in LA is like and what they would do and what would happen, etc.
They have no clue how it works, they've never had to retain counsel and pay legal bills, and they've never been to jail. So it's people with zero background in anything speaking with a certainty on how things work. I guess they get their information from scripted dramas on Netflix or something?
So all your rhetoric about the tough guy talk on the board here was just BS as no one ever said anything about what the 3 charged with running the operation should be doing. Though I suspect most would also agree that STFU is the right starting point even in that case.
No, it's not BS. It's a lot of people talking tough, you included, about how you'll just completely derail the justice system if you refuse to identify yourself. Like "there's this one trick that they hate!" and you're going to employ that to somehow skirt around being hammed up in a criminal investigation by HSI.
I'm showing that the tough guy talk, including one of the defendants here who had the Corvette seized, falls apart when they collide with the legal system. I illustrated above how you can be called as a witness, granted transactional immunity, and you'd be forced to testify. If you hired counsel they would tell you to testify to avoid being found in contempt and going to jail. It's real simple.
"No, it's not BS. It's a lot of people talking tough, you included, about how you'll just completely derail the justice system if you refuse to identify yourself. Like "there's this one trick that they hate!" and you're going to employ that to somehow skirt around being hammed up in a criminal investigation by HSI."
THAT is what you take from my saying that those that just confessed when asked should have just told the the agents they would only speak through their attourny and were not going to say anything until they spoke with an attourny? Really, THAT is suppose to "completely derail the justice system"??????
If you live in a state that requires the police to do more than just ask to see an ID then not showing it is a legal right People should take advantage of that. If you live in a State where you have to show ID when asked by police, then show it to them. But don't convict yourself of some consentual interactions just because you felt imtimidated by police. Police are expected to know, follow and respect the law. Demanding a legal right should not be an issue, even when they act like they want to make it seem like a big deal.
Last, while possibly a bit strong, I don't think anyone here really gives a shit about what the 3 who were arrested and charged with the federal crimes are doing. What I think EVERYONE here was concerned about was what is happening to the clients and the 28 who might be named.
However, that all changes for them if they were to be called as witnesses. Which is really only possible now that they confessed to the investigating agents. So the suggestion that it's good to talk with the feds if you only committed some local crime starts looking pretty bad in these types of cases. What everyone, pretty much, is really concerned about is their activites being made public -- which a trial and sitting on a witness stand will certinaly do for them. I suspect most here would say "I'll pay the 20K and keep my name out of the papers and local news and be happyer."
But sure, keep on telling everyone here to shoot themselves in the head by not just availing themselves of their legal rights. After all, it's not like your lawyer could never negotiate a deal where you might confess to paying for sex and then act as a witness for the DA in exchange for a closed door not name publicly released deal. I don't think that would be on the table at this point for any of the 28 should the 3 (or some subset) go to trial and they be named as witnesses.
That guy Rocket in here was talking about how he's in his 30s yet has no stable job that would wonder where he was if he went missing from work for 3 days. No family and no loved ones at all who would question his absence. Sounds like he would be able to just take the arrest and ride it out in jail without paying an attorney. As to how he would avoid being sexually assaulted in jail spending two nights in there is another matter I didn't cover, but his case is such an edge case. Most people have career responsibilities and friends and loved ones who would start to wonder why you vanished for several days. Going through all of that just to "stick it to the man" and refuse to identify yourself is stupid. You gain basically zero and you potentially sacrifice a lot.
There are nice ways to say things that get you a whole lot further than being a jerk, digging in your heels, refusing to show ID, and just generally being unpleasant. My responses above have never gotten me in any kind of bad faith dispute with police. They get it. But I'm also reasonable, I'm pleasant, and I don't sound like Robocop when I say I need to run these questions by counsel first.
TER tough guys don't have this nuance. They want to get in a battle with law enforcement, or at least think they do. But then the cuffs go on and grown men start sobbing.
It's weird how you have in your mind how you think this all works but it doesn't work that way at all.
"Identifying yourself when asked isn't convicting yourself. It's quite easy to find out who you are at some point. You also carry a device in your pocket that reveals more about you than anyone alive knows, and all that data is held in custody of companies."
Of course not nor did I ever say that.
"It's weird how you have in your mind how you think this all works but it doesn't work that way at all." If you don't mind my taking your own words you might decide to do a bit of self-reflection.
I'm referring to the federal case. No customers are being charged federally by DOJ. Whatever the State of Massachusetts decides to do is not really compelling to me. States pass heartbeat laws. States are silly.
Your point is compelling, giving that 28 men are facing possible criminal charges. Had the ones approached by the law enforcement staking out the brothels kept their mouths shut, as entitled, they likely wouldn’t be facing charges.
Are they releasing the client list? What cooperation are they providing? Are they not going to prison?
DOJ has the client lists and everything. They seized all electronic equipment, ledgers and communications of this operation and related one. I don't think there is a reason to release a list, but they did get detailed information from clients about sessions and what goes on in them when they were conducting surveillance on the apartments. Those client names have to be released to defense counsel upon request through the discovery process because they're being used as evidence in the indictment.
If this case was going to trial, which it seems like it won't, then defense counsel could call these witnesses to testify and go under cross-examination. The cooperation they're providing isn't known yet, as they only have hearings scheduled to change their not-guilty pleas. But they usually are offering something to avoid the max prison sentence. You have to come with something to bargain with before the US Attorney will agree to let you plea out to a lighter sentence. Can't show up empty-handed.
I think they would go to prison unless they've got something really valuable. I would be shocked if they were able to plea out to multiple counts of money laundering and trafficking and avoid incarceration.