Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Robert Kraft charged | Login/Join |
Has Achieved Nirvana |
Yes. Yes. Yes. And it does tie in to the immigration issue, because these people come from other countries and then can be forced into these sex jobs. And heightened immigration enforcement increases the pressure that they are under, because the threat that they and their children will be sent packing is larger. | |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
Yes. My bet is they'll all be charged with misdemeanors and they'll all be fined and have some sort of service time (including, I've read, mandatory training on human trafficking). But no jail time. | |||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
Jail? That’s ridiculous.
| |||
|
| Pinta & the Santa Maria Has Achieved Nirvana  |
I don't know if it's ridiculous, as it's in the realm of the sentencing guidelines. But I don't see it happening. I got stuck on this quote, from the 2nd article, this from the Patriots organization: "We categorically deny that Mr. Kraft engaged in any illegal activity." Uh, don't they have video? Surely they're not going to claim it was consensual. | |||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
That same $20 says he doesn't get fined either.
| |||
|
Minor Deity |
Meanwhile, in NY, legislators working to decriminalize sex work
| |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
Maybe I haven't read enough about this case, in fact I've probably seen only the headlines. But why wouldn't he? He's not accused of raping somebody, is he?
| |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
It’s still prostitution. That’s still a crime. Surely he will not try to argue that he went into a day spa to meet someone, and just happened to strike up a sexual relationship? | |||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
jon - What about the part about paying for services? Quirt -- Yea, and he was there more than once. Would be interesting to see if there was more than one woman involved...
| |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
I get that it's prostitution. But he'll still argue that it's consensual. I'm not arguing that it wasn't a crime, rather I'm addressing Nina's specific point about consent.
| |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
Consent gets you out of human trafficking, it does not vitiate a charge of prostitution. In the classic case of sex for money, if you assume a sole contractor who is a U.S. citizen with no pimp, the prostitute is consenting, 100%. And it's still a crime. | |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
Again, I get that it’s a crime in many jurisdictions. I was simply reacting to Nina’s statement about consent.
| |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
Human trafficking would be a charge for the owner, not the customer. Unless the law is really defective.
| |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
No. Suppose, for example, that the "customer" knows that the provider of the service is unwilling and is a victim of human trafficking. One can imagine the charging authorities claiming the "customer" is complicit. Perhaps that would be a rape or sexual assault charge. Or perhaps a conspiracy charge. Or perhaps an accessory after the fact charge. I can imagine several ways in which a "customer" who was aware that the provider was a trafficking victim might be charged. And now, I'll go look to see if I can find support for that viewpoint. | |||
|
| Has Achieved Nirvana |
http://www.ncsl.org/research/c...rafficking-laws.aspx | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|