Paula's case

Was completed today in Cabot. The charges were
1. For the guy - Patronizing a Prostitute
2. For the girls - Solicitation and Promotion.

To be convicted police must show that the lady took money from the man. So the verdict from the judge is:

1. The guy is not guilty - so he did not give money to anyone
2. yet somehow the girls are guilty for excepting the money that was never given?? Figure that one out. Justice - I think NOT.

I suspect it will be appealed but you would have to ask the girls.

...nah...

The two charges were not dependent...because Paula's 'book' was found with loads of cash, the case was made along with eyewitness testimony. Strange case indeed, but the police video showing the activities was the real proof. The second house across the street may have been the catalyst to the raid. All this hullabalew for a $500 fine.

I just hope she gets her book back.

http://www.todaysthv.com/news/local/...121287&catid=2

Was completed today in Cabot. The charges were
1. For the guy - Patronizing a Prostitute
2. For the girls - Solicitation and Promotion.

To be convicted police must show that the lady took money from the man. So the verdict from the judge is:

1. The guy is not guilty - so he did not give money to anyone
2. yet somehow the girls are guilty for excepting the money that was never given?? Figure that one out. Justice - I think NOT.

I suspect it will be appealed but you would have to ask the girls. Originally Posted by Old_gentlemen

It's all a stacked deck.... I always thought prostitution involved "paying" for "sex".... I guess we can't even "patronize" now? Video shows abnormal traffic in and out of a home of Asian women.... did the cameras see through walls? It has been pretty well documented that Paula and the girls served food and drink to their "patrons".... could the traffic have simply been the result of fine cuisine? Somebody above used the word "proof".... where is it?

Giz

It's all a stacked deck.... I always thought prostitution involved "paying" for "sex".... I guess we can't even "patronize" now? Video shows abnormal traffic in and out of a home of Asian women.... did the cameras see through walls? It has been pretty well documented that Paula and the girls served food and drink to their "patrons".... could the traffic have simply been the result of fine cuisine? Somebody above used the word "proof".... where is it? Originally Posted by MrGiz

It will always be a stacked deck.

Especially if you help the authorities stack the desk against yourself.

Remember, BP and FACES never play a part in any prostitution conviction.

"Also found was a computer with pictures on it. Those pictures lead investigators to a website called backpage.com, a website that advertised the location as a place you could exchange money for sexual favors."

Correct.... It will always be a stacked deck!! But, as has been proven.... enough money channeled to a skilled defense attorney can cut that deck. Doesn't appear to be the case here. Justice , eh... ?

Giz

If hapless patron occupy same space with provider, damage is done. Patron will go to jail. Lady will go to jail. All police must do is get you there. They will provide evidence, especially if gentleman neglect to bring own.

But, as has been proven.... enough money channeled to a skilled defense attorney can cut that deck. Doesn't appear to be the case here. Justice , eh... ? Originally Posted by MrGiz

It's a fuckin' misdemeanor for Christ's Sake!!! STFU.... Take your lumps and protect your fellow heathen hobbyists and playmates!! Originally Posted by MrGiz

With the evidence that has been made public, it would be a waste of good money for a misdemeanor. There is obviously some evidence that has not been made public. Since they were operating out of a residence, evidence against them had probably been accumulated over a long period of time. Every time the trash was picked up I bet someone went through it. Who knows how many pictures they have or what other evidence was found in the residence.

The entire set up was sloppy. They made it too easy for the evidence to be collected against them. Obviously, no one was thinking and everyone fell asleep at the switch.

The only evidence supplied at the trial was that they had guys staying about 1 hour at their place and leaving which the neighbors testifying said it was obviously prostitution. The problem with that is - that is NOT EVIDENCE. It is hearsay. In order to be convicted of prostitution, you need an undercover cop to give money to the girl and she is then caught in the act. This never happened.
Accusing someone of prostitution without EVIDENCE and only neighbors stating that guys were coming and going is innuendo.
.
The girls were convicted based upon innuendo. Isn't that nice to know how law enforcement works?

Don't forget the Tropheeee saga. What's the chance that unknown imposter actually made a visit to the house in question. If so, that evidence would never need to hit the street for public consumption.

.... The girls were convicted based upon innuendo. Isn't that nice to know how law enforcement works? Originally Posted by Old_gentlemen

I hear ya, Buddy!! And, I concur!!

The thing that many guys (including me) seem to sometimes conveniently overlook and dismiss when they say it's only a misdemeanor, is.... the arrest record never goes away.... even if not convicted. How many of us want to be questioned about that during job interviews? How many want to be listed in the daily newspaper arrest record?

I doubt very seriously, that the said traffic ever created a real problem or threat in that neighborhood!!

Giz

.... the arrest record never goes away.... even if not convicted. Originally Posted by MrGiz

And based on that observation, no amount of money thrown at a skilled defense attorney will make it go away. An appeal would be even more costly.

As you said, take your lumps.

The problem the 'girls' face is that if they are stopped for a traffic incident, a policeman can pull up their record and call INS and have them deported. It's far more serious than just a simple crime for them. They are permanent residents not american citizens. Any ahole policeman who doesn't like asians can get them deported should he/she want too. Just call INS, they will be there in 48 hours and if they do not have bail they get taken somewhere in Louisiana to a holding cell until their case goes before a judge. That can take years.
.
I'm sure they will appeal.

The problem the 'girls' face is that if they are stopped for a traffic incident, a policeman can pull up their record and call INS and have them deported. It's far more serious than just a simple crime for them. They are permanent residents not american citizens. Any ahole policeman who doesn't like asians can get them deported should he/she want too. Just call INS, they will be there in 48 hours and if they do not have bail they get taken somewhere in Louisiana to a holding cell until their case goes before a judge. That can take years.
.
I'm sure they will appeal. Originally Posted by Old_gentlemen

If that were true, why were deportation proceedings not instituted immediately after their conviction? The court already knows they are not American citizens.

And with that, good effing luck on their appeal.