Posted on 03/16/2007 3:20:08 PM PDT by SmithL
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge ruled Friday that a former escort service owner cannot sell phone records and other company records, saving about 15,000 clients from possible public embarrassment.
Deborah Jeane Palfrey, 50, has said she planned to sell the list to a news organization to help raise money for her defense. The alleged "D.C. Madam" ran Pamela Martin and Associates, an upscale escort service in the Washington area, for 13 years before it closed in August.
Federal prosecutors say it was a prostitution ring that yielded $2 million in assets, including cash and homes. In October, the federal government froze the asset
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
If I were her on Monday I would inform the judge, "oops it's too late" and cash the check fast.
What are you going to do once the horse is out of the barn.
Part of the fun of being "the government." Charge you with a crime, and then make sure that you're unable to use your assets to pay for a defense. And when you cry that you need a lawyer paid for by the government, because you can't hire one, they say, "Sorry, too bad. You've got pletny of money to hire one." The response being, "But you've frozen my assets, and I can't pay the lawyer!" Their response, "But the assets are still yours. Just because you can't use them doesn't matter!
It's good to be the king!
Mark
Absolutely. Giving it away would result in many profitable interviews for bringing down some powerful (but slimy) individuals.
I agree. Men are men.
Brief bio @ http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/kessler-bio.html
Caca ! Nowadays, saying, "I'm sorry " and going to rehab is the cure for everything! /s
Can she read from the list out loud, ala " performance art "?
Certainly she must have copies of all the phone numbers, etc. of her clients. If not, she still has time. Send them out of the country and publish them in some offshore country. All she has to say is that they were stolen. Surprise!!!
What a wimp.
I met her once. She was (is, I guess) an intelligent, friendly, and very sweet woman.
I thought of Miss Jane as well.
I'll go against the grain and say this is a good call. It would interfere with what is presumably still an ongoing investigation. The only value this list has is to blackmail a person or persons on it to pay her to keep it from getting out into the public, and blackmail is not ethical. Even if the people on the list aren't going to be prosecuted and somehow this broad isn't trying to blackmail her johns, there is no reason to allow their gratuitous embarrassment and invasion of their privacy.
Another Clint Billman appointee. Keep it in the
family...there are Democrats listed 2-1 over Republicans...
68 Polician names, someone leaked the number but no
names.... JK
That madam was foolish. The FIRST thing she should have done was move copies of those records offshore (with significant embellishment, that is, adding a lot of very sensitive names to the list first), into the hands of a trusted agent.
"My client would be very willing to cooperate, your honor, but my client is no longer in complete possession of the aforementioned documents, as she has just learned that copies of them were surreptitiously made, by person or persons unknown, and have been spirited away. Undoubtedly such individuals have it in mind to publish that information if my client is convicted, as it would then become valuable property."
"In fact, my client would not be surprised if at this very moment, individuals on that list, or their representatives, are being contacted by some unscrupulous person hoping for a conviction against my client, so that they may be publicly exposed to their constituents and families, of their connection to what may be determined by your honor to be a *criminal* matter."
"Now if your honor wants the originals, I am sure we can provide them on an evidentiary basis, and have no intention otherwise of disclosing them. We hope that this will help to lend a swift determination of findings on behalf of my client."
Even if the people on the list aren't going to be prosecuted and somehow this broad isn't trying to blackmail her johns, there is no reason to allow their gratuitous embarrassment and invasion of their privacy.
Many local papers publish johns in the paper. If there are any elected or appointed officials on the list the people need to know. Maybe the judge doesn't realize that prostitution is against the law.
Yes, and some put their pictures on TV. And it's wrong. Public humiliation went out as an appropriate punishment with the stocks.
Invasion of privacy is illegal also. It's not a crime, but it is a tort, the basis for damages and punitive damages.
So many people seem to be lusting, so to speak, to wreck those lives.
"11PM Mrs. C"
Yep, that was my first thought.
Oh, you are wonderful. You said it a zillion times better than I did. The thoughts are the same though.
TAKE COPIES OF THE BOOKS OFFSHORE, MS PALFREY. THE REVENGE WILL BE SO MUCH SWEETER.
We need Washington and all the bloodsuckers to have their day of reckoning.
Tell the judge to go screw himself!
If newspapers around the nation can publish the names of johns, then their is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
If she's convicted the judge could latter rule that the proceeds from the sale are forfeit.
Also, there's a pretty wide gap between getting sucked off for sixpence on a street corner and what we're talking about here.
The former is, of course, a public safety hazard and a nusience. The latter is, really, no one's damned business.
And, let's be realistic here folks - so far as I know, this woman's business catered to heterosexuals. There are going to be at least as many Republicans as Democrats on those lists.
Dang!... you're good.....lol
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.