Posted on 03/12/2008 6:37:31 AM PDT by Loud Mime
When New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was implicated Monday as a customer of a multistate prostitution ring, journalists rushed to brush up their knowledge of a 1910 federal law known as the Mann Act. The law, once known as the "white slavery" law, forbids the transportation of women across state lines for "immoral purposes," including prostitution.
Mr. Spitzer has not been charged with violating the Mann Act or committing any other crime. It's possible that no charges will be brought at all, especially if he resigns his office. Or it's possible that if charges are brought, they will focus on the possibility that he engaged in "structuring" -- arranging his alleged payments to the prostitution ring to avoid federal scrutiny of his finances.
But suppose for a moment that he is charged under the Mann Act. Some might decry that a statute intended to deter human trafficking would be used against a "John" of the sort who is rarely prosecuted for being a customer of a prostitute. These observers would have a point.
Then again, Mr. Spitzer himself is intimately familiar with the prosecutorial tactic of dusting off old laws and repurposing them. When he became New York's Attorney General in 1999, he seized on the 1921 Martin Act and wielded it as a club against some of the biggest firms on Wall Street. The Martin Act was originally passed to facilitate the prosecution of "bucket shops" that took advantage of small-time investors, but its use became relatively rare decades ago. It should have been repealed.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
A technical point.
Spitzer didn’t transport anyone. He made an appointment to be met at a DC hotel. He didn’t specify who should meet him.
Although he was aware travel may be involved and offered to pay exenses, the multi-state, multi-national prostitution ring could have sent someone local if they had someone.
It gets even better, seem that Eliot “Mess” is hoist by his own petard. The money tracking services bank use to comply with money laundering reporting requirements were resorted to after guess who slammed investment firms in 2001. Check out the delicious irony in the NPR piece here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88132229&sc=emaf
That's false. he asked for the same hooker as last time, Kristin.
“Spitzer didn’t transport anyone.”
Any procecutor worth his salt could make the case that talking w/, arranging for and paying for is ipso facto transporting.
I don’t think your defense flies very well.
Transportation of a female across state lines was performed, at his request and expense, for immoral purposes. At the least, this would seem to constitute conspiracy to violate the Mann Act.
Given his position as an attorney, an officer of the court, and executive official of government, he would also seem to have a legal obligation to report violations of the law of which he was aware. Certainly more obligation than the average person.
If he picked from a menu or asked for someone in particular, would that do it?
His law-stretching may well be used against him.
It's not a defense. I was pointing out something I don't think most people realized who hadn't read the actual documents.
It's not a defense. I was pointing out something I don't think most people realized who hadn't read the actual documents.
He didn't specify. He was told which it would be, and asked what she looked like.
Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, I'm not defending him. I think he's the lowest kind of scum, and not just for his hooker habit. I was just making a factual point, from having read the wiretap document.
LEWIS asked: "You had QAT . . .," and Client-9 (Spitzer) said: "Yup, same as in the past, no question about it."
SHOULD HAVE just acted responsibily and he would not have any of these problems.
No, in that part he’s talking about the financial transaction. How he sent the money.
No doubt. But I didn’t say “...may be...could have..” or anything like it.
He provided transportation costs from New York. That makes him an accessory.
I think that public castration would be a good start.
I love how ‘rats and media are trying to defend the guy.
The hypocrisy couldn’t be any more blatant.
Although he was aware travel may be involved and offered to pay exenses [sic], the multi-state, multi-national prostitution ring could have sent someone local if they had someone.
You are 100% incorrect on the facts.
Spitzer specifically demanded Kristen from NYC be transported to Washington DC’s Mayflower Hotel, he specifically requested her travel and companionship. Spitzer on the wiretap said that he wanted Kristen the “same as always” for a Waashington DC romp.
I would have loved to see his wife, while on the podium with him, knee him in the groin.
Liberal wimmin are such doormats.
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.