Archive for October 19th, 2010

If it were possible to make an accurate calculation of the evils which police regulations occasion, and of those which they prevent, the number of the former would, in all cases, exceed that of the latter. –  Karl Wilhelm Von Humboldt

Knowledge is power; it not only allows one to manipulate one’s local region of the universe, but also to resist attempts by others to manipulate one.  I’m sure all of my readers have noticed that once they become familiar with a subject that articles or stories written by people ignorant of that field become annoying or even laughable, and the omissions and misinformation inherent in propaganda stand out like dirt under an ultraviolet light.  The following is paraphrased from an article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazetteof Sunday, October 17th, 2010; it is an excellent representation of the sort of prohibitionist propaganda which the police love to issue and which gullible reporters swallow whole because they can’t be bothered to investigate the facts or interview anyone with an opposing view (and wouldn’t be allowed to print it if they did).

An Illinois prostitute was arrested recently in Monroeville, Pennsylvania after allegedly offering an undercover cop sex for $200.  Prior to going to the room, she met him in the hotel parking lot and grabbed his crotch.  Police call this a “cop check”, one technique women use to tell a cop from a customer.  Schooled by the Internet, experience and fellow prostitutes, they post lookouts, frisk johns, demand that men get naked or ask them to fondle them. They think cops will balk at such demands, but they’re wrong.  “These girls take it to another level,” said the Monroeville officer, who has worked prostitution stings for 18 years and asked that his name not be used.

She certainly didn’t learn that from the internet, unless it was from some dumb bunny who’s never been popped before; all experienced girls know that neither touching nor anything else will expose a cop because they can do whatever they like, and even in jurisdictions where there are rules of behavior the cop will just lie and say he didn’t do whatever it was he wasn’t supposed to do.  Note that this slimeball enjoys victimizing women so much he’s done it for 18 years.

This kind of prostitution bust goes on every day at area hotels, which have asked police to do something about increasingly savvy hookers traveling to Pennsylvania from as far off as California, Texas, Nevada and Hawaii.  But it’s become news in Green Tree, where police Chief Andrew Lisiecki reportedly allowed a 32-year-old Fort Lauderdale, Florida woman named Akudo Duru (whom he contacted from her Backpage.com ad) to begin performing a sex act on him in a hotel room on September 9th before arresting her.

Hotels “asked police to do something about” touring escorts?  Oh, please!  Aside from the odd bluenosed manager, hotels love escorts; they’re clean, quiet, tip housekeeping and book rooms out of season.  What’s actually going on in this paragraph is an intentional confusion of travelling escorts (who stay in 3-star hotels) with streetwalkers in fleabags, who may very well anger management with noise, drama and attracting cheap undesirables.  Also note these yahoos giving themselves airs by pretending that Pittsburgh is some kind of Mecca for touring escorts!

According to Lisiecki’s affidavit, the two met at the Radisson and disrobed at her request. He asked her whether she wanted her “donation,” code for payment. After she told him to put it on the table, Lisiecki claims, the woman used her hand to start a sex act. He said he stopped her and told her he wanted more.  When she pulled out a condom, he arrested her and called in two other cops.  Lisiecki said the appearance of a condom is an obvious indication of sexual intent and predicate for an arrest.  The chief has since been criticized for going too far, but prosecutors and police say he did nothing wrong.  Touching, they say, is sometimes necessary because veteran hookers are careful not to verbalize sex acts.

Yes, it’s “code”, which is why the cops know it too; the word is “jargon”, ignoramus.  The “indication of intent” thing infuriates public health advocates; by pretending the presence of a condom is “evidence of prostitution”, cops discourage streetwalkers from carrying them.  But I guess the cops think their weird aversion to condoms is more important than public health.  But of course he did nothing wrong; he’s a big, brave hero who busted a damned dirty whore!  And even if he had done something wrong, he would simply perjure himself and deny it.

Lisiecki, a former Pittsburgh police lieutenant who became chief of the 10-man Green Tree force last year, said criticism of his conduct is unfair and has hurt his wife and children. He claimed that he doesn’t enjoy physical contact with prostitutes, many of whom are drug addicts and are at risk for sexually transmitted diseases.  “I don’t like being touched by these girls but sometimes you can’t avoid it,” he said. “Some will not voice any sex act, so you can’t make the arrest.”  He said he decided to do stings himself because hotels in his community have asked for help, but his force is small and he won’t make officers work a detail if they don’t want to. “A lot of guys don’t want to do this work,” he said.

This paragraph is a gold mine.  The big booming metropolis of Green Tree (population 4422)  has such a huge problem with prostitutes that it has to devote a THIRD of its force (i.e. all who were on duty at the time), including the chief himself, to deal with the scourge of wanton women running up and down the streets and causing general consternation.  Next, a PUBLIC OFFICIAL claims immunity from criticism on the grounds that it has “hurt his wife and children.”  Gee, maybe he should’ve thought of that before accepting public office and then abusing his position to get free hand jobs.  Then he claims that he doesn’t like being touched by girls, despite the fact that he clearly had an erection because otherwise she wouldn’t have brought out the condom.  Obviously, an erection constitutes clear legal proof of sexual disinterest in Pennsylvania; the “rape is not a crime of sex” crowd may buy that, but no sexually aware woman would.  Then he trots out the old “diseased whore” stereotype, followed by a pathetic attempt to cast himself as a hero.  And the reason “A lot of guys don’t want to do this work” is because of these things called scruples, which the chief clearly lacks.

At least 25 recent affidavits from area police indicate that his tactics are not uncommon; cops often take their clothes off and touch or allow themselves to be touched.  While it’s legal, some officers don’t think this is a good idea, and some lawyers also question whether contact is appropriate since the law simply states that prostitution occurs when an agreement is made to exchange money for sex.  David Harris, a University of Pittsburgh law professor, said most police around the country usually make arrests after a verbal agreement.  “It’s not illegal for him to do what he did,” he said. “It is simply unusual…I’m not sure he had go that far to make the arrest.”

I think this speaks for itself.

Chief Lisiecki disputed that, however, saying he has received messages of support from vice units around the country who use similar techniques such as the Indianapolis PD policy which instructs officers to wait until the prostitute touches them before arresting her.  “Most (prostitutes) know not to talk,” said Sgt. Jon Daggy, late-shift supervisor of the Indianapolis vice unit. “They put you through these tests to see if you’re a cop. In many cases they’ve been coached by lawyers.”

Is even one person surprised that he received kudos from other vice cops?  They probably swap these stories over beer.  Apparently the brilliant legal mind of Sgt. Daggy is superior to that of the lawyers who “coach” prostitutes by giving them incorrect information about the efficacy of cop tests.

The prostitutes, who often carry laptops to keep track of appointments and post online ads, keep working because they make good money despite the occasional arrest. Some can clear $5,000 in a weekend, police said. If they have to pay a $300 fine now and then, “That’s the cost of doing business,” said Lisiecki.

$5000 in one weekend?  Not hardly.  In a busy week, sure, but not in two days.  Long division is your friend; try it sometime.  But since you admit you can’t stop prostitution, why the hell are you wasting public money trying to?

Prostitution is often referred to as a victimless crime, but police say it isn’t because it attracts other crime that can degrade the community.  If independent prostitutes are permitted to work, detectives say, the stage can be set for an organized ring to move in and control the sex trade.  What’s more, police say, prostitution is rampant.  During one bust at a Monroeville hotel, officers learned that five hookers were working the same building that day. In Moon, police have made 33 busts this year. In the city, Lt. Mathias said, officers arrest between five and 10 prostitutes every day.

Once again we have the intentional equation of internet escorts with local streetwalkers.  How, pray tell, do touring escorts “attract crime”?  Do they carry thugs in the trunks of their cars, perhaps?  And then we get the old “whores and pimps” fallacy again; “an organized ring…move in and control?”  WTF is that even supposed to mean?  I’ve been in this business for ten years and I’ve never heard of an “organized ring moving in” (from outer space, apparently) to “control” anything.  Do these retards mean escort services, or are they talking about the Mafia?  And how do they imagine these imaginary bogeymen “control” independent escorts, especially ones who are only there for a few days?  Once again, we’re faced with a lurid masturbatory fantasy of whores enslaved by pimps, dreamed up insecure men who cannot handle the fact that the sex trade is controlled almost entirely by WOMEN.

Since the Green Tree incident, several departments have asked the district attorney’s office for guidelines on stings. Lawyers can generally challenge arrests on two fronts: entrapment and “outrageous government conduct,” but neither usually succeeds.  “Entrapment” happens when an officer deceives an innocent person into committing a crime; interstate hookers rarely fall into that category.  “Outrageous police conduct” means a violation of due process; the landmark Pennsylvania case involved a 2006 arrest in Allentown where state troopers paid an informant to enter a massage parlor and have sex four times with two women.  The judge ruled that the man did not need to have sex four times and a verbal agreement would have sufficed. “We expect more from the police, and demand that they conduct their investigations and utilize their resources without resorting to such embarrassing investigative techniques,” the judge wrote. “No standards existed for this type of investigation, and some of the behavior by the participants was sophomoric.”  He dismissed the case and prosecutors appealed, but last year Superior Court upheld the ruling.

Yes, they can challenge on those grounds, but only shysters try because they know it won’t work and merely advise their marks (excuse me, “clients”) to fight because it results in more billable hours.  Lawyers know they can’t win prostitution cases because they’re “he said, she said” and the court is biased in favor of the cops, so any half-decent one will simply advise his client to take the plea bargain, pay the fine and get on with her life.  The fine doesn’t even cover the cost of the trial much less the sting, so the public is left paying the bill for crooked cops to get their sadistic jollies by having sex with whores and then busting them.

Read Full Post »