Archive for April 25th, 2011

Q: How can you tell if a politician is lying?  A: His lips are moving.

Whores are used to being lied about by prohibitionists, politicians and cops, but since we’re the subject of the current moral panic the current crop of lies is even worse than usual, and the most outrageous of these lies are being spewed out by cops and their media stooges.  Really, this should come as no surprise; since virtually every statement made by cops about sex workers is a lie, and since they are encouraged to commit the most ridiculous fabrications to paper as “evidence” of women’s “crime” of being sexual, it takes very little provocation for them to come out with tall tales which might be funny were they not used to whip up anti-whore hysteria among the pathologically gullible.  So though the popular joke which forms my epigram mentions politicians, on the subject of prostitutes it applies equally well to cops.  I’m going to look at two recent examples, both of which were called to my attention by the ever-alert Brandy Devereaux.

I’m sure most of my readers are familiar with the fact that there is a new serial killer in New York, and like so many others of his kind he’s targeting prostitutes.  The reason for this should be obvious to any reasonable person:  The criminalization of our trade forces us to work secretly and therefore makes us much easier targets.  But cops and their ilk are not reasonable people; first the district attorney said it was their own fault they were killed, and now the FBI is trying to call attention away from the fact that the killer is probably a cop by blaming the murder of at least one of the girls on internet trolls.  Here’s the April 17th report from that bastion of responsible journalism, the New York Daily News:

Members of an Internet sex forum hatched a “revenge” plot against a Long Island hooker who was later murdered and dumped in a serial killer’s burial ground, the Daily News has learned.  Talk on longislanderotic.com shows members were outraged when one of their cronies claimed he had paid Amber Lynn Costello $200 for sex, only to be robbed by men who barged into her West Babylon home.  “Tell her we are all coming over there with baseball bats,” threatened one member…

That ominous threat, and more to follow, has opened a window on what probers say is a virtually unregulated sex network of johns, hookers and escort services.  “The Internet has really become a highway for criminality,” said Eugene O’Donnell, a professor of law and police studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.  “In terms of prostitution, it’s moved a pretty public enterprise into the shadows more than ever, and made it more difficult for law enforcement to get a handle on it.”  Investigators would not say if any of the online johns are suspects in the probe of a possible serial killer…Still, law enforcement sources say the chilling online thread is the type of internet-based sex crime that attracted the FBI to the case…

A message board member known as “Humiliatrix69” first raged on July 11, 2010, about getting “suckered” by Costello and company hours earlier.  Shortly after, a pal called “italyrider” asked for her address:  “No one from this board needs to be involved.  I have friends who can take care of this s—.”  Humiliatrix69 posted Costello’s address, a description of her home, and her phone number.  Three days days later, “Morrie” chimed in:  “A friend of ours told me today that ‘You won’t hear from those 2 girls anymore!'”  Costello, a twice-divorced drug addict, disappeared on Sept. 2, 2010.  That was eight weeks after Humiliatrix69 aired his anger on the message board…Costello advertised herself as a “Southern girl” named “Carolina,” who was “short, sexy & a lot of fun.”  Humiliatrix69 didn’t have such a good time.  “Seemed really friendly,” his angry post read.  “Provided the donation.  She slipped away and got comfortable, and so did I.  Then there was a knock at the door.”  Humiliatrix69 claimed two men armed with a baseball bat rushed at him.  One claimed he was Costello’s boyfriend…They fought on the front lawn.  “I made it clear that it wasn’t over, so after posting this…I gotta go handle this,” he wrote…Humiliatrix69 was hell-bent on revenge, but nervous.  “I want to be spiteful and get revenge, but I am going to [private message] the info.  I wanna get the exact address.  I will go by there tonight.  I could seriously do some time for the things I want to do to this provider and her boyfriend.”  Then he admitted to having cold feet.  Revenge wouldn’t be worth it, he reasoned, claiming he would go “back to attempting to make legitimate porn videos”…

As is typical for tabloids, the article concentrates on the lurid and pitches the story to make the commonplace seem sinister; for example, “a virtually unregulated network blah blah blah…” when the entire internet is virtually unregulated!  And if any of my readers has NOT ever seen some big shot running his mouth off on one message board or another as the men in this story did, please comment; I predict no replies.  The guy was angry because he got ripped off; so would anyone be.  I certainly hope the FBI’s “interest” is just a fabrication on the part of the Daily News, because if the feds are honestly trying to pin one of a string of virtually-identical serial killer cases on angry internet commenters, they must have learned their investigative techniques from watching too many TV cop shows.

I do want to point out one more thing about this story: Professor O’Lawhead’s asinine comments at the beginning of the second paragraph. “Highway for criminality?” WTF?  I mean, is this person for real?  He claims to be a law professor and yet can’t recognize the difference between real criminality and a status offense?  And that stupid comment about prostitution being a “public enterprise” betrays an appalling ignorance of the history of the subject he is presuming to speak about.  One has to wonder if he won his law degree as a prize from an iron claw machine on Coney Island.

The second example is far less serious, but IMHO more irritating because it’s a blatant lie rather than a distortion of the truth, and comes directly from the pigs’ mouths instead of potentially being a journalistic artifact.  Brandy’s blog of April 18th refers to this story posted on recordpub.com the day before:

An alleged prostitute who advertised her services online and was caught in an April 4 Brimfield police sting operation at a hotel in the township has pleaded not guilty to prostitution, solicitation and related misdemeanor charges.  Samantha R. Edwards, 19…was arraigned last week in Portage County Municipal Court…on one count each of prostitution and solicitation, both third-degree misdemeanors, and three counts of possession of criminal tools, all first-degree felonies…Brimfield police allege that Edwards posted a profile under the “Female Escorts” section of AkronCanton.BackPage.com under the alias “Skyy”…A tip led officers to investigate and then send an officer into her hotel room undercover, where an offer for sex allegedly was made and money allegedly changed hands.  Edwards was arrested and a Nokia cell phone, Sanyo digital camera and 50 to 60 Trojan condoms were seized as tools related to her alleged activities.  Five men, or “johns,” allegedly arrived while police were investigating.  Because no offers were made and no money changed hands, Brimfield police identified the men and turned them away…

As Kelly James pointed out, the website misquotes the law; “possession of criminal tools” is a misdemeanor, not a felony.  But that’s bad enough; how many of my female readers carry around cell phones?  I guess that means you’re all criminals under Ohio law, especially if you also own a digital camera.  And I wonder how many condoms you need in your purse before it becomes a “crime”; 40? 10?  One, perhaps?  When will our amateur sisters wake up and understand that these laws can be (and sometimes are) used against ANY woman?  As long as meeting up with a man to whom one is not married can be classified as a “crime” on the basis of motive (and defined by carrying a cell phone) no woman is safe from this type of tyranny.  Then there’s one last, small detail which irritates the hell out of me:  The police attempt to slut-shame their captive by falsely claiming five men showed up while they were “investigating” (i.e. busting her).  Unless they were there for at least 8 or 9 hours, that’s total bullshit in the same class as Pennsylvania cops’ repeated claims that typical escorts make $5000 per weekend; they’re blatant attempts to evoke the “dirty whore” stereotype and disgust housewives by making it look as though we spend all our waking hours pulling trains without washing in between.

Read Full Post »