In Session: Sidebar  « Back to Blog Main
March 21, 2008
Posted: 03:37 PM ET

NEW YORK – We’re learning more each day about the details surrounding the investigation by federal authorities of former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer.

ALT TEXT

Eliot Spitzer’s downfall was swift, but was it criminal?

And with each revelation comes a series of questions. Just how did this investigation get started? Was the investigation conducted properly? And—perhaps most important—is this a case that truly deserves to be the subject of a federal prosecution?

The facts—at least what we’ve learned so far—do seem troubling. Despite the disgust that most people feel for Spitzer, not just over his conduct but also over his blatant hypocrisy, there’s some real doubt that this should be a federal case.

Once it became clear that the governor’s conduct involved marital infidelity and not official corruption, why continue to invest the time and energy that were utilized? Surveillance teams? Wiretapping? All over a series of paid-for sexual trysts? At a time when our law enforcement resources are so terribly stretched attempting to combat terrorism threats, drug offenses and organized crime?

Although law enforcement is certainly not a democratic process, driven by the vote of the people, it is difficult to imagine that most people would feel a compelling need to prosecute a “john”—even if that “john” is named Spitzer– for trying to hide what were apparently payments using his own money. Or for paying the transportation and hotel costs for a prostitute willingly offering her services, especially given the history of the “Mann Act” which was intended to protect against forced prostitution.

Hypocrisy, infidelity and arrogance may well be political offenses, but should they be prosecuted as federal crimes? We’re still looking for an answer from the Federal authorities for that question.

Jack Ford, In Session anchor

Filed under: Eliot Spitzer • Jack Ford


Share this on:
Peg Robson   March 21st, 2008 3:59 pm ET

I am a resident of the great state of NY and I don’t want Spitzer as Gov . He was absolutely brutal in his quest to live up to his Elliot Ness image, and underneath it all he is a low life like the rest of them that he arrested. Of course he will never see jail time…actually he should because I bet those who he busted went to jail. But then again in the game of politics they think they are above the law and the money belongs to them and not the taxpayer.

lory   March 21st, 2008 5:52 pm ET

Peg you are right on there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mike Cook   March 21st, 2008 6:03 pm ET

Hypocrisy, infidelity and arrogance should not be prosecuted as federal offenses…but why do you ask? No law enforcement agency is attempting or even could prosecute him on those charges. Suspicious activity was investigated and the illegal act of soliciting a prostitute and transporting a person across state lines for purposes of prostituion was subsequently uncovered. Apparently Ex-Gov. Spitzer thought that taking advantage of the services of a prostitute deserve harsher treatment as he just raised the penalty for those found guilty of that crime.

TIA TAYLOR   March 21st, 2008 6:09 pm ET

Quote:
“it is difficult to imagine that most people would feel a compelling need to prosecute a “john”’ UnQuote

Why would you assume that most people would NOT want to ‘prosecute a ‘john’”??????? I WOULD!

Why is it okay to prosecute the person who SUPPLIES the service and not the individual who creates the DEMAND for the service (i.e., PROSTITIUTION)?

Those who enforce the law should be held accountable for when they break the SAME law(s) - and should also be held to a higher standard due to their position. Just my opinion ….

Monkey   March 21st, 2008 7:10 pm ET

Good point. I hadn’t thought of it that way.

nancy   March 21st, 2008 7:31 pm ET

Spitzer should get the same “mercy’ he has shown others…no; no less. His hypocritical ways should be examined by higher authorities…

J Brook   March 21st, 2008 7:51 pm ET

I do agree with this article…why waste the time and money. Spitzer has resigned his position. Unless they find some type of fraud involved- he should not be charged with any federal crime. But I am very curious in regard to the prostitute… she has done this type of work for years and I would be very curious to see if she has paid any taxes on her earned money. I work and pay taxes… I have not seen any mention of this. Her previous boss (or John) spent two years in jail… and she continued to be a prostitute. I do believe she should be made to pay taxes on all the money she has earned.

Buddy   March 21st, 2008 8:07 pm ET

Wasting Federal dollars to prosecute this creep is not necessary. Let him slither from public view forever and spend his time grovelling before his wife and daughters. A pariah is always a pariah. A courthouse would simply be fodder for the media and nothing more. His well-paid prostitute is now rich from her fame and the Gov is gone, replaced by yet another unfaithful politician. Ugh!

Trader J   March 21st, 2008 9:37 pm ET

Why does anyone care about his tryst with a prostitute, other than the hypocracy? Is it morally wrong? If you believe it is wrong, why is it morally wrong to pay for services of a voluntary service provider, if that service is sex? This is obviously a guy who is a hyprocrit, and his hard on crime actions towards prostitution is hard to justify since he was a closet client all the while. For that, I am very dissapointed, but it is the norm, especially for the far right, especially for those who are most disgusted, they tend to be the same people who are actually involved in the same types of behavior. Case in point, Kenneth Star, who mercilessly prosecuted Clinton for his tryst, was simultaneously involved in his own affair, ultimately divorced his wife for the other woman. Spitzer is a human in a marriage, which was obviously in trouble; this is not a federal crime. Who put the feds onto this case? What powerful source of corruption knew about Spitzers secret habit, and what corruption activity are they glad to be covering up while Spitzer suffers the ultimate embarrassment and the ruin of his career? Kennedy, and many other politicians are guilty of the same, but corrupt criminals did not get away with getting the feds to investigate. Who was it, that is what we should be asking, and forget about Spitzer, and loosen up the prostitution laws. For heavens sake, if a woman wants to do this, for a living, let her do it legally and with safety and protection, don’t force it under ground!

Trader J

Josh Kane   March 21st, 2008 10:37 pm ET

I have mixed opinions on this topic as I both agree and disagree with the points made in this article. I do agree that taxpayer money should not be wasted trying to bring down a “John”. As far as I’m concerned, prostitution a victimless crime. However, Mr. Spitzer campaigned on issues upon which he has been shown to be a massive hypocrite. Would seeing a prostitute affect his ability to govern? Well, the answer has turned out to be a blatantly obvious “yes”. New Yorkers who voted for Spitzer didn’t just flip a coin on election day. They agreed with the man’s policies and felt that his views best reflected their own. As I see it, his entire gubernatorial campaign was based on a lie. For this reason, I believe that this matter should be investigated further. Perhaps this could be a stepping stone to make politicians think twice before running on hypocrisy.

Megan Long   March 21st, 2008 11:57 pm ET

Spitzer gets what he deserves, he was brutal on people who he charged and served time so why shouldnt he get some punishment? Now to the “call girl”, only in America can you become a prostitute for the Gov. of NY and then become very famous….apparently she thinks she deserves more that $1 million to pose in Hustler. And then being 17 in Girls Gone Wild movies? It seems to me that the message this whole thing is getting across is that if you want to become famous quickly become a prostitute and that prostitution is an ok form of income. I feel bad for Spitzers wife.

Joe   March 22nd, 2008 6:29 am ET

I think many people are missing the point here. The reason the Feds were involved was because of a large money laundering operation being committed by the escort service. In the course of the investigation, wiretaps were obtained and that is how Spitzer was discovered. It also shows how he broke federal banking statutes by transferring small sums of cash (under 10k) around to avoid federal banking reporting laws. I have no problems with him using “escorts”, but come on, he broke numerous laws and helped a criminal enterprise continue, whether knowingly or not. Believe me, if he was just a normal person, he would be in deep water because of the banking transactions alone.

Diva   March 22nd, 2008 1:32 pm ET

If the “johns” are prosecuted instead of just the suppliers I guarantee that there will be a drop in demand. Prostitution is not a victimless crime. I have to deal with it everyday in my neighborhood. These women are beaten, drugged and raped on a daily basis and over half of “their earnings” taken by pimps.

There isn’t much of a difference in the treatment of prostitutes by the escort services and their clients. The neighborhood where the deeds take place goes suburban and that is it. And who usually sets up an escort service? Mobsters and gang-bangers. If Spitzer paid the woman $80k at least $40k ended up in the hands of criminals.

Jack   March 22nd, 2008 2:51 pm ET

I laughed hysterically on Friday morning when Robin Meade and the Morning Express told how Playgirl wanted to publish the governor in a nude pictorial. There are just some things that we don’t need to know. The governor enjoyed $5K call girls when he was in office. Now he will have to deal with $50 hookers like other men. He and his call girl have now enjoyed their 15 minutes of fame. It’s time to move on to the next story in his life… Spitzer versus Spitzer.

Dr   March 22nd, 2008 4:57 pm ET

He should be paraded in handcuffs for the media.

Elizabeth   March 22nd, 2008 7:39 pm ET

Personally, I could care less about Ex-Gov. Spitzer’s morals. That is between him, his wife and a Higher Power. What does bother me is, the hypocrisy of the entire ordeal. What is it: “Do as I say, not as I do”? None of us are perfect.

I have more respect for the newly appointed Gov. after he came forward with his indescretions. I agree. It happened, get over it, move on! I don’t care what anyone does in their bedroom (or someone else’s for that fact). What I do care about is portraying an image that is squeaky-clean when in fact, he is just like the rest of us. Human.

Lenny Stivason   March 22nd, 2008 8:52 pm ET

Hi, Good article,is his replacement any better? New Yorkers must be hard up for politicans.

Bob from SC   March 22nd, 2008 9:36 pm ET

Follow the dollars - who benefits most by Spitzer’s embarrassment and ultimate departure from public life. A “real life sentence” for a politician. I have to wonder who has enough juice in New York to bring him down and get him out of the way and why. Spend tax payers dollars and media attention on the real news and leave the John to pay the price.

grisgirl849   March 22nd, 2008 10:23 pm ET

It is people like Spitzer and Patterson who demean the institution of marriage, not gays and lesbians. Heterosexuals, heal yourselves.

Burt   March 23rd, 2008 2:35 am ET

Prostitution is as old as civilization, a non-violent outlet for male sexual urges, conducted, certainly in this case, as a business transaction between consenting adults. The only crime against the state of any import would be the failure to declare the income and pay taxes. How many of the morally outraged have dodged their taxes?

muse sheriff   March 23rd, 2008 2:38 am ET

HE WHO LIVES IN GLASS HOUSE SHOULD NOT THROW A STONE.

deanarue   March 23rd, 2008 9:31 am ET

We are not talking about a 50 buck “john” here, doesn’t anyone care that the money he was spending came from us? if this wasn’t his first time and you can bet it wasn’t, we could be talking 50,000 or even more! It is very obvious that without his high paying “job” he wouldn’t have been able to afford this. WE prosecuted and persecuted Clinton for a little consentual playtime and no money changed hands there. In this time of recession, maybe we should be talking paycuts for all our polititions. This was a “working” trip for him and you can bet he would have tried to write this off on his taxes. Thus “screwwing us twice”.

LLf   March 24th, 2008 9:42 am ET

Spitzer is sorry because he got caught. He would have continued doing his ‘thing’ until that happened; perhaps in his arrogance, he never thought he would be caught. His behavior is typical of most politicians; they are not to be trusted, period. I can feel some sympathy for his wife, but then she must have seen the signs of his hypocrisy.

Catherine   March 24th, 2008 9:47 am ET

As a woman, I am disgusted by the celeb treatment that this offending prosititute has been given.
Last I heard, prostitution was illegal. Something is seriously wrong with this picture, and obviously there is a serious lack of morality in our society, for this to be allowed to happen.

I am embarrassed for the ex-Gov & his family, but I believe the prostitute should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. She is a blight upon womanhood.

elly gh   March 24th, 2008 4:36 pm ET

I totally agree with this column. What a waste of time, money and energy! Everyone knows what he did — he’s been publically humiliated — as he should be. But he shouldn’t be prosecuted — or rather, we shouldn’t waste the money. I do agree, however, that the prostitute’s finances should be investigated. She should definitely have paid taxes as we are all required to do.

Jim   March 26th, 2008 3:12 pm ET

Jack,

Great take on the story. I wondered all along where in the DOJ structure the decision had been made to go after this investigation full bore. It struck me that this was a federal investigation with the primary purpose being to take down an arguably rising star in the Democratic Party. Sure, the marital infidelity is revolting, but you saw that as far back as your days in Monmouth County. (I know because we spoke about it and many other things at the time.) and they don’t call the young lady’s trade the “oldest profession” just because the phrase has a nice ring to it.

The interstate commerce spin does make for a potential federal crime for the people who ran the business as do the financial machinations they employed (See, the DC Madam case currently wending its way through the federal system in DC.). But, to make the case against the former governor as a federal prosecution for the way he managed the money transfers is, at best, a stretch.

Dirty Rider   March 27th, 2008 3:32 am ET

This was a case of political vengance! Elliot Spitzer happened to play “hardball” with white collar criminals. The result was he paid for it! This whole case appears to be pure unadulterated cow manure! there is no excuse for Spitzer’s actions, but this is gotcha politics at its worst!

dainty   March 28th, 2008 10:02 am ET

I normally would think this is a private matter better left for husband and wife BUT Spitzer saw fit to put others’ husbands, fathers, sons in jail for this crime, I expect him to get the same penalty. Nothing worse than a hypocrite politican. This will teach them to walk their cheap talk, imho*

Kuy   March 29th, 2008 11:20 pm ET

What a creepy man this Spitzer character is. There he was, on TV, admitting to secret sexual acts with a prostitute, and there’s his wife and teen daughters standing there. UURRAAGGHH!!! Young girls look to their fathers for direction. Young girls want a man like daddy for themselves.

If Spitzer broke the law then he should be prosecuted just like everybody else.

Leave Your Comment


 

Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Sidebar takes you behind the scenes of the day's legal headlines with breaking news and in-depth analysis from In Session's anchors and correspondents.

Contributors
Ashleigh Banfield
Co-anchor of the daily trial program Banfield and Ford: Courtside
Ashleigh Banfield
Jack Ford
A former prosecutor and co-anchor of the daily trial program Banfield & Ford: Courtside
Jack Ford
Lisa Bloom
Anchor of the daily trial program Lisa Bloom: Open Court
Lisa Bloom
Jami Floyd
Former defense attorney and anchor of her own daily program Jami Floyd: Best Defense
Jami Floyd
Fred Graham
Senior Editor Fred Graham covers legal news in Washington, D.C.
Fred Graham
Jean Casarez
Attorney Jean Casarez covers trials around the country
Jean Casarez
Beth Karas
Former prosecutor Beth Karas covers trials around the country
Beth Karas
Categories
CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNN makes reasonable efforts to review all comments prior to posting and CNN may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement.
Home  |  World  |  U.S.  |  Politics  |  Crime  |  Entertainment  |  Health  |  Tech  |  Travel  |  Living  |  Business  |  Sports  |  Time.com
Podcasts  |  Blogs  |  CNN Mobile  |  Preferences  |  Email Alerts  |  CNN Radio  |  CNN Shop  |  Site Map
© 2008 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress.com