In Session: Sidebar  « Back to Blog Main
April 10, 2008
Posted: 02:59 PM ET

WASHINGTON — Is this trip necessary?

By that I mean the sad, sordid procession of former call girls and humiliated “Johns” that constitute the ongoing prostitution trial in the District of Columbia known as the “D.C. Madam” case.

In this first week of the prosecution’s case against Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the dominant question is not whether prosecutors are proving that Palfrey operated an escort service that was a front for prostitution, but why they have pursued this expensive case against her when scores of “full service” escort services continue to operate full blast in the nation’s capital.

So far, the testimony has been titillating and embarrassing, but has not produced the political big names that some had hoped. Former “escorts” (who had been granted immunity and forced to testify) gave sheepish accounts of performing various sex acts for pay. Two local attorneys told of paying Palfrey’s employees for sex (one lawyer was a repeat customer when he was a student at Yale law school), then the two men pulled their coats over their heads to disguise their humiliation as they departed the court house.

The prosecutors have produced considerable evidence that some of Palfrey’s escorts engaged in sex for money, despite a clause in their contracts with her that said if they committed any illegal acts, they would be fired. The key issue will be whether prosecutors can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Palfrey knew some of her girls were selling sex.

But the most perplexing question is why the prosecutors are pursuing this case. They have given no indication that the “DC Madam” case is part of a broader campaign against prostitution by the thriving escort business. No similar cases have been brought. Palfrey’s attorneys claim they are punishing her for giving them a hard time in an unrelated case. The government should not prosecute a citizen for such a reason, and if the prosecutors have a proper reason, they should declare what it is.

Fred Graham, In Session senior editor

Filed under: Fred Graham • Trials


Share this on:
L. Allen   April 10th, 2008 11:57 pm ET

Stupid is as Stupid does……………

Bert Lord   April 15th, 2008 5:36 pm ET

This trial is an interesting one. With all of the crime, corruption, and problems that we have in DC (and I am not talking about what the politicians do) it would seem that the taxpayer’s money and the time of the DA’s office would be better spent pursuing violent criminals and actual criminality. This case is about a morals law that the US is dogmatically holding to even though prostitution is legal in most of the world. Where is the tenacious drive to prosecute violent criminals? DC has one of the highest gun-related murder rates in all of the US…and they have the most stringent gun control laws. The drug trade in DC is one of the most diverse and prevalent in any city in the US but there is no pursuit of those crimes or criminals. I think the DA’s office is riding a campaign trail where they can get as much press as possible to increase their abilities to run for office. Either that or the DA is making this a personal case and should be disbarred for abuse of power.

Maxim Fields   April 15th, 2008 6:25 pm ET

Whenever government, at any level, chooses to prosecute a single member of any group without targeting the entire group for committing the same offense, we as a nation run the risk of violating the spirit of fair and equitable justice for all. Therefore, we the people must cry out for equality so that tyranny will find no place within our borders.

Con Gubser   July 8th, 2008 10:45 am ET

Your guest is off base when it comes to guns and the amount of murder “they” cause. No gun has ever pulled it’s own trigger! It’s a tool. SOMEONE has to pull that trigger for the crime to take place. As far as her comment on knives, they, (knives) have spilled more blood than guns ever have or will. We should not be working on gun control, we should be working on people control. All a gun is, is a tool. You can kill with knives, cars, baseball bats etc, guns don’t kill, people kill. How long will it take society to learn these facts?

It is a proven fact that when there is more guns in society, there is less crime. This comes from a book written by a former anti gun person who is a statistisian by the name of John Lott. He did research the researsh and changed sides, and became pro-gun, where before he did the research, he was anti-gun. You guest should read the book and educate herself. Thank you.

Con Gubser

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