Well he wasn’t hiding bribes so there shouldn’t be a problem.
I don’t recall reading that he was using taxpayer funds…only that the sums of money he was moving around made the bank suspicious. I believe (so far anyway) that the sums being moved around were his own.
He apparently had to put down a deposit of several thousand dollars in advance, pay for the girl’s train ride to town and back, her cab fare, hotel room and mini-bar (don’t know about turn-down service), plus he followed the agency’s suggestion that he give the girl an extra $1,500 on top her remaining fee so he’d have ‘credit’ established for his next visit.
One would think the governor of New York would have sufficient juice to be able to get a hooker without having to put down a deposit first.
Spitzer is a multimillionaire independent of his salaries. He came from a wealthy family.
OK. I see that might not be the case now. My mistake.
My (personal) feelings of someone in a public office who is on one hand challenging public morality while not practicing it in private is a little disconcerting, not to mention hypocritical.
As for prostitution being a victimless crime, I’m not sure. Perhaps at the $5,000 range you’re right. Still, for someone in public office, I still say the bar should be set higher.
YMMV.
The funny thing is that the tri-state area is now three for three with gubernatorial scandals; first Connecticut Gov. John Rowland went to prison after contractors paid for work on his house, then New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey, who resigned after putting a male aide/lover in a job for which the guy was completely unqualified and now this.
And I hope we’ll get more details on the $5,500 prostitutes. At least a picture so we can see what that much money buys you.
I can answer this one: the money. How I know this about myself is for another thread, but you can trust me on this.
We can’t begin to know how this has affected their marriage, or when he told her and how much time she’s had to adjust to this. But don’t criticize a wife for forgiving her husband, or at the least for not kicking him to the curb in the first 5 seconds.
Lots of pics and details here.
ETA: Photos safe for work; text is relevant to subject.
Folks – Read the various articles. Unfortunately for Gov. Spitzer, arranging for a prostitute for services that cross state lines involves the Mann Act, and gets one into the realms of trafficking in persons. He could easily go to jail.
As a guy who works for a company that fell victim to one of Sir Eliot’s witch hunts several years ago, I can’t tell you how much I am enjoying watching this sanctimonious bastard twist in the wind.
He did not by any stretch of the imagination “traffic in persons.” She travelled of her own free will and he didn’t personally transport her (what a sexist and in insulting 19th century concept that is anyway). There’s no way any Mann act charges are going to stick. I don’t see that they really have anything on him except misdemeanor solicitation.
When you say your former company “fell victim,” are you saying the company wasn’t guilty of any crime? Did he fabricate charges? In what way was your company “victimized?”
Well, I’d certainly pay $5,500.00 for those jawlines.
Serious, what the eff? How did they drum up any business with pictures that useless?
The fact that the law may be stretched to prosecute Gov. Spitzer doesn’t mean that Gov. Spitzer is safe from prosecution under the law. Both the Mann Act and the laws against structuring are potential charges that Spitzer could be indicted under, and brought to felony trial under. Doesn’t matter if it is a reach and over-prosecution (which, and here I’ll agree with you, IMO it is).
I’m not saying it IS trafficking, I’m just saying that Gov. Spitzer may fall on the bad side of some unanticipated consequences. That said, IMHO, anyone who is willing to spend $5500 for an hour of sex is too stupid to be in a position of authority and public trust.
Do you believe he has to personally transport her? If he offers her money and that act induces her to cross a state line for the purposes of prostitution, that’s a violation of the law. He doesn’t have to physically pick her up and carry her over a state line.
She’s still doing it of her own free will and isn’t being “transported.” Could a motivated prosecutor technically contrive a case? Probably, but a technical case could also be made against somebody driving his girlfriend to Vegas for a weekend of “debauchery.” I actually think a stronger case could be made for the latter. This Mann Act bullshit is just tendentious political spin, in my opinion. It amounts to little more than trying to inflate a trivial, misdemeanor charge into (OMG) FEDERAL CHARGES.
I don’t know anything about this “structuring” stuff (I don’t see why can’t conceal his own money but whatever), but no way in hell are there going to be any Mann Act charges. That’s an archaic law and prosecuting him for it would be nakedly selective and political.
I wouldn’t have the arrogance to judge anyone for staying with her husband after infidelity. What boggles my mind is that somehow they are convinced to appear up on stage with them, in apparent solidarity, while their husbands confess. I realize political wives are a different breed and all, but geez. My husband would at least have enough sense not to ask me to get up on stage, let alone turn his back to me for any appreciable amount of time.
In US v. Singh, the owner of an Economy Inn in West Virginia was convicted under the Mann Act for renting rooms to prostitutes at a discounted rate. The women travelled to his motel from out of state, under their own free will. They “transported” themselves, in the sense that they got in their cars and drove themselves there, with only Singh’s offer of discounted room rates as inducement. Singh was convicted, and his conviction upheld on appeal.
So far as I can discern, Singh was not the governor of any state.
Wow, that’s really evil.
Apparently Gov. Spitzer has a reputation for grandstanding and prosecuting cases (and ruining people’s lives) on very thin evidence. So it would be ironic if he were to have the proverbial tables turned on him.