NFL team owner Robert Kraft was swept up in a bust of a sex-trafficking day spa

[Jolly_Penguin]

This I agree with. Take them down for actual violations they actually are doing, if they are doing them. And don't presume greater harms are happening at any particular place without good evidence.

We don't need to "presume" greater harms, we can rationally infer them beyond any reasonable doubt, just like we can rationally infer that humans evolved from earlier species even though no one observed direct evidence of that happening.

Absolutely not. At least with the passport taking (which is Derec's hypothetical and not mentioned in the OP case) you have very good evidence. Here, you have much much poorer evidence.

You can't just presume bigger wrongs are done by someone when you find a wrong. And you certainly can't rationally infer them beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

#notallhumans

 

[ronburgundy]

This I agree with. Take them down for actual violations they actually are doing, if they are doing them. And don't presume greater harms are happening at any particular place without good evidence.

We don't need to "presume" greater harms, we can rationally infer them beyond any reasonable doubt, just like we can rationally infer that humans evolved from earlier species even though no one observed direct evidence of that happening.

Absolutely not. At least with the passport taking (which is Derec's hypothetical and not mentioned in the OP case) you have very good evidence. Here, you have much much poorer evidence.

You can't just presume bigger wrongs are done by someone when you find a wrong. And you certainly can't rationally infer them beyond any reasonable doubt.

One of the women has said her passport was taken. In addition, the fact the women never left on their own, slept, ate, and bathed in such poor conditions, and worked as extensively as they did are all evidence supporting coercion, because it is implausible that a women who was free to leave and/or to control their own prostitution would behave that way or tolerate such circumstances.
Circumstantial evidence is evidence and can easily be more than enough to support a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[laughing dog]

Your MO of persistent in sniping at a woman poster

My responses to Toni and calling her out when complaining about behaviour she routinely engages in has nothing to do with her gender, and everything to do with said behaviour.

Your posting history in this thread and many others sjpow you focus your sniping on women. Add in your incredulous defense of the claim that the women in this massage parlor were not essentially slaves nor trafficked, and it is pretty clear that gender does play a role in your positions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Keeping passports would keep them from going elsewhere, it wouldn't keep them from going to the police.

It would be a clear sign of criminal activity too. One would have to wonder why they would take a passport from someone. If not to entrap them, then why? It may not be conclusive, but it is a pretty clear sign of being trafficked against their will.

If they were truly trafficked against their will they would go to the police, the passport wouldn't matter. Thus they must consider the mistreatment they get in the brothel superior to going home--illegals, not trafficked.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Keeping passports would keep them from going elsewhere, it wouldn't keep them from going to the police.

Yeah, it does. How else could they prove they were in the country legally? (assuming they are legal).

People in power--those with money, diplomats, etc. have long used the passport as a way to control their employees. I've seen it happen in real life, with people who likely have a better command of English and a better education than the sex workers do.

Using holding a passport as a means of control only works if the police won't listen to you. If they will--it's the theft of a passport, that will get the passport holder in trouble. The only way someone would do it is if the person thus being restricted is better off with the status quo than going to the police and thus going home. (And note that if she is truly trafficked she very well might be able to stay here legally and not go home--the theft of the passport won't stop this.)

- - - Updated - - -

One of the women has said her passport was taken. In addition, the fact the women never left on their own, slept, ate, and bathed in such poor conditions, and worked as extensively as they did are all evidence supporting coercion, because it is implausible that a women who was free to leave and/or to control their own prostitution would behave that way or tolerate such circumstances.
Circumstantial evidence is evidence and can easily be more than enough to support a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt.

You're comparing their position with that of a typical American.

If they're illegals you should compare their position with the situation where they came from--the situation they would be back in if they were deported.


The brothel owners certainly are scumbags but I do not see a decent case for concluding that the women are trafficked.

 

[laughing dog]

Keeping passports would keep them from going elsewhere, it wouldn't keep them from going to the police.

It would be a clear sign of criminal activity too. One would have to wonder why they would take a passport from someone. If not to entrap them, then why? It may not be conclusive, but it is a pretty clear sign of being trafficked against their will.

If they were truly trafficked against their will they would go to the police, the passport wouldn't matter. Thus they must consider the mistreatment they get in the brothel superior to going home--illegals, not trafficked.

Your conclusion does not follow. If their life back home was awful enough or if it would be more awful when their community learned they had been prostitutes, they might not go to the police for fear they would be sent home. It is possible that their fear of the police or fear of what might happen to their family back home prevented them from going to the police.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Also, talking to the police here means that the police back home beat their family with a club. You don't just up and testify against organized crime groups.

 

[Toni]

Also, talking to the police here means that the police back home beat their family with a club. You don't just up and testify against organized crime groups.

Yes. Plausible threats against family members are a type of coercion used against trafficked people, not just sex workers. Unfortunately, this type of coercion is not uncommon. What is unusual is that this is now getting more recognition than it has in the past.

 

[Toni]

Using holding a passport as a means of control only works if the police won't listen to you. If they will--it's the theft of a passport, that will get the passport holder in trouble. The only way someone would do it is if the person thus being restricted is better off with the status quo than going to the police and thus going home. (And note that if she is truly trafficked she very well might be able to stay here legally and not go home--the theft of the passport won't stop this.)

This is much more effective if you are fluent in English, have no non-American or maybe a western-European accident, are well educated and not in fear for your life. Oh, and if you can get out. There is ample evidence that these women were not able to leave the premises, or could do so only rarely and in the company of their controllers.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Also, talking to the police here means that the police back home beat their family with a club. You don't just up and testify against organized crime groups.

Yes. Plausible threats against family members are a type of coercion used against trafficked people, not just sex workers. Unfortunately, this type of coercion is not uncommon. What is unusual is that this is now getting more recognition than it has in the past.

Ya, and the point of that is that you cannot rely on testimony of the victims in order to get prosecutions in cases such as these. That may lead to the situation that they can't actually be prosecuted for human trafficking part. However, you can still get situations like how Al Capone went away for tax evasion instead of all the real criminal activity he did. If you can charge these guys for things like labour code violations and going against zoning regulations by having the employees live on the premises, you can start taking steps to make the business model less profitable and viable.

It's not the optimal prosecutorial path, but it may be the most effective.

 

[ZiprHead]

Keeping passports would keep them from going elsewhere, it wouldn't keep them from going to the police.

It would be a clear sign of criminal activity too. One would have to wonder why they would take a passport from someone. If not to entrap them, then why? It may not be conclusive, but it is a pretty clear sign of being trafficked against their will.

If they were truly trafficked against their will they would go to the police, the passport wouldn't matter. Thus they must consider the mistreatment they get in the brothel superior to going home--illegals, not trafficked.

This is the equivalent of "If she was really raped, she would have gone to the police."

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

If they were truly trafficked against their will they would go to the police, the passport wouldn't matter. Thus they must consider the mistreatment they get in the brothel superior to going home--illegals, not trafficked.

This is the equivalent of "If she was really raped, she would have gone to the police."

It also applies to other kidnapped victims.

 

[blastula]

God in heaven, please don't let them release Kraft's surveillance video.

Robert Kraft's real problem is the video - CNN

Media outlets oppose request by Robert Kraft, others to keep evidence sealed - The Boston Globe

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Also, talking to the police here means that the police back home beat their family with a club. You don't just up and testify against organized crime groups.

If they have that sort of control they don't need to hold passports to keep the women under control.

- - - Updated - - -

Using holding a passport as a means of control only works if the police won't listen to you. If they will--it's the theft of a passport, that will get the passport holder in trouble. The only way someone would do it is if the person thus being restricted is better off with the status quo than going to the police and thus going home. (And note that if she is truly trafficked she very well might be able to stay here legally and not go home--the theft of the passport won't stop this.)

This is much more effective if you are fluent in English, have no non-American or maybe a western-European accident, are well educated and not in fear for your life. Oh, and if you can get out. There is ample evidence that these women were not able to leave the premises, or could do so only rarely and in the company of their controllers.

Get a decent guy as a john, ask him to send the police.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Tom did ask a good question though, Loren. Why else would they hold the passports if not an attempt to control these women? Could be identity theft I guess. Could be other things. But trafficking sure does seem to top the list to me. As I said above, it isn't conclusive, but its pretty good evidence.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Tom did ask a good question though, Loren. Why else would they hold the passports if not an attempt to control these women? Could be identity theft I guess. Could be other things. But trafficking sure does seem to top the list to me. As I said above, it isn't conclusive, but its pretty good evidence.

So, what WOULD be conclusive evidence for you? It's just really weird how you hedge your statements on that. You seem to admit that there isn't actually a second reason but then don't seem to come to the conclusion that therefore the only remaining reason would therefore be the reason. This wouldn't be a red flag, it would be a smoking gun.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Tom did ask a good question though, Loren. Why else would they hold the passports if not an attempt to control these women? Could be identity theft I guess. Could be other things. But trafficking sure does seem to top the list to me. As I said above, it isn't conclusive, but its pretty good evidence.

So, what WOULD be conclusive evidence for you?

Something that shows they are brought there against their will, locked in and forbidden to leave, etc, would do it. Not having their passport doesn't prove it to me. I would need a little more. There are plenty of possible reasons why somebody would have somebody else's passport, or steal it. Identity theft, mere spite, immigration, safe keeping are all possibilities. I left my passport with a friend who lives near the airport last time I visited Manila, just in case my bag got stolen or something.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I left my passport with a friend who lives near the airport last time I visited Manila, just in case my bag got stolen or something.

Ya … not any kind of comparable situation.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Show me the doors that lock only from the outside. Show me bruises and other injuries. Show me the passports of multiple girls being taken and return of them refused. Show me fearful girls, afraid of their managers. Show me accusations from the victims.

There are many good indicators and evidence of trafficking people against their will. This one is a good one but is not conclusive. I would not convict on it alone, and it would seem nor would the court (if the post above claiming a passport was taken is true).

Also, why do you direct this question to me and not to Loren?