Suspected madam recruited students

SoulManX

The Inspector!
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
11,028
Reaction score
1
Points
58
Correction appended

Federal agents broke up a prostitution ring last month that recruited women from this university through advertisements in The Diamondback, seizing the assets of the operation's alleged madam.

According to court documents, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, originally from Escondido, Calif., operated the prostitution business for almost 13 years in the Washington metropolitan area. It was billed as a non-sexual escort service under the company name Pamela Martin and Associates until a judge issued an arrest warrant for her property last month. Women were also recruited through online advertising, in the yellow pages and in the Washington City Paper.

The company's former website said the business sought women with a minimum age of 23 and at least two years of college education to perform adult services for a fee in areas deemed "respectable" throughout the Washington area. The website boasted the outfit as "Washington's premier adult service."

Court documents do not specify how many women were recruited from the university, and a prosecutor interviewed for this story declined to comment on whether former workers might be called as witnesses in court.

Court filings described how Palfrey hired prostitutes through an application process, then submitted them to a "screening" appointment during which each new hire was required to engage in sexual intercourse with trusted clientele for no pay to make sure they weren't police officers.

The meeting also ensured the women understood the activities that they were expected to perform, documents stated.

Palfrey frequently distributed newsletters to her employees, providing advice on everything from pleasing customers to avoiding a paper trail that could elicit a police investigation, an investigator wrote in court filings.

"One never knows where the evil, i.e., the vice squad is lurking in the business...[the police] get a real kick out of surprising (shocking) you girls, whenever you give them the opportunity!!!" Palfrey allegedly wrote in a 1995 newsletter, which was seized by federal agents in a raid of Palfrey's California home.

"No record is a good record!!!" she reiterated in a 2000 newsletter, prosecutors said.

Prosecutors also said in the documents that Palfrey prided her business for its high expectations of service and urged her employees to work at least three nights a week.

"Minimum wage mentalities can go elsewhere for employment," instructed one of Palfrey's newsletters. "We advertise quality service to our clientele and by God they will receive such."

The business' website boasted a repeat clientele of almost 75 percent, pledging "a comfort level unprecedented in the business."

Prostitutes charged between $250 and $300 for their services and kept half the profits before shipping the other half to Palfrey in postal orders, according to court documents.

Palfrey is being sued in a civil forfeiture action, which means federal agents have seized her assets because of their alleged connections to criminal activities that include money laundering and prostitution conspiracy. Her assets include two properties in California and millions of dollars in bank accounts, stocks and safe deposit boxes.

Prosecutors allege Palfrey received more than $1 million since her most recent prostitution outfit opened in 1993. She was convicted of prostitution charges once before in 1991, and served 18 months in prison.

Palfrey denied all charges, according to court documents, saying she ran an escort service but never encouraged women to perform paid sexual activities.

A civil court date has not been set. And while no criminal charges have been brought in this case, Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Cowden said they typically follow civil cases of this nature.

Palfrey is currently filing her own lawsuit against Charles Schwab for disclosing her bank account information to the federal government. In the most recent motion on her behalf, her lawyer argued the complaint against her lacked first-hand accounts of illegal activity sufficient to justify the seizure of her property.

Maggie Levy, the business manager at The Diamondback who keeps all the accounting records, declined to discuss advertising clients, so it was unclear how long the ads ran or which ads were allegedly placed by Palfrey. Levy said it is standard business practice not to release information about advertising clients.

Cowden, who is handling the civil charges for the prosecution, also declined to provide more information about the content of The Diamondback ads or the time period in which they ran.

In the past, escort firms have advertised in The Diamondback, including companies such as Sapphire and Elite, which listed ads for non-sexual escort services.

Contact reporter Ben Slivnick at [email protected].

Correction: The print version of this story incorrectly stated that the subject of a civil suit, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, was arrested last week after federal prosecutors alleged she was running an illegal prostitution investigation. An arrest warrant was issued, but because the accusations are contained in a civil suit, the warrant was for the arrest of Palfrey's property. A criminal arrest warrant will not be requested unless prosecutors file criminal charges.
 
I love that she said "No record is a good record!" but it's her own records that are being referenced in the case. Hehe! I guess blind_fury's going to have to find a new "source". :dry:

jag
 
jaguarr said:
I love that she said "No record is a good record!" but it's her own records that are being referenced in the case. Hehe! I guess blind_fury's going to have to find a new "source". :dry:

jag

LOL...nice.
 
we couldn't let this thread go without a blind_fury comment lol
 
04nbod said:
we couldn't let this thread go without a blind_fury comment lol

Hell no. This thread was tailor made for that! :D

jag
 
Why the hell do people think they need to play moral police? No blind_fury, I'm not going to stop making fun of you. But prostition only hurts the two people that consent to it. What's next, jailing people for looking at porn?
 
Kritish said:
Why the hell do people think they need to play moral police? No blind_fury, I'm not going to stop making fun of you. But prostition only hurts the two people that consent to it. What's next, jailing people for looking at porn?



Some would like that to be a law.:o
 
Why are they prosecuting this woman? She deserves a Nobel Peace Prize. :up:
 
Kritish said:
Why the hell do people think they need to play moral police? No blind_fury, I'm not going to stop making fun of you. But prostition only hurts the two people that consent to it. What's next, jailing people for looking at porn?
How is it hurting those who consent to it? :huh:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,153
Messages
21,907,325
Members
45,704
Latest member
BMD
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"