Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Crime and Punishment II - This topic is not yet closed to further replies.


NoiseInsideMyHead
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/crime-and-courts/7171655-GFPD-uses-prostitution-sting-to-study-human-trafficking-in-the-city

Saw this story on WDAY Friday night and was puzzled.  The gist was that GFPD ran a typical John sting, with a non-existent prostitute.

Quote

The goal of authorities is to find the link between the commercial prostitution industry and human trafficking. 

"What we are specifically going after is to find those people, those individuals, to find those individuals who are doing this against their will and free them,"

Here's the problem:

Quote

Officers posed as adult women online offering sex for money.

No indication of trafficking here.  I've watched "COPS," and I can tell you that adult women can and often do voluntarily engage in sex-for-money.  What about this setup is even remotely related to "individuals who are doing this against their will"?  Could they not at least have posed as an adult offering the services of a minor, or the services of a "young woman new to town" or an "immigrant"?  You know, to draw in the real scuzzballs?

The CVIC person is quoted as saying that ordinary Johns "are doing harm and may not realize the person providing sex to them is going through, they may be being beaten, held against their will, starved."  But all you could possibly accomplish here is to soften the market for ALL prostitution.  You could bust 1000 Johns (ruining countless lives) and not put a single dent in 'human trafficking.'

Would this not have been infinitely more intelligent to set up as a reverse sting, drawing in the trafficked, or the traffickers, rather than three horny, lonely dudes who were just looking for love in the wrong place?

I really hope that the Herald and WDAY either got the story wrong or that certain details were left out.  Because otherwise this sounds like a Keystone Kops exercise, devoid of logic, and I want to believe that the GFPD is better than that.  If you want to bust regular Johns, fine, but please don't pretend it has anything to do with some greater evil.

(Discussion time) What say you...is it time to legalize and regulate the sex trade in ND?

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/crime-and-courts/7171655-GFPD-uses-prostitution-sting-to-study-human-trafficking-in-the-city

Saw this story on WDAY Friday night and was puzzled.  The gist was that GFPD ran a typical John sting, with a non-existent prostitute.

Here's the problem:

No indication of trafficking here.  I've watched "COPS," and I can tell you that adult women can and often do voluntarily engage in sex-for-money.  What about this setup is even remotely related to "individuals who are doing this against their will"?  Could they not at least have posed as an adult offering the services of a minor, or the services of a "young woman new to town" or an "immigrant"?  You know, to draw in the real scuzzballs?

The CVIC person is quoted as saying that ordinary Johns "are doing harm and may not realize the person providing sex to them is going through, they may be being beaten, held against their will, starved."  But all you could possibly accomplish here is to soften the market for ALL prostitution.  You could bust 1000 Johns (ruining countless lives) and not put a single dent in 'human trafficking.'

Would this not have been infinitely more intelligent to set up as a reverse sting, drawing in the trafficked, or the traffickers, rather than three horny, lonely dudes who were just looking for love in the wrong place?

I really hope that the Herald and WDAY either got the story wrong or that certain details were left out.  Because otherwise this sounds like a Keystone Kops exercise, devoid of logic, and I want to believe that the GFPD is better than that.  If you want to bust regular Johns, fine, but please don't pretend it has anything to do with some greater evil.

(Discussion time) What say you...is it time to legalize and regulate the sex trade in ND?

 

Prostitution is wrong and shouldn't be legal. But the police should not go hunting for Johns

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/crime-and-courts/7171655-GFPD-uses-prostitution-sting-to-study-human-trafficking-in-the-city

Saw this story on WDAY Friday night and was puzzled.  The gist was that GFPD ran a typical John sting, with a non-existent prostitute.

Here's the problem:

No indication of trafficking here.  I've watched "COPS," and I can tell you that adult women can and often do voluntarily engage in sex-for-money.  What about this setup is even remotely related to "individuals who are doing this against their will"?  Could they not at least have posed as an adult offering the services of a minor, or the services of a "young woman new to town" or an "immigrant"?  You know, to draw in the real scuzzballs?

The CVIC person is quoted as saying that ordinary Johns "are doing harm and may not realize the person providing sex to them is going through, they may be being beaten, held against their will, starved."  But all you could possibly accomplish here is to soften the market for ALL prostitution.  You could bust 1000 Johns (ruining countless lives) and not put a single dent in 'human trafficking.'

Would this not have been infinitely more intelligent to set up as a reverse sting, drawing in the trafficked, or the traffickers, rather than three horny, lonely dudes who were just looking for love in the wrong place?

I really hope that the Herald and WDAY either got the story wrong or that certain details were left out.  Because otherwise this sounds like a Keystone Kops exercise, devoid of logic, and I want to believe that the GFPD is better than that.  If you want to bust regular Johns, fine, but please don't pretend it has anything to do with some greater evil.

(Discussion time) What say you...is it time to legalize and regulate the sex trade in ND?

 

Prostitution is wrong and shouldn't be legal. But the police should not go hunting for Johns

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Human Trafficking is the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of people through force, fraud or deception, with the aim of exploiting them for profit. Men, women and children of all ages and from all backgrounds can become victims of this crime, which occurs in every region of the world. The traffickers often use violence or fraudulent employment agencies and fake promises of education and job opportunities to trick and coerce their victims.

This article doesn't seem to have anything to do with this...but people do play attention when you use words like trafficking. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to stop human trafficking then you need to punish those who are creating the market for it. Lots of assumptions that "it's the woman's choice", the reality is even those that claim they are in it by choice really aren't - they are in because of lack of choices, they stay in it our of fear. Abuse and physical violence in the industry is rampant.   

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always found it interesting that a guy can buy a girl a $70 dinner and take her to a $30 movie, after which they have casual sex, and it's called a "date" and the morality police are mostly silent.

Same guy gives same girl a $100 bill, skips dinner and the movie, and it's called a "crime."

But wait, they say...there is at least some economic impact when you go out and spend money on a date.

Well, can't a legal, regulated sex industry be taxed, which would offset the sales tax losses entirely?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

I've always found it interesting that a guy can buy a girl a $70 dinner and take her to a $30 movie, after which they have casual sex, and it's called a "date" and the morality police are mostly silent.

Same guy gives same girl a $100 bill, skips dinner and the movie, and it's called a "crime."

But wait, they say...there is at least some economic impact when you go out and spend money on a date.

Well, can't a legal, regulated sex industry be taxed, which would offset the sales tax losses entirely?

Up the stakes and call it marriage....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/28/2021 at 6:50 PM, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Well, can't a legal, regulated sex industry be taxed, which would offset the sales tax losses entirely?

Years ago, Nevada was the only state with legal prostitution.  I haven't heard of any since.        While I morally don't believe in it, the logical side of my brain says:  Legal prostitution is regulated both legally and medically.    It could be a lot safer than a one night stand.          If it was legal, would a man be more apt to stay toward the legal instead of looking elsewhere?       With all the free activity out there, would it be an economical profession?           As far as trafficking, do the politicians get a cut by voting against the southern wall? ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

Judge tosses death sentence in slaying of N. Dakota student
Judge tosses death sentence in slaying of N. Dakota student (msn.com)

Interesting; it's been the same judge throughout. Judge Erickson is judge that sentenced Rodriguez to death, denied his first appeal, and ordered the new sentencing hearing after this appeal. I understand it's typical to do this(the same judge that ruled on the original NFL anti-trust case is the same one that's handled all subsequent NFL cases), but I sometimes forget.

If you don't want to read the article, it boils down to questionable testimony from the medical examiner about cause of death, plus a possible mistake by Rodriguez's attorney in limiting a mental health evaluation that could have helped an insanity plea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Hammersmith said:

Interesting; it's been the same judge throughout. Judge Erickson is judge that sentenced Rodriguez to death, denied his first appeal, and ordered the new sentencing hearing after this appeal. I understand it's typical to do this(the same judge that ruled on the original NFL anti-trust case is the same one that's handled all subsequent NFL cases), but I sometimes forget.

If you don't want to read the article, it boils down to questionable testimony from the medical examiner about cause of death, plus a possible mistake by Rodriguez's attorney in limiting a mental health evaluation that could have helped an insanity plea.

The sentence was overturned, but not the conviction. This guy will never see the light of day again, death sentence or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Oxbow6 said:

Rodriguez should have been dead years ago. Feel awful for Dru's family. He's a worthless POS that has been on the tax payers dole too long already.

This thing should be dragged by his feet spread and naked behind a four wheeler through a dry lumpy potato field, during a bad year for thistle.

Daily, or at least until whats left can be effectively shoveled into a septic tank and forgotten about.

I see this as grandstanding by the judge, I dont know why, but it does. it serves zero purpose, other than to torment the family and friends of young Dru

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
2 hours ago, JohnboyND7 said:

Anyone tracking the Rittenhouse trial? Closing arguments going on today.

Are the DA and Ass. DA in trouble for witness tampering with the "did anyone ask you to change to statement?  Yes, you!!"  That does not sound good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...