Discussion in 'General Industry Related Topics' started by ramstein, Nov 28, 2001.
Did anyone say it was Gerald?
Its good that they got him - I'm assuming that this was the infamous "Gerald".
Interesting aspect to the article, though. These girls were smoking CRACK with him? Damn!
"Manhattan millionaire wanted in Los Angeles for allegedly raping three high-priced call girls....... Los Angeles police told NYPD detectives that Thom raped and terrorized three prostitutes and tortured them ......during separate crack cocaine binges in expensive hotel rooms.......
......NYPD detectives were led to Thom after he was arrested in June at Manhattan's Sheraton Starwood Hotel. .....he lured a woman to his room at the Starwood under the ruse that he was a movie producer looking for attractive actresses.........Once there, he and the woman smoked crack cocaine and trashed the hotel room...."
I'm glad they caught him. Psycho bastard like him makes all of us look bad.
Click on the link to see an article from the NY Daily News today (Dec 6, 2001) about a guy who got arrested for raping providers.
So let me get you straight, so you're a lumber jack.
Can't really say. I do murder a lot of trees every year though and am likely (as all persons with a legal education are) to be reincarnated for at least five successive lifetimes as a cheap quickly grown pine tree that gets manufactured into toilet paper.
Just out of curiosity Judge, are you actually a judge or a lawyer. I can tell by your legal expertise that you are involved in the field of law. Just curious.
Relevancy is always a pissing match. Such cases will continue to come up in the future. For the provider/client relationship, would recommend negotiating everything up front. If the woman changes her mind about anything she has agreed to or all of a sudden announces her attention to become a Buddhist nun, stop doing what you are doing immediately, get dressed and walk.
Seriously doubt that any provider would ever press charges except in the most hideous of circumstances where there has been a beating, etc. Bad for business and the reputation.
Hard thing being asked if you are a whore or have been a whore on the witness stand. Any decent defense lawyer would do everything possible to get his shit hooks into a woman to upset her and undermine her credibility while she is upset. Way that game is played.
Skagen, that is a good point but this all leads me to the same question. Where are rape shield laws applicable? In terms of the provider/hobbiest relationship doesn't it stand to reason that any provider who maybe angry at a hobbiest can cry rape? Also, what if the male had a history of sexual assault, surely that kind of evidence wouldn't be barred on the grounds of irrelevancy?
To be clear, I was paraphrasing/summarizing the case. I was not party to the specific words they used in the e-mails. But clearly, there was enough there that they let the guy go.
I was just wondering if any lawyers here have a sense of what the implications of that case might be in the future, because its a very fine line. No everyone may use "safe words'. And even if they did, then its simply one person's word against the other as to whether the two people communicated clearly, because the physical evidence would not be in dispute.
Interesting what would happen if for instance, the provider offered domination S&M, fantasy etc. Would rape shield apply there?
There was the recent case of a Columbia U grad student, Oliver Jovanovic, who won his case because the rape shield was judged to have been misused. Jovanovic met a girl (not a provider) on the internet and she said she was into being dominated. They met, he dominated her, she then cried rape.
Jovanovic was convicted because the Judge applied rape sheild law in barring him from showing the e-mails where the girl asked him for domination.
I think that decision later got got overturned the appeal court felt that the rape sheild was misused - the prior sexual activity/discussion was directly relevant to the incident at hand.
That decision may possibly be used as relevant case history in a future situation eg with a provider.
All that goes to relevancy. Defense (not the prosecution) would still usually be able to point out monetary transaction and prior history (convictions, etc.) Point though is that prostitutes are considered assault victims whenever they engage in acts that are forced on them or are beaten, etc. That is what has to be remembered.
HeyJudge, even with the rape shield wouldn't, the prosecution be able to describe the circumstances of the rape including monetary transactions. Also, if the provider had been convicted of prostitution previously, woudn't the prosecution be allowed to bring up that point as well?
Researched the matter in the spring. There are about 20-30 relevant opinions (both official and unoffical) from U.S. state courts. Most focus on the effect of rape shield laws on criminal prosecutions of men who have been charged with sexual assaults by prostitutes or former prostitutes. Rape shield laws prohibit irrelevant information concerning a sexual assault victim's sexual past from being placed into evidence. All of the cases took it for granted that a prostitute can be the victim of a sexual assualt.
uh oh I hope you have not been a bad boy
Sure, but I'm talking about cases in which there is forced intercourse and nothing else. Are there any cases like that?
Successful Rape Case
I know of one in the Seattle area from a few years ago. The guy tortured and humiliated the woman, put a gun in her mouth, etc., so it wasn't difficult to convince the jury that the sexual activity was non-consensual.
Skagen's post about the boxer in Arizona brings me to an interesting question. Has there been a case where a known prostitue successfully won a rape case against a client? Does anybody know?
Separate names with a comma.