blog description

Topics relate to adult business, the War on Drugs, political prosecutions, censorship, and police, prosecutorial, and judicial misconduct

Smiling Faces - The Undisputed Truth

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Paul Bergrin Trial: The Summation

Paul Bergrin has more trials ahead of him and in a sense, this is only the beginning. The main purpose of this post is to offer a link to Paul Bergrin's transcribed trial summation from the first trial that ended with a deadlocked jury.

It is an excellent summation and like none that I have ever heard or read. It is indeed revealing of the created case against him in the murder of Kemo Deshawn McCray, a drug trafficker turned informant that was murdered when federal agents failed to protect him in his informant work for them. They refused his request to enter witness protection and wait until you find out why!

It is my intention to go through the entire trial transcript in many posts and include a link to the transcript for each day discussed. However, I have decided that this blog will not do it justice with the surrounding posts on various other topics. I am working on a new blog in which the sole purpose is discussion and documents from Paul Bergrin's first trial, the next trial that is coming soon, and later trials if there are any.

There will be an Appeals panel addressing the situation that prosecutors have pushed to the forefront. Prosecutors did not like the fair and impartial Judge William Martini and want him removed from the next trial. The panel will be hearing oral arguments on March 29, 2012 and will make a decision shortly thereafter, probably within two weeks.

To read more about the fight that prosecutors have started over US District Judge William Martini, read this recent article in The New York Times:

For 2 Titans of U.S. Court in Newark, Bad Blood

Why? Since when do prosecutors get to choose their own judge? Isn't that best referred to as judge shopping?

The "why" is that on several occasions, Judge Martini did not rule in favor of the government. But what could be expected in a case with no actual evidence that rides on the words of a parade of convicted felons seeking leniency in sentencing? The progression of this trial reminded me of the Antonio "Nino" Lyons case from Orlando federal court. USA Today investigated thoroughly and wrote extensively on the prosecutor misconduct in the Lyons case:

Prosecutors' conduct can tip justice scales

Federal prosecutors too often work above the law

Justice Dept. agrees to pay $140,000 to man wrongly jailed

Yes, the truth is that federal prosecutors in the Paul Bergrin trial(s) are judge shopping. They absolutely need to exchange Judge Martini for a more compliant judge because there is no actual evidence. The transcript of Paul Bergrin's summation on November 15, 2011, in the concluded trial is here (PDF):

US v Bergrin (1st Trial) Bergrin Summation (link removed - contact me privately for a copy)

In the future you will find all posts, documents, and transcripts on the blog  that is reserved specifically for this purpose. Please do bear with me as I complete the design of the blog and begin to post - expect that it will all be in place by April 15, 2012 or sooner: Paul Bergrin on Trial


We look forward to the Appeals panel making the correct decision and calling a halt to prosecutors' attacks on the honorable, fair, and impartial US District Judge William Martini.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Conflicting Information in Anna Gristina Case

I am beginning to wonder if Anna Gristina was ever in business at all. Perhaps she was in some sort of business at one point, but closed years ago. According to NY prosecutors, the alleged madam ran a brothel in Manhattan's Upper East Side, but I saw the images of the place and there's no way in hell it was ever a brothel for the wealthy. According to Anna Gristina, she's flat broke. We know the prosecutors have lied about this so-called brothel; maybe she is broke.

And then there is Jason Itzler, informant extraordinaire, making all sorts of wild and crazy allegations about Gristina in an interview with the New York Daily News... as they both sit in Rikers. I must wonder if Itzler's case disappearing from the system back in mid-December is related to this case and grand jury testimony: Jason Itzler Disappears

Read Itzler's wild claims here: East Side 'Soccer Mom Madam' has huge black book of star clients, says rival pimp

Personally, I consider Jason Itzler a clown and an informant, but not much more. He simply is not credible. But what of prosecutors in this case? How credible are they when we think about that so-called brothel? See the photos of the place here: Photos reveal apartment Anna Gristina allegedly used as brothel

Though I admit to never entering a brothel, or even an incall operation for that matter, the photos totally clash with my vision of what I think it would look like, especially when the vision involves super-wealthy clients. Am I alone on this?

And what of Jaynie Mae Baker? Prosecutors still have not named her as the unnamed co-defendant, but various news articles make this claim. Since this is a NY State case, I have no way to view any documents and no way of knowing if it's just one more wild claim in this case.

I do know what a Florida judge would tell Anna Gristina if she pled poverty here in a similar case. She would have to submit a financial affidavit and any property she owned would have to be listed. Does she rent the pig farm property upstate or does she own it? If she owns it, or even 50% of it, she would be instructed to sell it and pay an attorney. I was instructed to sell my vehicle as well.

No matter what else comes from this case, we can be sure that prosecutors intend to leave Anna Gristina financially insolvent and completely ruined before it is all over. They claim to have hundreds of hours of taped calls from the wiretaps that are incriminating, but I do consider it a real possibility that Gristina made it all up, perhaps knowing there was a wiretap in place; except for one thing: the bodyguard. Why would a woman with a pig farm upstate need a body guard when in the city?

And then Kristin Davis stated that she had shared a booker with Gristina; a woman named Winnie Wong. Kristin has no reason to make this up. We also learned that this alleged business had a name, at least back in 2005, if not later: Fleur d'Elite. This sounds more like an outcall escort operation. So why would prosecutors claim it to be a brothel in an Upper East Side building?

Tune in for more conjecture on this mixed-up case in the future.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

The NY Case of Anna Gristina: Mixed Messages

I am compelled to post on the recent indictment of Anna Gristina (AKA Anna Scotland) again today due to the many disconnected statements and the lone count charged of "promoting prostitution". What I am reading today leans towards her owning an escort service, except that there is no such thing as an in-call escort business. In-call operations are not any different than brothels and the mere existence of one anywhere except a list of counties in Nevada would be illegal.

Calling something an "in-call operation" is a polite way of stating "brothel" and nothing more. However, according to Anna Gristina's attorneys, this is not at all what she was operating. One attorney describes a plan (future) to open an online dating site, similar (but better) to Match.com. No one describes what she was currently up to except the ADA.

I have also read that it was an attorney that helped her set-up her business. The exact allegation:

"The building is owned by a close confidant of Gristina’s, a lawyer who “invests her money, helped her set up her business and helps to launder her money,” prosecutors said.

Source: High-end madam busted for running upper East Side brothel is a suburban mom with four children

My main question about that statement is this allegation, also included in the article:

"The prosecutor added that Gristina hasn’t reported income to the government in a number of years, and that New York State authorities will also be charging her with tax evasion."
Someone please tell me how an attorney could help Gristina with all of that and not address tax-related issues? These two statements together make little sense to me. But of course that is not the only separation from reality in this new case.

The same article describes Gristina being in business (some sort of business) as far back as 2004 and 2005.

There are also a few wild allegations thrown-in for good measure. Apparently the State Attorney's Office has a confidential informant that claims to have been present when Gristina set-up an encounter between a client and minor(s). The exact (and quoted) allegation:

"“We have had at least one eyewitness account of someone that has been obviously present for a sexual encounter arranged by (Gristina) for one of her clients in which minors were involved in the encounter,” Assistant District Attorney Charles Linehan said at her Feb. 23 arraignment."
Also apparently, the DA doesn't necessarily believe this confidential informant as Gristina is certainly not charged with anything relating to minors. Informants will make anything up to get out of their own legal problems, so this makes sense to me, but then why bother stating it? To make the world despise her? It does work too: If minors were involved in the case I wouldn't have anything good to say and probably wouldn't even discuss the case. If you lose me, you're really going to lose in the case. I'm as open-minded on the topic of tryst arranging that you'll ever find, but do tend to jump ship if minors or drugs are involved.

So, prosecutors have Anna Gristina doing all of this bragging in wiretap recordings. What is normally done with this sort of 'evidence' (I use the term lightly), is to investigate further for evidence that the bragged-about events actually occured. Ironic, but in my case agents tried to cram it down my throat that I had help from an officer - Internal Affairs was even involved - but I just kept repeating the truth: No, he never helped me do anything whatsoever. This really angered them and the "investigation" gained steam resulting in my arrest 8 months later. In my case they were out to get the officer in question though - not discover one or many officers.

And who is the unnamed co-defendant? I have heard of unindicted co-conspirators in conspiracy cases, unnamed informants, and confidential informants, but never an unnamed co-defendant in a "promoting prostitution" case. Trust me - redacting the co-defendant's name in such a case is highly unusual. Look at the NY High Class Escorts case, also charged by the State of New York, if you doubt me.

And what of Gristina's husband in all of this? He almost looks like he was posing for the cameras in the images and videos I viewed. Prosecutors claim she was in business for 15 years and they have been married for 10, according to his statements. How could a husband not be aware of a business going on an hour away when there are children involved, or even without children for that matter? It is possible, but not probable.

How does anyone remain semi-active in real estate, take care of four children, rescue animals, have pot-bellied pigs and pit bulls on a farm, and operate an in-call that's more than an hour away? Such a business would require constant attention.

As for the black book of clients' names mentioned: Let's not pretend the DA's office would use it to prosecute anyone. Clients are never prosecuted. They certainly are used as witnesses though.

So far this is curious and confusing.


Thursday, March 1, 2012

PayPal Censorship has Broad Ramifications

As many of you are aware, PayPal froze my account back in July 2011 because I "sell a book about escort services". Refer to my original post: Censored by PayPal. This post was prompted by an article written by Andrew Shaffer and posted on February 27, 2012 for Huff Post: PayPal Takes Controversial Stance Against Sex

I thank Andrew Shaffer for including my unusual case in this article.

In the last few days, this US corporation that pretends to be a bank, but is not regulated as such, has demanded that books categorized as "erotica" with specific sexual content that many consider to be abhorrent be removed from a list of online bookstores that sell with PayPal. The particular content at issue is nothing I'd ever read, but since when did Americans appreciate what amounts to book burning?

My situation is proof positive that this monstor censor won't stop there - they are after all that is adult. Does the Disney - Meg Whitman connection have any relation to the recent events? I think so, but then I know better than most what Disney is capable of in the pursuit of an anti-adult agenda and it is more than you can imagine.


Reflections on the Past

As a result of my past history as an adult business owner in the Orlando area, I find the recent actions by PayPal to be par for the course. An examination of the bigger picture here reveals a similar anti-adult trend in the US to that which I experienced for so many years in Orlando. I said it before and I'll say it again: Orlando was a test market to understand the level of toleration for censorship of the general population in the US. Welcome to my world.

Back in 1996, the Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation (MBI), with Disney grants as one major source of funding, pursued Sprint Yellow Pages as a result of the publisher's refusal to remove the "escort services" category from its upcoming 1996 books. More on that story in Memoirs.

To better understand the MBI agenda over the years, read: Orlando MBI: The Long War on Adults

The Orlando area has been under siege for over 30 years by these pretend prudes that are now disguised by corporate America and as a matter of fact, many have now joined corporate America after retiring - (A big holler out to former MBI agent Ray Peters and a congrats on his employment as Head of Security at the Rosen Plaza in Orlando). I state "pretend" because as the party that owned escort services in the metro Orlando area for 10 years, I know what they really do. They may fool some of the people some of the time, but they'll never fool me.

I know why I was prosecuted and it had nothing at all to do with anything (95% pure lies and BS) stated in the arrest affidavit. You may note that there was never even enough evidence to get court orders to wiretap or search in my investigation and prosecution.


The Big Picture


What began long ago as a war on all that is adult in Orlando, Florida has now proliferated and is a War on all that is adult in the US. First they went after anyone they could find that looked like a viable target. This practice evolved into creating cases where there were none to begin with as the eye of government turned to the publishers of advertisements and websites for adult business.

One of the most known cases is the MBI arrest of several Orlando Weekly advertising sales executives and the civil RICO indictment of the newspaper in late 2007. Read what well-known First Amendment attorney Marc Randazza had to say about this case: The Orlando Weekly Case

Going after publishers is the first major step in the anti-adult agenda. Of course the great majority voluntarily caved and stopped selling advertisements for anything adult. The results of the Orlando Weekly case gave MBI the nerve to go national. Craigslist was attacked and shamed by the ignorant and many with an agenda, eventually caving also. The attack on Craigslist originated with none other than the Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation (MBI) in Orlando. Doubt that? Read these public documents with thinly veiled threats:

MBI to Buckmaster September 2007

MBI to Buckmaster November 2007

Buckmaster to MBI November 2007

MBI to Buckmaster January 2008

MBI to Buckmaster March 2008

Note that the MBI refers to the demand to Craigslist to drop the adult categories as Good Corporate Citizenship.  I absolutely picture one of these whacks contacting PayPal and requesting that my account be frozen utilizing the usual tool box of lies and referring to my books as "obscene material". If I ever find out that they had something to do with my frozen account, I will sue the pants off of anyone involved.

Going after the publishers is not a new approach, but it is now used as a major tool in the anti-adult agenda toolbox. First Amendment attorney Lawrence Walters addressed the problem as it relates to adult business ads online in two recent posts:

Killing the Messenger: The Campaign Against Online Escort Advertising Sites; Part 1 - Setting the Stage

Killing the Messenger: The Campaign Against Online Escort Advertising Sites; Part II - Operational Policies and Legal Issues

When you read the two articles written by Walters, realize that this is a pursuit of any directory, classified ad seller, or online listings provider for these adults in the adult business. This has already existed to an extent, but the stakes are getting higher. As Walters states:

"Federal conspiracy, solicitation and money laundering statutes certainly don’t help an escort site’s plight. The epitome of broad and vague statutory language; these laws expose even the most tangentially involved individual/entity to potential legal liability."

Law enforcement agents around the US have managed to poison the phrase and business description of "escort services" by including street hookers and referring to any operator as a pimp. The reality is that most escort business operators market and book appointments and not much else. The general population in the US has fallen into their trap hook, line, and sinker.

Perhaps it is time for a new business title that omits the word "escort". They poisoned it - let them keep it! Changing titles for businesses and independents wouldn't be all that complicated. It was done back in 2000-2001 with the "hobbyists" and "providers" on message boards all over the world. One idea for the operator in a major city is "convention hostess" or we could all return to the "lingerie model" concept and the operators would offer model referrals or hostess referrals for conventions.

As one reader of this blog recently pointed out to me, the MegaUpload indictment is the beginning of the end. Mentioning that case, I was happy to read that Kim Dotcom was released on bond because as previously stated, I do not advocate any prison at all for non-violent activities. I do not like what these people did, but that doesn't translate to any desire to lock them in a cage. You can't believe that I would be happy that people steal what little I could have.

Today it hit the news that the US DOJ is now going after gambling websites even when the business is outside the US. From a blog reader:

"But NOW, they have dropped the pretext of being fair, and have gone after a gambling company not in the US, not registered in the US, and apparently not even banking in the US."
Verisign seizes .com domain registered via foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities

I can envision the US government seizing adult websites of all types, especially if a Republican (other than Ron Paul) makes it to the White House in the 2012 national election. Well known First Amendment attorney Lawrence Walters states this best: The Politics of Porn - 2012

Make sure that you get out and vote. Realize which politicians are ready to kill your income, your reading material, movies that adults enjoy, your bingo parlor, and anything else that is adult in the United States. Mark my words - the MBI has gone viral with the anti-adult agenda and anything from bingo parlors to internet cafés to adult businesses and writers of adult material are in the line of fire. Now that they've reached out to the payment processors (PayPal, Visa, MasterCard), it won't be that complicated.

It is indeed censorship as it is all a part of a government agenda. Do not pretend that greedy corporate payment processors do not want the money.