One of my colleagues was arrested over the weekend for soliciting a prostitute in a town just north of the ESL/Sauget/Brooklyn strip club district.
Not sure how the Supreme Court would deal with a conviction on the charge, should one occur, but I doubt they would approve. Today is the 20th anniversary of my swearing-in to the Bar. I am reminded of something the State Bar President said at my swearing-in: Never do anything to jeopardize your license.
Be careful out there, guys.
She asked me what I thought. I told her what I thought was totally irrelevant. She says NO, maybe a jury trial. I just shook my head and said best to listen to your attorney and accept a plea deal assuming that is what he advises. She says you wouldn't vote to convict. I said I'm not exactly the typical joe now am I? She says yes you are. :) Such a sweet girl. I never did learn the end of the story for sure. I think mainly it just cost her money and time. A cheap lesson, if she learned it.
First impression after reading the post is it doesn't hit me as triggering the typical "moral turpitude" standard in most jurisditions that would get more than a slap on the wrist. Probably half the clients for pros are either doctors or lawyers. Embezzle client funds, take public bribes, commmit fraud etc - those kinds of thing, yes OK. Judges would likely not be too anxious to start taking away the tickets of horny bastard lawyers soliciting pros.
"jurisdictions" that is
CTL 20th Bar Anniv: I trust that you will choose a most apropos place to celebrate... TR eagerly anticipated. Congrats
CTL: Ditto on the congrats! Celebrating in TJ, maybe?
First I've ever heard about lawyers celebrating bar admision anniversaries. However to be on the safe side, I will plan a party for Sept 2008 for my 25th anniv of bar admission
I used to know a girl who had a good full-time job but also did some prostitution with a limited number of regular clients to supplement her income. And yes she was a single mother. She once told me that most of her clients were lawyers.
"I used to know a girl who had a good full-time job"
Yup, and she was probably a lawyer too
I follow with interest ...
I'm attending law school starting next fall. At the ripe old age of [early 40s], I'll be the weirdo in the class no doubt (and I'm already worrying about being able to keep my eyes -- and hands! -- down when the young gals parade by).
But more to the subject at hand. What is it exactly that is done to you if you're a lawyer and you're also a monger or hobbyist. Is there some kind of professional reprisal? Are different regions different about this sort of thing? What kinds of extra steps do lawyers take?
I'm, personally, unlikely to kick the strip-club habit any time soon. And those of you who know my posts, also know that (although I don't support any activity that endangers a participant) I engage in patronizing certain service-providers for certain services which, though perhaps criminal, are nevertheless certainly victimless crimes. Or, if there IS a victim, then I'm definitely willing! :)
Would I have to stop it? Am I able? Should I try? Is there something else I need to know? CHitown, I'm looking forward to your reply!
was talking with a "pro" a few weeks ago about income, this girl is around 21 or 22, probably little or no education but presents herself reasonably well, nice looking, nice personality, high class (temporary) apt/hotel setup, and I was telling her I knew of a dancer that made around 30 to 35 k last summer
100% true: She laughs and says quite matter of factly says "30,000"? "well, maybe in a month"
Lets say 200 to 300k w/o any taxes - that is the after tax equivalent to many law PARTNERS who after 7 years of schooling and 10 to 15 years of 70 to 80 hour work weeks, and these girls don't have 100k in student loans
"First I've ever heard about lawyers celebrating bar admision anniversaries."
I know. Like 9/11, it is an occasion that is "commemorated" or "marked", rather than "celebrated." I happen to have a very retentive memory, so I happen to know the exact date I was sworn in. I think most lawyers would have to look at their admission certificates to remember it.
Sorry, BookGuy, but I'd rather be 20 years into the profession than just starting out in it--or, like you, just starting to start out in it.
"What is it exactly that is done to you if you're a lawyer and you're also a monger or hobbyist. Is there some kind of professional reprisal?"
I guess we'll find out. When it comes to bar discipline, all screwing is not equal. Guys who screw their own clients in lieu of fees generally get disbarred. In our town, there is a lawyer who fell in love with her client's future ex-husband (in other words, the party on the other side of the divorce case...the other lawyer's client.) They started screwing after the case had been tried, but before all the paperwork/technicalities had been resolved. She was let off with a reprimand. The Supreme Court found "mitigating circumstances" in the fact that she did, after all, marry the guy.
I suspect that our hero in the solicitation case will get a reprimand, rather than any time off. I can almost guarantee he won't be disbarred, and if he got 30 days off, I'd be shocked. As salacious as this particular misdemeanor is, it is still just a misdemeanor. He isn't married, so he doesn't have those particular issues to deal with. His father was a county judge in our area, then a judge on the appellate court, and I think this guy had some political aspirations. The loss of those possibilities is probably his biggest sanction.
A lawyer in our state was disbarred a couple of months ago for helping his non-lawyer wife run a whorehouse in one of the American colonies, I think the Mariana Islands, and for profiting from same (in other words, for being a pimp.)
Several years back, a young female lawyer at a very prestigious (and well-paying) Chicago firm got 6 months off for turning tricks in downtown Chicago. Her shrink and the disciplinary commission's shrink both agreed that she was a highly-achieving woman who had always "played by the rules", and she played the whore to satisfy her emotional need to be on the wrong side of the rules for a change.
BookGuy, the initials "OTC" are not unknown to me. The rules for lawyers are no different than for non-lawyers. Never suggest any act. If a woman should suggest an act, never link same to payment of money. In all your OTC discussions (or discussions in anticipation of OTC), never say anything that you wouldn't want to have played back to a jury. If a woman is so indiscreet as to suggest any particular act in exchange for an amount of money, walk away from the deal. The stakes are too high, and a pro will know what to say and not to say. Anyone else is either a cop, or too stupid for you to risk messing with.
I realize that you might read the guidelines in the last paragraph and think, "If I follow those, I'll never get any OTC action." To which I say, "Balderdash!" I have followed them faithfully, and I have never gotten "stung", and have had plenty of OTC experiences. You just have to balance your desire to bust a nut with your desire to keep a clean police record.
I'd like to add there is nothing wrong with being scammed out of money by a woman! :) (Or, a man.) So if everthing is suggested because of the need to be discreet, then don't let it ruffle your feathers if she walks. If you're making a couple hundred an hour then losing three or four hundred dollars shouldn't be a biggie except for your pride. Let her walk--yes, with your money. :)
The New Times did a story on this attorney who hired a thug for around $200 + - to do some dirty work. Nothing wrong with that. Thug decides to void the deal, but can't or won't return the attorney's money. Please understand the attorney has tons of money both from his license to practice as well as from his family. A $1,000 to him is like $5 to an ordinary uneducated wage slave.
So attorney hires thug to do dirty work and pays thug in cash. So far so good. Kudos to attorney for attempting to keep his hands clean. Thug turns out not to be a man of his word and can't or won't return attorney's $200 + -. What should attorney do at this point? He has done good so far, but there is a bump on the road. Thug isn't asking for more money he just doesn't want to do the work and can't or won't return the $200 +-.
Attorney does the most stupid thing at this point because he doesn't want to be "cheated." Remember he is hiring a thug for peanuts to not only engage in a felony---nothing morally wrong there---but, to harm another person, to spill another person's blood. Yes, the other person may need to have his blood spilt--that ain't really the point. The point is this is very dangerous business! Thus, you need to operate your affairs with care and concern and consideration.
YOU DO NOT CALL THE POLICE to complain that the thug you hired is failing to carry out your blood thirsty plan!!!!!!!!!!!! NO, NO, NO, Mr. Attorney. That just ain't cool. Screw the $200. Hell if it were $2,000, screw it! Walk away. Therefore, if your working lady refuses to do what was implied be happy that you were able to get some conversation and that you were able to contribute some money to her.
Ain't nothing wrong with getting burnt if the price is right. :) Hell, hardworking honest folks get ripped off by crooked judges day in and day out and for a hell of a lot more than a few hundred dollars. Just think of those folks as you're being ripped off.
From the Belleville (IL) News-Democrat, 11-06-07:
Supreme Court candidate's son arrested in prostitution sting
BY BRIAN BRUEGGEMANN News-Democrat
EDWARDSVILLE --The son of a candidate who ran for the Illinois Supreme Court has been arrested on a charge of soliciting a prostitute.
Thomas Gordon Maag, 32, of Highland, was arrested Friday during a sting operation conducted by Granite City Police.
Thomas Maag, an attorney, is the son of Gordon Maag, a Democrat who ran in 2004 for a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court. The race between Gordon Maag and Republican Lloyd Karmeier set a national record by attracting more than $9 million in campaign spending.
It would be interesting to know more details about the sting. I assume it wasn't a lack of intelligence on his part, but more akin to thinking it really isn't a crime . . . like homosexual sex . . . smoking a joint . . . buying natural cow's milk . . . etc.
Seems like it should be relatively easy to avoid just by being discreet and not worrying about losing a few bucks, but who knows . . .
"I used to know a girl who had a good full-time job but also did some prostitution with a limited number of regular clients to supplement her income. And yes she was a single mother. She once told me that most of her clients were lawyers." -- FONDL
"Yup, and she was probably a lawyer too" -- David9999
Sorry I can't resist.... Because Lawyers see nothing odd about screwing someone for an hourly fee!
Here's a report on a former brother at the bar who got in trouble for trying mix business and pleasure:
In re JOHN WALTER ACKERMAN, Attorney Number 8591 531 Commercial Street, Suite 604 Waterloo, Iowa 50701-5497
Mr. Ackerman, who was licensed in 1971, was disbarred on consent. He falsely represented to Iowa jail officials that he was an attorney for a woman detained on criminal charges. When he met her at a corrections facility, he offered her a fee discount for defending her in exchange for sex. He was later found guilty of prostitution and assault based on his advances to the female prisoner. He failed to notify the (disciplinary commission) of his conviction.
Lawyers are just people too. They can get caught up in the same shit as the rest of us. Just because they know the law does not mean that they are immune to it. Remember the lawyer that shot and killed the manager at Chastity's Gold Club in Columbia SC. a few months back. Lawyers wright the laws not the government office holders. This is fucked up. Who is guarding the chicken coop? More money to be made unless you live in Pakistan and have morals.
And here's a redacted version of the disposition of the charge concerning a brother who tried to put on a horizontal version of "South Pacific":
In re David P. Schluckebier
RECOMMENDATION: Disbarment. DATE OF OPINION: October 11, 2007.
Between 1998 and 2004, Respondent lived in Palau. In 2002, Respondent married Hong Kun Xue a/k/a Xue Hong Kun ("Xue"). Xue operated a restaurant that also included a massage parlor and a house of prostitution. From 2002 to 2004, Respondent was aware that Xue operated the restaurant as a prostitution business.
Between 2002 and 2004, Xue deposited a portion of the funds she received as a result of operating her prostitution business into a Palau bank account which she held jointly with Respondent . Respondent knew that a portion of the funds Xue deposited into the joint account were derived from her operation of a prostitution business. The Palau National Code defined prostitution as a crime. By holding the joint account with Xue, Respondent knowingly acquired, possessed, or controlled funds that constituted the proceeds of a crime in violation of the Palau Code.
In 2004 Xue, was criminally charged with money laundering. Respondent was called to testify as a witness during Xue's criminal trial. During his sworn testimony, Respondent testified that the funds he and Xue deposited into their joint account were derived from wedding gifts, his family and his salary (liar, liar, pants-on-fire!!!). This testimony was false; Respondent knew that the funds that he and his wife deposited were the proceeds of her prostitution business.
The Tribunal noted that Respondent once thwarted a police sting on his wife's business. On a day that Respondent was present at the restaurant, under cover plain-clothes officers entered the restaurant in search of evidence of prostitution. Upon their arrival, Respondent discreetly conferred with his sister-in-law who then approached the officers to advise them that only regular massage services were available at the restaurant.
We note in mitigation that Respondent has no prior disciplinary record. However, Respondent's prior good conduct is insufficient to outweigh the severity of his misconduct. We recommend that Respondent be disbarred.
Actually the girl to whom I referred headed up the computer department for a small company. She was a geek not a lawyer. She worked 4 days a week at her regular job and booked a motel room every other Friday. And she drove a fairly new Lexus. And was very good looking. Makes me wonder how common that sort of thing is - single professional mothers adding to their incomes with a small number of select clients.
So your recommendation is, don't get caught? Gee, thanks ... :P
Seriously, as far as prostitution goes, it doesn't sound like the risk is any greater for an attorney than for anyone else. I spent last evening in a strip club. Is that something I"m going to have to curtail?
Book Guy
Note there is a difference between the character and fitness standard utilized for bar admission in most jurisdictions vs the (normally client-directed) moral turpitude standard typically utilized to determine whether a suspension or disbarment for an admitted member is warranted.
The first is relatively broad based, and an arrest and/or conviction of any type would have to be explained in detail to the Admissions Committee with the idea the applicant for less serious offenses could redeem themselves sufficient to apply. My guess is that you would get one free screw - so to speak, meaning if you were arrested for solicting a prostitute (a misdemeanor) for example in the first year or 2 of law school, and refrained from the activity for the next few years - its not usually going to be a roadblock.
With admitted members, I am under the impression that a single arrest for engaging a prostitute would generally not be deemed sufficient for suspension or termination, so long as it had nothing to do with the client-atty relationship.
So long as one is not arrested and/or convicted multiple times or is involved in profiting from the unlawful acts of prostitutes, the issue is not likely to be of significance.
Seems to me it would differ depending on whether the infraction was considered a misdemeanor or a feloney. So it would depend on what exactly the guy was convicted of. And since we're talking about a lawyer I would think some sort of plea bargain would be likely. In other words the prostitute would get screwed and the customer would get off. And isn't that what always happens, isn't that what he's paying for?
Fondl: I like that wording... not sure if it was intentional, but chuckle-worthy... "the prostitute would get screwed and the customer would get off"
Thanks, Doug. Yes it was intentional. The purpose of my last sentence was to make that obvious but I guess it didn't work.
Reminds me a little of a successful buddy. He's been smoking dope for decades and was bragging you'd have to be brain dead to get caught. I just shake my head. Yes, he may die never getting caught. But, how many who were sure they'd never get busted get busted. I don't know. Not something I have any interest in investigating, either.
Reminds me of a bartender, Sky (great guy, btw), chewing out a dancer who got busted for tiny tiny marijuana cigarette. She couldn't believe the cop was such an asshole. She felt since had been completely cooperative and that the amount was so tiny that he should give her a break. Sans tats, he might have, imo. In the good old days I remember officers more than willing to look the other way. They seemed like family--good family. :)
Sky didn't have any compassion. Not because he believes in the drug laws necessarily, but because he felt stupidity should be treated as a serious crime. If tomatoes are illegal, then stay the fuck away from tomatoes no matter juicy or mouthwatering or healthy. He put the poor girl in tears when he told her that if her was the judge he'd throw the book at her even if it meant years behind bars. I like Sky--no mercy and plain spoken. :)