POI: Michael Pak

[WINDSOR]

Tugela and Seaslug44,

Okay, if statute 230.06 is not what MP should be charged under then we must legally re-define MP as a promoter rather than an accomplice. section 230.36 which I felt applied to MP, as you have pointed out does not. The law as outlined in 230.15 and 230.20 defines MP actions as those of 'promoting'


S 230.15: Promoting prostitution; definitions of terms
The following definitions are applicable to this article:
1. "Advance prostitution." A person "advances prostitution" when, acting other than as a prostitute or as a patron thereof, he knowingly causes or aids a person to commit or engage in prostitution, procures or solicits patrons for prostitution, provides persons or premises for prostitution purposes, operates or assists in the operation of a house of prostitution or a prostitution enterprise, or engages in any other conduct designed to institute, aid or facilitate an act or enterprise of prostitution.
2. "Profit from prostitution." A person "profits from prostitution" when, acting other than as a prostitute receiving compensation for personally rendered prostitution services, he accepts or receives money or other property pursuant to an agreement or understanding with any person whereby he participates or is to participate in the proceeds of prostitution activity.
S 230.20: Promoting prostitution in the fourth degree
A person is guilty of promoting prostitution in the fourth degree when he knowingly advances or profits from prostitution.

Promoting prostitution in the fourth degree is a class A misdemeanor.

BTW way it was Governor Eliot Spitzer that signed these laws into force in 2007. Does anybody remember why Spitzer had to resign?


70.15 Sentences of imprisonment for misdemeanors and violation.
1. Class A misdemeanor. A sentence of imprisonment for a class A misdemeanor shall be a definite sentence. When such a sentence is imposed the term shall be fixed by the court, and shall not exceed one year; provided, however, that a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon a
conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree as
defined in subdivision one of section 265.01 must be for a period of no
less than one year when the conviction was the result of a plea of
guilty entered in satisfaction of an indictment or any count thereof
charging the defendant with the class D violent felony offense of
criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree as defined in
subdivision four of section 265.02, except that the court may impose any
other sentence authorized by law upon a person who has not been
previously convicted in the five years immediately preceding the
commission of the offense for a felony or a class A misdemeanor defined
in this chapter, if the court having regard to the nature and
circumstances of the crime and to the history and character of the
defendant, finds on the record that such sentence would be unduly harsh
and that the alternative sentence would be consistent with public safety
and does not deprecate the seriousness of the crime.

In conclusion it is clear New York State law defines MP's activities relating to SG in May as criminal and he should face all legal consequences.

MOO

 

[WINDSOR]

For the record I have sent an email to the Suffolk County DA's office asking him to charge MP under the following statute.

S 230.20: Promoting prostitution in the fourth degree
A person is guilty of promoting prostitution in the fourth degree when he knowingly advances or profits from prostitution.


I await their response.

 

[Tugela]

The response will be nothing because to take it to trial will require evidence of a crime, not speculation of a crime. MP is not going to confess. The client says he didn't pay her and she is dead. He wasn't arrested on the scene in a sting, there was no complaint, so there is basically no evidence to charge him with anything.

Knowing what he was doing and proving it in the complete absence of any evidence are two completely different things.

 

[truthspider]

The response will be nothing because to take it to trial will require evidence of a crime, not speculation of a crime. MP is not going to confess. The client says he didn't pay her and she is dead. He wasn't arrested on the scene in a sting, there was no complaint, so there is basically no evidence to charge him with anything.

Knowing what he was doing and proving it in the complete absence of any evidence are two completely different things.

Excellent response. Moreover, in reality and especially in a case of this magnitude, even if LE had complete proof of his crime, they would drop it for his complete cooperation in Suffolk's largest investigation...

 

[WINDSOR]

Truth, I agree LE would drop the sex trafficking charge for complete co-operation. I do not believe they have received complete co-operation from MP. If they have what has been the result?

Tugela, the law states A person is guilty of promoting prostitution in the fourth degree when he knowingly advances or profits from prostitution.

Remember the standard is "reasonable doubt"; can anybody reasonably doubt that MP knowingly advanced prostitution.

Did MP knowingly drive SG to JB's house for the purpose of prostitution? MP has admitted that in the media. Under the statute no proof of a sexual act is needed, no proof of money exchange is needed. The evidence of crime is the fact MP drove SG to JB's house and JB had hired her for sexual purposes.(remember the call to CVS, regarding lube)

MP's defense could be that he did not 'knowingly' drive SG to JB's house. At that point I am willing to let the jury decide MP's guilt.

Your interpretation of the statute appears that it is legal to be a driver of prostitutes and share in the proceeds of their income; I do not believe that is what the legislators intended when they wrote the law.

May the heavens help us if what MP did is not considered a crime.

MOO

 

[truthspider]

Truth, I agree LE would drop the sex trafficking charge for complete co-operation. I do not believe they have received complete co-operation from MP. If they have what has been the result?

Tugela, the law states A person is guilty of promoting prostitution in the fourth degree when he knowingly advances or profits from prostitution.

Remember the standard is "reasonable doubt"; can anybody reasonably doubt that MP knowingly advanced prostitution.

Did MP knowingly drive SG to JB's house for the purpose of prostitution? MP has admitted that in the media. Under the statute no proof of a sexual act is needed, no proof of money exchange is needed. The evidence of crime is the fact MP drove SG to JB's house and JB had hired her for sexual purposes.(remember the call to CVS, regarding lube)

MP's defense could be that he did not 'knowingly' drive SG to JB's house. At that point I am willing to let the jury decide MP's guilt.

Your interpretation of the statute appears that it is legal to be a driver of prostitutes and share in the proceeds of their income; I do not believe that is what the legislators intended when they wrote the law.

May the heavens help us if what MP did is not considered a crime.

MOO

Windsor you are failing to differentiate between escorting and prostitution. Escorting is legal, prostitution is not. If you, Windsor, want to hang out with me, to play golf, for a surfing lesson, or watch me to do the Pee-Wee Herman dance naked on your kitchen table, and are willing to pay me $500 US an hour to do so, that is perfectly legal. The crime of prostitution is only committed once the exchange of money has been made explicitly in return for a sexual act. I don't think Mike Pak-alypse ever witnessed such an exchange.

PM me for booking info :floorlaugh:

 

[WINDSOR]

Windsor you are failing to differentiate between escorting and prostitution. Escorting is legal, prostitution is not. If you, Windsor, want to hang out with me, to play golf, for a surfing lesson, or watch me to do the Pee-Wee Herman dance naked on your kitchen table, and are willing to pay me $500 US an hour to do so, that is perfectly legal. The crime of prostitution is only committed once the exchange of money has been made explicitly in return for a sexual act. I don't think Mike Pak-alypse ever witnessed such an exchange.

This is the legal definition of prostitution in New York
S 230.00 Prostitution.
A person is guilty of prostitution when such person engages or agrees
or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for
a fee.

Saying you are an escort, or gigolo or whatever does not make it legal. What SG was engaging in with JB was Prostitution under the law. The fact no sexual conduct took place is irrelevant under this law, the mere fact of offering or agreeing to engage in sexual conduct is a violation of the law.

The fact SG went to JB's house, based on JB's call in response to her advertisement is sufficient for prostitution under this law to have taken place. The fact MP drove her is a violation under S 230.20.


If I offer to pay you $500.00 to dance naked, and we both understand that some sexual activities may also occur, a crime has been committed under this New York state law.


Years ago prostitution laws were loose; money had to be exchanged, and certain acts had to be performed. This New York State law is much more encompassing and the burden of proof on the state is much lower.

It is not important what you or I think is legal or a crime. It is what the law states. Now it is up to LE and the District Attorney to enforce the law.

BTW I wonder if the FBI were involved they could ask the IRS to review MP's tax returns and see if he files a return and if he reports his income from his driving. They got Capone on IRS charges in the 1930's that way.

MOO

 

[truthspider]

MOO

Windsor are you local?

 

[Victory]

I havent noticed opinions on why JB hires these women even though he cant perform. Maybe normally he can but just couldnt this night?

 

[Tugela]

Remember the standard is "reasonable doubt"; can anybody reasonably doubt that MP knowingly advanced prostitution.

Did MP knowingly drive SG to JB's house for the purpose of prostitution? MP has admitted that in the media. Under the statute no proof of a sexual act is needed, no proof of money exchange is needed. The evidence of crime is the fact MP drove SG to JB's house and JB had hired her for sexual purposes.(remember the call to CVS, regarding lube)

MP's defense could be that he did not 'knowingly' drive SG to JB's house. At that point I am willing to let the jury decide MP's guilt.

Your interpretation of the statute appears that it is legal to be a driver of prostitutes and share in the proceeds of their income; I do not believe that is what the legislators intended when they wrote the law.

May the heavens help us if what MP did is not considered a crime.

MOO

There is also a requirement to demonstrate to a judge that there is sufficient proof to make a charge. For that you need evidence, not speculation. You might con a jury with "reasonable doubt" and not present any evidence, but a judge would not fall for that. Fact is that there is no evidence for such a charge. Knowing what was probably happening is not sufficient, you need actual evidence or the charge would be dismissed long before any jury saw it.

 

[Tugela]

Windsor you are failing to differentiate between escorting and prostitution. Escorting is legal, prostitution is not. If you, Windsor, want to hang out with me, to play golf, for a surfing lesson, or watch me to do the Pee-Wee Herman dance naked on your kitchen table, and are willing to pay me $500 US an hour to do so, that is perfectly legal. The crime of prostitution is only committed once the exchange of money has been made explicitly in return for a sexual act. I don't think Mike Pak-alypse ever witnessed such an exchange.

This is the legal definition of prostitution in New York
S 230.00 Prostitution.
A person is guilty of prostitution when such person engages or agrees
or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for
a fee.

Saying you are an escort, or gigolo or whatever does not make it legal. What SG was engaging in with JB was Prostitution under the law. The fact no sexual conduct took place is irrelevant under this law, the mere fact of offering or agreeing to engage in sexual conduct is a violation of the law.

The fact SG went to JB's house, based on JB's call in response to her advertisement is sufficient for prostitution under this law to have taken place. The fact MP drove her is a violation under S 230.20.


If I offer to pay you $500.00 to dance naked, and we both understand that some sexual activities may also occur, a crime has been committed under this New York state law.


Years ago prostitution laws were loose; money had to be exchanged, and certain acts had to be performed. This New York State law is much more encompassing and the burden of proof on the state is much lower.

It is not important what you or I think is legal or a crime. It is what the law states. Now it is up to LE and the District Attorney to enforce the law.

BTW I wonder if the FBI were involved they could ask the IRS to review MP's tax returns and see if he files a return and if he reports his income from his driving. They got Capone on IRS charges in the 1930's that way.

MOO

And how do you propose to prove that an offer was made? Because that is a requirement. No one is going to testify in court that an offer was made, there is no LE officer witnessing the act, there are no phone recordings, there is no bank record, there is nothing.

MP would simply claim that she was an escort, which is perfectly legal. LE would have to prove that she was something else.

If it was as simple as you seem to think, remember this, there are thousands of ads placed by escorts every week. If it was as simple as you believe to get a conviction then LE would have no trouble mopping them up on prostitution charges. However, that does not happen.

 

[BKS]

I thought Alex and Pak admitted to all this illegal activity on National TV and in previous news articles. I even remember Alex saying in one that their "rent was due." Money was definitely the motivating factor for Pak to drive Shannon to LI. IMHO

Taking business to the Internet was risky but typical of Gilbert, Pak said. "Nobody could control her. She was the boss," he said.

She charged $200 an hour, and paid Pak a third of the take, he said.

http://www.newsday.com/news/breaking/gilbert-vanishing-reaches-one-year-mark-1.2849214

 

[WINDSOR]

Truth,

I am not a local, I live about 450-550 miles away. I would like to meet you someday and discuss this case.

Tugela

If I am correct judges in New York state are elected. It would be very difficult for an elected judge in such a high profile case not to at least have a trial and allow a jury to hear the evidence that LE has.

As BKS has stated, the evidence is in the public record. I think a judge would be very foolish and reckless to dismiss the charges before a trial. Many cases in New York have gone to trial with far less 'evidence'.


The phone call from JB to SG and/or MP prove the offer was made, because if no offer was made they would not have driven to Oak Beach.

Under the law MP claiming SG was an escort is not a defense.

LE tends to concentrate on street walkers rather than escorts, because of public complaints and it is even an easier conviction. The public does not really care about escorts because of their low profile. A couple of hookers working your street corner will get your attention and the cops will be called.

The alternatives to charging MP is to do nothing.



MOO

 

[BKS]

Truth,

I am not a local, I live about 450-550 miles away. I would like to meet you someday and discuss this case.

Tugela

If I am correct judges in New York state are elected. It would be very difficult for an elected judge in such a high profile case not to at least have a trial and allow a jury to hear the evidence that LE has.

As BKS has stated, the evidence is in the public record. I think a judge would be very foolish and reckless to dismiss the charges before a trial. Many cases in New York have gone to trial with far less 'evidence'.


The phone call from JB to SG and/or MP prove the offer was made, because if no offer was made they would not have driven to Oak Beach.

Under the law MP claiming SG was an escort is not a defense.

LE tends to concentrate on street walkers rather than escorts, because of public complaints and it is even an easier conviction. The public does not really care about escorts because of their low profile. A couple of hookers working your street corner will get your attention and the cops will be called.

The alternatives to charging MP is to do nothing.



MOO

Also, Micheal Pak lives in Jersey City which is even more evidence of sex trafficking

 

[En Passant]

Windsor are you local?

In last ID special MG explained how SG works things out before agreement & MG stated they agree to what they will do & not do "sexually" than the fee for service is established. It was stated that SG was booked & Jb was going over time ....Maybe that money was not exchanged. But upon arrival there is an exchange. Escort services get money up front & get Credit cards etc before escort leaves for "DATE".

Craigs List....changes that....& is used for Prostitution?
Maybe I am wrong just saying, SG was working for herself, she use to work for Escort service when Alex was her driver.

So why wouldn't it be considered prostitution?
Still Sex Trafficking als, which was mentioned via MG & many others.

I think they didn't need MPak...they got more than enough, i think MP was up front from get go as he knew SG had to have been killed....

That is there line of work (Alex & MPak).....Alex called to see if Shannan was with family, than SG sister said Pak called & explained what happened.

Now IMO Alex was still SG boyfriend & SG was making income for each as well.
IMO if they had anything to do with killing SG they would never have called the family.... Alex called....Than MPAk to explain

If they were guilty of murder, they would not have called & alerted family...they knew JB killed her IMO...they know prostitution is a big difference than murder & they wanted nothing to do with that. I do believe that they did care about SG, They were disturbed...just human behavior. SG trusted MP & Alex did to.

I do not think the whole prostitution issue is even an issue at this time. No offense, water under the bridge. MG made it very clear how SG worked & stated how SG made agreement on $ & what in turn he wanted SEXUALLY & agreed on time & price. JB was going to pay a higher rate for drive etc....Just like what happened to the other victims. Money & Sexual activity discussed prior, that was established already. If MG stated this, I am sure Alex would have agreed thats how they work & I am sure MP agrees to how that is established whether someone chooses to agree or not.

Now that was MP job to make sure money was recieved up front at least for time traveled, I know there is noway that MP would have changed that. MP did say they are over time. I think that over time was not paid that is it, IMO

IMO JB just stated that because Jb & Mp may have talked upon him leaving OB & stating he is going to say he never was going to pay, so MP would figure he would not be in trouble & JB would not either....UNTIL Victims started popping up like daisies imo

 

[Seaslug44]

I thought Alex and Pak admitted to all this illegal activity on National TV and in previous news articles. I even remember Alex saying in one that their "rent was due." Money was definitely the motivating factor for Pak to drive Shannon to LI. IMHO

Taking business to the Internet was risky but typical of Gilbert, Pak said. "Nobody could control her. She was the boss," he said.

She charged $200 an hour, and paid Pak a third of the take, he said.

http://www.newsday.com/news/breaking/gilbert-vanishing-reaches-one-year-mark-1.2849214

Yes but being an escort, an escort service or an escort's driver is not illegal in New York state.

There is a huge difference between escorting and prostitution.

 

[Seaslug44]

Dear Mods;

Is there any way we can PLEASE have some other place where some posters can use to post their long "IMO" theories?

All of our discussions that were originally full of valuable facts (with links to back them up like this thread), intelligent debates and meaningful, indepth conversations are being overwhelmed (and over run) by monster-sized posts that are pure opinion.

When did it become okay to post completely false information and hide behind the "IMO" or "IMHO" disclaimers?

All due respect, when seven out of every ten posts are full of misleading information under the protection of the "IMO" disclaimer (or responses to those posts asking for MSM links or clarification) and when the same false information is posted on almost every discussion (regardless of what the actual topic of each discussion is), it's time to consider the possibilty that the discussion has been hijacked and/or an intent is being made to drive sensible readers & posters away.

I am the first person to admit that I sometimes come up with some radical theories out of left field. But when I do, I always am respectful to my fellow members by starting a new discussion for those theories (to avoid any damage to the integrity of our established discussions).

 

[truthspider]

Today I j-walked twice, I also rolled through a red light, then when I got home I burned a plant and inhaled the smoke. On my tax returns this year I told my accountant that I spent $800 on my cell phone bill as opposed to the $600 I really spent. Do you guys care? I don't know about you, but I am here because there is a man in my county who murders women, girls, children, etc, then torments the victim's little sister. I think the individual should pay and suffer for this, as well as be made an example of. I want people thinking of doing something similar to know that they will be rejected by society, their families ruined, and their sad life ended in a ****** prison hallway when a makeshift shank finds a vital organ or five.

In light of the surrounding events, no one should care if 2Pak was in the gray area of prostituion laws, that behavior is entirely neglibable when compared to the decades of murder and hate crimes committed by the serial killer, who I for one know is not M Pak. Feel free to debate whether I should be prosecuted for my minor follies. smh.

 

[En Passant]

Yes but being an escort, an escort service or an escort's driver is not illegal in New York state.

There is a huge difference between escorting and prostitution.

From my understanding she use to work for escort service that Alex was her driver. Than Her & Alex became a couple SAhannan left the escort service & SG prosituted for herself on craigs list & had 2 people that made there living by shannan.

Can you link me to Shannans escort company & the license & business tax ID...it would be public. If not than she was a prostitute which is diffence. I would like to see the tax ID & link to TY

Because it would be misleading & basically the truth would be she did not have a escort business license.

Please clear this up, I searched & it would be public knowledge & it doesn't seem to be the case. It is not fact sorry. Just give links

 

[WINDSOR]

Seaslug44 said

Yes but being an escort, an escort service or an escort's driver is not illegal in New York state. There is a huge difference between escorting and prostitution.

Yes the difference is 'sexual conduct' once "the person engages or agrees
or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for
a fee" it becomes illegal. Call it escorting if you will, but if it involves sexual conduct it is illegal in New York state.

Truth, yes we should focus on the SK, but I think MP will provide the information we need to go after the SK.

MOO