Backpage.com raided, CEO arrested for sex-trafficking

[User-E]

Trafficking is over rated and so is underage. How many of the avid reviewers here have come across underage and forced women? It's overblown and if the stigma were to end, the ladies who maybe being "pimped" would be quicker to come out and cry for help.

I agree that LE exaggerates the number of trafficking cases, but do you read the that reverdy faithfully continues to update?

These are the articles posted just since the end of July where there is proof, not just suspicion, of underage and/or trafficked women in Canada, much of it right here in Ontario:

https://www.hubgfe.com/community/sh...ding-Bill-C-36&p=787093&viewfull=1#post787093



https://www.hubgfe.com/community/sh...ding-Bill-C-36&p=777377&viewfull=1#post777377
https://www.hubgfe.com/community/sh...ding-Bill-C-36&p=779183&viewfull=1#post779183









It makes sense that not many of our avid reviewers run into trafficked or underage girls/women, because these are seasoned veterans who would purposely avoid seeing women in these types of situations, and automatically pass over ads that look suspicious. Most of our reviewers find their ladies on the boards and reputable ad sites, but just because our core group doesn't encounter these women/girls, doesn't mean they don't exist, because they do.

 

[jeg]

Trafficking is over rated and so is underage. How many of the avid reviewers here have come across underage and forced women? It's overblown and if the stigma were to end, the ladies who maybe being "pimped" would be quicker to come out and cry for help.

and yet there is a signed agreement that pledges worldwide co-operation to combat the problem. Easy google search.
Apart from trafficked women ( forget children even though we know there are some sick fucks out there ), how many women are being pimped, maybe the bf is a crack dealer and he beats her. As a society, we take a stand against ANY man who abuses a women, we may not agree that offering her up for sex is more disturbing.
In the end, it is the children of those women who through no fault of their own will most lukely continue down the same path and so on.

Din't expect it to change because the simple fact is most people only care about themselves and they think someone else should do it, then bitch and complain when the government tries to tackle a problem because the solutions that were offered up was they shouldn't worry about it.

 

[jeg]

On a final note, not all trafficked women are beaten, some abuse or control of the women is done through the holding of their passport or mild threat that may fall upon family members back home. Most, if not all are told of a better life in exchange of a small debt. Similar tactics are employeed with the domestics, drugs, escape home.

Now the backpages charges are targeting the international obligations and really now of us know what the trigger was. It may have even started with a complaint that originated from a foreign country.
Who has to share in the responsibility, I would hope the ones that are making a living off of the girls, the State decided that the website need to bear responsibility and therefore brought the charges against the owners of the site.

 

[Hoser]

Latest news-recap anyone?.

 

[User-E]

Handcuffed and dressed in an orange jail jumpsuit, the chief executive of an internet site authorities accuse of being "a hub for the illegal sex trade" waived extradition to California on Friday, and his attorney vowed to fight the "trumped up" sex trafficking and money laundering charges he faces.

Backpage.com CEO Carl Ferrer was arrested Thursday and his Dallas headquarters was raided after officials in California accused him of felony pimping a minor, pimping, and conspiracy to commit pimping. Under California law, felony pimping is defined as making money off prostitutes or soliciting customers for prostitution. Texas' attorney general's office added money-laundering to the list of alleged crimes.

Ferrer, 55, was arrested after arriving in Houston on a flight from Amsterdam. Backpage.com is a Dutch-owned limited liability corporation. Ferrer was expected to be flown to California later Friday.

Ferrer, wearing glasses, said little during his brief court hearing, acknowledging he was waiving extradition.

"Mr. Ferrer looks forward to vigorously fighting these charges that we believe are trumped up," Ferrer's attorney, Philip Hilder, said after Friday's extradition hearing. Hilder declined to comment on further questions related to the charges.

Authorities also issued arrest warrants for Backpage's controlling shareholders: Michael Lacey, 68, and James Larkin, 67. They were not yet in custody as of Friday, said Kristin Ford, spokeswoman for the California attorney general.

Lacey and Larkin are former owners of the Village Voice and the Phoenix New Times. It wasn't clear whether they had attorneys who could comment. An attorney who previously represented the two men, Michael Manning, said he was not representing them in this case.

Cindy McCain, the wife of Arizona U.S. Sen. John McCain and who has been leading efforts for several years to fight human trafficking, called Ferrer's arrest a "huge game-changer" in the efforts to crack down on the trafficking of young girls and boys for sex.

Texas state agents raided Backpage's Dallas offices following allegations that adult and child sex-trafficking victims were forced into prostitution through escort ads posted on the site.

Backpage.com advertises a wide range of services, but California officials said the site collects fees from users who use coded language and nearly nude photos to offer sex for money. A California court affidavit says Ferrer expanded Backpage.com's share of online sex marketing by creating affiliated sites including EvilEmpire.com and BigCity.com with related content.

The ad portal received more than 90 percent of its revenue from the adult escort ad portion of its classified advertising business, according to a search warrant affidavit filed by the Texas attorney general's office. In California, that amounted to about $50 million between January 2013 and May 2015, or between $1.5 million and $2.5 million a month, it said.

Ferrer was told directly by law enforcement officials about prostitution on the site "and is regularly copied on the hundreds of law enforcement subpoenas and requests that Backpage.com receives each year related to prostitution and sex trafficking of both adults and minors on the website," according to the affidavit.

The California complaint alleges that rather than merely being a conduit for the ads, Ferrer "developed and oversaw a process to screen escort ads on Backpage.com." By charging for the ads, the state charges that he and his co-defendants violated the state's law against pimping, defined as making money off prostitutes or soliciting customers for prostitution.

California authorities said the state's three-year investigation found many of the ads involve victims of sex trafficking including children under the age of 18.

One of the advertisers, identified only as 15-year-old "E.S.," ''was forced into prostitution at the age of 13 by her pimp," according to an affidavit filed with the complaint. She used other online advertising services until they were shut down, the court filing says, when she turned to Backpage.com.

The criminal charges, like a lawsuit pending in Washington state, skirt free-speech and federal internet immunity protections by alleging that Backpage profited by directly participating in sex trafficking, including of minors.

In a statement Friday, Liz McDougall, Backpage.com general counsel, called the raid and Ferrer's arrest "an election-year stunt, not a good-faith action by law enforcement."

She said prostitution ads violate Backpage.com's policies against illegal content, that the company blocked the posting of ads using terms that violated those policies and removed ads when contacted by law enforcement

"The actions of the California and Texas Attorneys General are flatly illegal. They ignore the holdings of numerous federal courts that the First Amendment protects the ads on Backpage.com," McDougall said. She also contended that they also violate the U.S. Communications Decency Act "pre-empting state actions such as this one and immunizing web hosts of third-party created content."

However, the criminal complaint and affidavit, like the Washington lawsuit filed on behalf of three underage girls, contend that Backstage actively coached advertisers in how to write advertisements in ways that would stay within legal limits while still encouraging commercial sex.

Backpage has argued that it merely publishes advertisements that are created and provided by others, but the Washington Supreme Court ruled last year that the company didn't just host the ads, but helped develop the content.

The girls' civil attorney, Erik Bauer, said at the time that the three were in the seventh and ninth grades when adult professional sex traffickers sold them as prostitutes on Backpage.

Ford, the spokeswoman for the California attorney general, declined comment on the company's statement. A message to a spokeswoman for the Texas attorney general drew no response.

California officials said their investigation was prompted in part by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which reported 2,900 instances to California authorities since 2012 when suspected child sex trafficking occurred using Backpage.com.

The charges against Ferrer could bring him nearly 22 years in prison. Larkin and Lacey face a maximum of six years.

A U.S. Senate subcommittee that has investigated the company estimated its annual revenue at more than $150 million.

 

[cristycurves]

Now the backpages charges are targeting the international obligations and really now of us know what the trigger was. It may have even started with a complaint that originated from a foreign country..

......Or the complainant may have been an owner of another site, a competitor, riled by the amount of biz bp takes from them.....a possibility.
I think it's a far stretch and shameful to charge the owners of BP with the said charges. Bp clearly covers what it allows and doesn't allow. It polices itself to a degree, but it's disclaimer, should be enough.To expect a site that large to police every ad is as reasonable as expecting the sun to shine every day. As adults shouldn't we all be looking out for those abused/underage/etc, and report them, as adults shouldn't we be held responsible for our own doings. The ceo is no more a pimp than any of us, and should the charges stick, all other companion sites should be worried, I would think.

https://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/sex_ads_it_isnt_just_backpage_com/

 

[jeg]

......Or the complainant may have been an owner of another site, a competitor, riled by the amount of biz bp takes from them.....a possibility.
I think it's a far stretch and shameful to charge the owners of BP with the said charges. Bp clearly covers what it allows and doesn't allow. It polices itself to a degree, but it's disclaimer, should be enough.To expect a site that large to police every ad is as reasonable as expecting the sun to shine every day. As adults shouldn't we all be looking out for those abused/underage/etc, and report them, as adults shouldn't we be held responsible for our own doings. The ceo is no more a pimp than any of us, and should the charges stick, all other companion sites should be worried, I would think.

https://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/sex_ads_it_isnt_just_backpage_com/

We all should look out for the vunerable, the reality is people don't care, including people who make a living off of those.
I was told by an agency owner that he saw a competitor in a parking lot sitting in his car. He called 911 and said he walked by the car and he believes he saw a gun in his competitors lap. So it is plausible.

Putting up a disclaimer, say on the front entrance of a massage parlour doesn't absolve by any streach of the imagination.

It certainly puts people who make money on the vunerable on notice that they may be held accountable.

Time will tell how it all plays out.

 

[cristycurves]

We all should look out for the vunerable, the reality is people don't care, including people who make a living off of those.
I was told by an agency owner that he saw a competitor in a parking lot sitting in his car. He called 911 and said he walked by the car and he believes he saw a gun in his competitors lap. So it is plausible.

Putting up a disclaimer, say on the front entrance of a massage parlour doesn't absolve by any streach of the imagination.

It certainly puts people who make money on the vunerable on notice that they may be held accountable.

Time will tell how it all plays out.

By the vulnerable I assume you mean, underage, pimped, etc? If that's the case then those who make money off them should be accountable always and stopped. I do disagree that ALL people don't care, as many of us do care. When I ran agencies I often helped those who needed help and would advise some to stop working and to seek help through specific government agencies, and would confront some of those, who at that time, were, so I believed, living off girls, taking all their money, but little good that did, and I put myself in jeopardy doing so. But now, if I suspected anyone were to be be forced, I'd still intervene. I believe in this biz, for those who choose it and who truly want to do it, but they are few and far between.
As far as disclaimers, I believe they are functional for online sites but too place one at an entrance of any establishment, I don't think would be effective.

 

[jeg]

By the vulnerable I assume you mean, underage, pimped, etc? If that's the case then those who make money off them should be accountable always and stopped. I do disagree that ALL people don't care, as many of us do care. When I ran agencies I often helped those who needed help and would advise some to stop working and to seek help through specific government agencies, and would confront some of those, who at that time, were, so I believed, living off girls, taking all their money, but little good that did, and I put myself in jeopardy doing so. But now, if I suspected anyone were to be be forced, I'd still intervene. I believe in this biz, for those who choose it and who truly want to do it, but they are few and far between.
As far as disclaimers, I believe they are functional for online sites but too place one at an entrance of any establishment, I don't think would be effective.

You know, I went out to the store last night and as I followed my wife around like a puppy it gave me some time to think.
Forget about underage, underage anything that is improper is WRONG.
Unfortunately women ( not just industry ) are abused and the funny thing is they protect the abuser. There is no excuse for a women who is abused or pimped to allow herself to be.
I too helped out some women including my wife, without getting into a long winded story, the local police service's detective said that "if you stick your nose in their business, you'll lose your nose".
So yes there are people that give a damn but most of us don't give a rat's ass. The potential for trying to help out someone is that they take a big bite out of your tush.

I don't know the answer to the issue, I have no problem with someone wanting to earn money by any means as long as they don't harm another. It is whether BP were somehow involved in anyway to the harm of the women, the state seems to believe they are.

 

[cristycurves]

You know, I went out to the store last night and as I followed my wife around like a puppy it gave me some time to think.
Forget about underage, underage anything that is improper is WRONG.
Unfortunately women ( not just industry ) are abused and the funny thing is they protect the abuser. There is no excuse for a women who is abused or pimped to allow herself to be.
I too helped out some women including my wife, without getting into a long winded story, the local police service's detective said that "if you stick your nose in their business, you'll lose your nose".
So yes there are people that give a damn but most of us don't give a rat's ass. The potential for trying to help out someone is that they take a big bite out of your tush.

I don't know the answer to the issue, I have no problem with someone wanting to earn money by any means as long as they don't harm another. It is whether BP were somehow involved in anyway to the harm of the women, the state seems to believe they are.

First let me thank you for helping and I'd like to be more optimistic and still believe there are more who'll help, than not The psychology of abuse is hard to understand, but even so, we can NEVER blame the abused for not leaving, or for not seeking help.
As far as the state believing BP having a part in trafficking, I don't believe that, I think they are just trying to close something that is helping to keep prostitution alive, well and in the limelight. Sort of the same as government did with criminalizing buying sex but allowing it to be sold, thinking this too would stop trafficking, it's a ruse to stamp out the profession entirely and those who want to be in it, that's all

 

[HOOKED]

Sort of the same as government did with criminalizing buying sex but allowing it to be sold, thinking this too would stop trafficking, it's a ruse to stamp out the profession entirely and those who want to be in it, that's all

This is exactly what it is. Does underage and trafficking happen, of course it does but no where near the claims. It's conflated to press an agenda and many are starting to buy into it.

 

[jeg]

First let me thank you for helping and I'd like to be more optimistic and still believe there are more who'll help, than not The psychology of abuse is hard to understand, but even so, we can NEVER blame the abused for not leaving, or for not seeking help.
As far as the state believing BP having a part in trafficking, I don't believe that, I think they are just trying to close something that is helping to keep prostitution alive, well and in the limelight. Sort of the same as government did with criminalizing buying sex but allowing it to be sold, thinking this too would stop trafficking, it's a ruse to stamp out the profession entirely and those who want to be in it, that's all

I don't blame the women BUT let us think for a minute
Cosby, Jian and Trump, suddenly there are women coming out of the woodwork to tell their story. I'm sorry the government has spent literally millions on ads and programs assuring the women of abuse to speak out. So to me there may be no excuse for the man, but I believe there is no excuse for the women. What it tells me is that those women who do not speak out permit the man to continue abusing, another example of not caring. I know of a women, who has a child and an abusive bf who deals crack. She goes into court to tell the court that the man ( not the child's father ) is the father figure of HER child so she could be with him (abused more). Can you see the child's future?

If a group feels that they can stamp it out, they are not well educated and WE should wonder how WE let those people run the government. Unfortunately, everything seems to get muddled because it has to do with sex, but abused sex is slavery. Like I said, I don't have the answer and I seriously doubt anyone else does also. The C36 arguing is a prime example.
I am not sure if the intent of the state is to close BP, that has yet to be seen, if it is, history tells us there is something in the wings to take its place. There is money to be made after all.
Maybe the state believes it is acting on the behalf of the silent majority.

 

[peace]

I don't think anyone can speak for abused victims except for themselves....I cannot imagine what they go through but to blame them for not leaving shows we don't know really how much they have suffered.

 

[Madman]

I know many women in the workplace that would literally rip a guy apart if they are treated badly. I know men who are complete pussies in front of authority and are abused, maybe not sexually but work wise, promotion wise ect....

 

[cristycurves]

Even with all the support, even with all the assurance, those abused, often times face ridicule, isolation, blame, etc, when they come forward or confront their abusers. Never should we speculate as to why any victim, especially of abuse, reacts as they do. No matter what some face with an abusive spouse, so, boss, employer, manager, sibling, parent, etc, sometimes it's easier to face the abuse daily and stay in it, than to face the repercussions of taking action against it. But each case is as individual as the one abused.

 

[User-E]

Backpage.com pimping case will turn on what officials knew about escort ads

https://blogs.reuters.com/alison-fr...turn-on-what-officials-knew-about-escort-ads/