Who Needs Juries

I made the decision long ago that I couldn't take most comments about my former businesses too seriously, but sometimes the person making the statement just manages to push my buttons. In general people, in the U.S. anyway, tend to believe that all escort services are dens of prostitution because this has been ingrained in their minds. Either that or all the other escort service owners that have been arrested on organized crime charges deserved this, and the allegations were provable and accurate.

Why is it so hard to understand that a jury found me not guilty because I was not guilty?


What in the hell allows a person to believe that they know more than a jury that listened to a case for 2 flipping weeks? The person reads a 100 word statement from the MBI or knows an agent and suddenly they have developed insight that the entire jury lacked. They know more than all of us.

Of course they assume that I'm a liar at the same time. Never mind that I testified in my defense and was drilled and screamed at by a very experienced prosecutor for the better part of an entire day – never mind all that – it is assumed that I'm a liar. I have been called a liar by people that never read my book and know nothing about my case. I've been called a liar by people that have read my book and called it unbelievable. None of these people ever actually attempted to have any real conversation with me or ask me about any specific statement or situation. Each simply assumed and stated that I was a liar.

Why would my civil suit filed in federal court be dropped if I'm not a liar? Well, I'll toss that one back at you: Why wouldn't I be charged with perjury for submitting sworn affidavits in the civil case or for my statements made under oath in trial if I were lying? I'll top that: If all that I've stated in my Memoirs of an Accused Madam were not true, don't you think that they would have filed suit and stopped me from selling the book?

The truth is that the MBI did much more than I included in the book – I only included what I could prove or stated that I was not positive about an incident that I wrote about. Every sentence in that book that is stated as fact is indeed provable. I'm the one with all of the hearings and the entire trial on CDs – I beat them to the court reporters office and placed my order while they were still attempting recovery. So that's great that they stole the files, but I still have the evidence.

As to the dismissal of my civil suit, the parties that I named in the suit didn't even deny my charges. They simply claimed that they couldn't be sued for their actions and there was in fact some probable cause for arrest. Sure, when an agent and his informant conspire and make an allegation it is probable cause for arrest, but not enough for conviction. Probable cause is a thin line when it comes to RICO charges, but there was not enough probable cause to get a warrant for a wiretap or a search warrant. What does that tell you?

I do try not to take the assertion that I am a liar personally; however, it is very personal and that's not an easy request. Just stop assuming that you know more than a jury that heard it all for two solid weeks and we can at least pretend to respect each other. As usual, in the U.S. a defendant is already convicted by the general population when arrested. Guilty, even when proven not guilty; that is the U.S. criminal injustice system.

What do we bother with the jury system in the US for? Why not just convict everyone that the police arrest and prosecutors indict? That way you can go straight to the punishment phase, as after all, cops and prosecutors never lie, right?