'D.C. Madam' sighs as jury finds her guilty
A federal jury convicted a woman Tuesday of running a prostitution service that catered to members of Washington's political elite.
Deborah Jeane Palfrey, 52, sighed as the verdict was read.
She had repeatedly denied that the escort service engaged in prostitution, saying that if any of the women engaged in sex acts for money, they did so without her knowledge.
My favorite part of the article:
Three of Palfrey's clients testified during the weeklong trial in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, explaining how they found the service, how often they called, what they were hoping for and whether they got it during their visits.
"When a man agrees to pay $250 for 90 minutes with a woman, what do most men expect in that time?" prosecutor Daniel Butler asked during closing arguments Monday. "In that context, it's pretty clear. Most men want sex."
Well, if they pay for the time, expect and want sex, of course it's a prostitution service. And by all means, those whores should put out. They're getting paid after all! I mean, if you go on a date with a girl and pay for dinner, she owes you. [/sarcasm]'
Edit: I remembered someone recently had written something good about the trial recently and just found it.
Some highlights of the article about the trial from the Washington Post include how the prosecution asked irrelevant and invasive questions about the escort's sex lives such as "Did you specifically discuss what happened when you went in the shower?" and "What would happen if you were menstruating?" and from the article, "[The prosecutor] had her talk about when she was 'aggressive' with a client, when she was 'more submissive,' when she had a difficult client ('he tried to remove the condom') and how often she got 'intimate.'"
Vanessa over at Feministing has it right: We all know who should really be ashamed here.