4 comments on “INTERPRETING THE BACKPAGE INDICTMENT

    • I saw a video blurb from a Washington Post reporter who observed exactly what I did: “Carl Ferrer appears to be cooperating with the feds.” Doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes to figure that out. No, no new thoughts for the moment. But here’s a tidbit I left out of yesterday’s post: Throughout my process, the proposed plea bargain was tax fraud. Suddenly, toward the end, my lawyer called to say the feds wanted to switch the plea to money laundering. (This is literally a year and a half after the “raid.”) Of course, I asked about the gov’s motivation – which was when I was informed about where the proceeds of the seizure would eventually end up with the different pleas. My response was “I don’t care about who gets my money” (unless it’s me). “I didn’t launder money. I was a tax cheat. And I don’t like the idea that they want me to plead to a crime I didn’t commit.” (They would argue that point, I’m sure.) “Unless there’s something in this for me” (like a reduced fine), “I think this is a shitty idea. I’m not in.” And that was the last I heard about switching my plea.

  1. Thanks. I noticed today that the TX plea does include a count of trafficking but I haven’t had a chance to read it.

    You make a great point. The IamJaneDoe people have stated they have standing for a piece of Backpage. The government seems to be shifting in a direction to take all assets , leave Backpage with no choice but bankruptcy and all the promises of civil claims null.

    But, it’s hard to know. After a decade’s worth of court decisions, it’s hard to believe this is where it ended.

  2. But in the wake of Backpage s seizure, many sex workers and their allies have expressed concerns that losing access to the site will only make them less safe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *