Is solicitation of a prostitute a federal crime?

[Winterblues]

Why are the Feds involved in such a minor infraction? Aren't people allowed to spend their own money? What is the deal here with the Feds? What is suspicious about a powerful man taking a thousand dollars from his bank account? Once it was determined that the "crime" was solicitation of a prostitute why wouldn't the Feds then turn it over to the proper authorities?

[theboss]

1. It went across state lines

The end.

[mainegreen]

2. Across state lines?

[ljm2002]

10. Apparently the hooker...

...crossed a state line to meet him at his hotel.

As I see it, that may make the prostitution ring itself liable under the Mann Act (itself somewhat of a travesty). But I don't see how that makes Spitzer liable -- after all, he is just purchasing a service from an organization -- he's the john, not the operator of the service.

That's just my take, of course -- IANAL :-)

[northzax]

13. he arranged for and paid for

her inter-state transportation. (from New York to DC) so that's that.

[ljm2002]

20. Oh. Well then.

Geez, even more of a chump than I thought.

[rox63]

3. I believe the federal charge has to do with transporting her across state lines

If he had been doing this only in NY, I don't think there would be federal charges.

[LostinVA]

4. It has to do with transfering money over state lines and having the prostitute cross state lines

The latter is due to the Mann Act. Had this all taken place in New York State, it wouldn't have been a federal matter.

[rucky]

17. I thought the mann act,,,

was what happened after he transported her

[rateyes]

18. ROFL...

You're bad. :spank:

[yardwork]

5. The paperwork says that interstate communication was used - cell phones and email.

The feds get to control anything not specifically assigned to the states. Long distance calls and email go across state lines. Hence, federal involvement.

[ingac70]

6. Yep. and doing it across state lines...

is a violation of the Mann Act, and that is Federal jurisdiction.

[calico1]

15. Yes, and money laundering.

Plus possibly using his guard detail for these meetings which is inappropriate use of them. So it's not just a simple case of a man going out with a prostitute.

[Fresh_Start]

7. started with IRS

investigation

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

8. Up to 20 years in prison.

This looks like what Larry Craig did a parking violation.

[slackmaster]

9. No, but transporting a woman across state lines for "immoral purposes" is

Intrastate prostitution per se is legal under federal law.

[GoldieAZ49]

11. money, phone calls and text messages crossed state lines, also the MAN act?

heard something about that this morning

[annabanana]

16. I think it's just people.... (and it's the "Mann" Act.). . .n/t

[selador]

12. no, but...

not unless it occurs on federal property (like a military base) and in that case its still a misdemeanor

the fed crimes are under the mann act, and also the crime of structuring.

regardless, the REAL offense is soliciting a prostitute and it's a minor offense

as for what is suspicious in regards to the money transfers...

that's a bit more complicated. i posted a link to some IRS info on that. suffice it to say banks look for patterns. and when it was seen the money was going to shell corps, that significantly raised the suspicions

[robinlynne]

14. 4000? And the millions of dollars the republicans ferry all over the place?

[selador]

19. you are looking at

one discrete transaction

the issue is PATTERNS.

same thing is the case on all sorts of organized crime, money laundering, bribery, and drug cases

act X may not be suspicious

but an aggregate pattern is.

in drug houses for example, a visitor who arrives and leaves 5 minutes later is not suspicious

when it happens 20 times a day, that adds to suspicion.

etc.