It has been decided that former governor of New York Eliot Spitzer – aka the Tainted Gov – will not face criminal charges for repeatedly visiting a prostitute.
The New York Times reports that the reason is because, well, the Johns usually don't get charged. "It’s not surprising,” said Andrew B. Lachow, who once ran the public corruption unit in the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan that has for months been investigating Mr. Spitzer. "There just wasn’t much there that would have called for prosecution."
Now wait a minute.
What happened to if you do the crime, you do the time? Isn't this an open and shut case? I realize that everyone is entitled to a defense, and that trials cost money. But when you get caught red-handed, and when everybody else involved is facing criminal charges, isn't this just a tad unfair?
In other words – if it's hard out here for a pimp, shouldn't it be hard for their customers as well?
The Times article continues: "From the outset, the story of Mr. Spitzer and his patronage of the now-defunct Emperor’s Club V.I.P. read more like a moral tale than a legal one." OK. But he broke the law. Right? "In laying out his decision not to prosecute Mr. Spitzer, Michael J. Garcia, the United States attorney in Manhattan, said he had three main rationales: Mr. Spitzer had apparently not used any public money or campaign funds for his trysts; there was insufficient evidence that he had broken the law in how he had structured payments to the call-girl ring; and, finally, it was not the policy of his or other federal prosecutors’ offices to charge the customers in matters of prostitution."
The real kicker is the last one. Basically, visiting a prostitute is illegal, but if you get caught, you probably won't face any punishment.
The good thing – sort of – is that this doesn't appear to be special treatment for Spitzy, according to attorney Patricia A. Pileggi, a former prosecutor. The financial reasoning behind not charging him is vaguely complicated; to me it sounds like he did what they would accuse him of, but perhaps it would be too difficult to prove in court.
I'm not anti-prostitution. I think it might – MIGHT – even be a good idea to legalize it. (That's a much bigger issue, obviously.) But right now it's against the law. Shouldn't the guys who do it be charged?
Source: NY Times
Image: also NY Times
Read more:
