There are times when a story truly cries out to be narrated by Partner Emeritus, who could call the play-by-play on this one far better than your humble author. Though he had somehow managed to attain his sixty-first birthday, our San Diego colleague, William David Turley, proved himself at once ill-suited both to practice law or to patronize the sex trades.
Using the website, sugardaddymeet.com, Turley hooked up with a willing, independent adult sex worker (per the DOJ, his adult "victim") who was willing to fly from California to Las Vegas to meet with him. Because, apparently, he somehow could not find a willing sex worker in Las Vegas, Nevada. Turley arranged and paid for his sugar baby's travel, and also dropped $1,500 to $1,800 on her for the sexual interlude. Bam! Who wouldn't know better? Had Turley flown to California for the hookup, with all other facts the same, there would have been no basis for a federal charge (this is where Partner Emeritus would colorfully go on at length).
But of course, a lot of uninformed, horny and non-peer individuals (including at least one former state governor) order-in their sex workers from out of state on a regular basis. I certainly haven't ever, and I can't condone it (because it tics off all the elements of a federal crime, to wit, enticing an individual to travel in interstate commerce for purposes of engaging in prostitution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a)). Yes, as most of us know, the statute provides that this conduct can get you 20 years in La Casa Grande Federale, and a $250,000 fine. However, U.S. Attorneys usually don't charge these cases, because, if they filed one every time they could, they would never get anything else done. (Also, "victim" terminology aside, this lady wasn't being hustled, and she got on the plane of her own volition to go claw a bit of scratch away from the Vegas pros).
This brings me to the second "never have I ever" facet of Turley's incompetence. A mere nine (9) days after spending enough for a European cruise on his adult, California sugar baby, Turley was back online. This time, he found himself a nice, high school girl, who was complaining that her parents had taken away her cellphone. But, hey, she SAID she was eighteen, right? And how was Turley, a mere, sixty-one-year-old, practicing attorney to know that she was actually underage? If only he could have accessed some publicly available data, on, say, the Internet, or made any minimal effort to verify her claim, given the circumstances that: 1) she was in high school; and 2) her cellphone access was subject to her parents' whims, and 3) he had already checked off all the elements for a federal crime with an adult sex worker nine (9) days before. But no.
Instead, Turley met his high school sugar baby (who was actually 16) for tea one fine day, after school. Evidently, he was suitably impressed, because the next day, he drove her to a shop where he purchased a cellphone for her, then parked the car while he "engaged in a sex act" with her. Clearly inexperienced, and not even close to a sexually-skilled pro, Turley's high school sugar baby told him she wanted to stop, and needed to get home. Turley (who must physically resemble Calibos from the old Greek theatre) honored her request and also gave her $300 for showing up and trying (at least he seems to be a kind man, if extremely incompetent, naive, and a moron).
When the feds came for him, the plea Turley entered was for the "enticement" of his adult "victim," yet the plea agreement contained numerous references to, and admissions of "sexual contact" with, Turley's sixteen-year-old, high school sugar baby (federally, his "minor victim"). As the linked article reflects, all parties anticipate that the federal charges relative to the minor victim will be dismissed at the sentencing, and part of the plea deal is that Turley will not have to register as a sex offender.
So, the between-the-lines story here is that the feds know they have a swing, and a miss, on the minor miss. But, they also have the icking fudiot dead to rights for flying his adult sugar baby over a state line to pay her for sex. Here we see the ruin of a man not competent to advise even himself, for not learning the most basic rules before he tried to play the game. Either mistake in isolation might have been survivable, but combine them, and his life is down the tucking foilet.
Partner Emeritus, where are you? Non-peer colleagues desperately need your guidance!
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/story/2019-11-01/san-diego-attorney-61-pleads-to-federal-prostitution-charge-linked-to-sugar-daddy-dating-site
No comments:
Post a Comment