« "Our Existential Death Penalty: Judges, Jurors, and Terror Management" | Main | Another potent sentencing dissent from the Sixth Circuit's Judge Merritt »

January 30, 2009

Six-month federal sentence for Elliot Spitzer's "hooker booker"

Local news stories here and here report on the sentencing of a young woman involved in booking hook ups for the prostitution ring that former New York Governor Elliot Spitzer frequented.  Here are basic details from the NY Daily News:

The woman who ran Eliot Spitzer's favorite call-girl ring got six months in prison Thursday from a judge who cited her mentor's tight control over her.  Manhattan Federal Judge Barbara Jones rejected prosecutors' recommendation of a 21-to-27 month sentence for Cecil (Katie) Suwal, citing the Svengali-like power Emperors Club VIP boss Mark Brener once had over the 24-year-old.

A regular reader sent me this reaction to the sentence via e-mail:

This call girl was prosecuted in a federal case, if you can believe it.... The ignobility of it all...that Eliot Spitzer should escape prosecution, but this woman didn't...it boggles the female mind.

January 30, 2009 at 11:22 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e201053703e9af970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Six-month federal sentence for Elliot Spitzer's "hooker booker":

Comments

Is she a "call girl"? The story says she ran the ring. Prosecuting the pimps while both the prostitutes and the customers get off easy, or perhaps get off altogether, is not unusual or unjust. Your correspondent's emphasis on the fact that this pimp is female sounds like sex bias to me.

Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | Jan 30, 2009 1:12:03 PM

Kent,

I think you make a fair point, except that this defendant worked for and was under the thumb of the guy who was actually in charge, who was about fourty years older than she was. That's not to excuse entirely her behavior, which likely included a substantial amount of money laundering, but it does seem to justify a sense of proportion compared to the "boss." And, of course, that is exactly what she got -- it's hard to get too worked up over a six month federal sentence.

Posted by: anon | Jan 30, 2009 4:43:54 PM

Anon,

Yes, I agree, and apparently the judge took that into account. Her culpability is below that of the overall boss and above that of the "working girls."

Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | Jan 30, 2009 5:59:33 PM

does that make her a vice-pimp?

Posted by: . | Jan 30, 2009 6:54:18 PM

Kent: Prostitutes don't necessarily "get off easy." My (as correspondent) emphasis did not include labeling the female defendant a "pimp"...that's your initiative. I'll tell you, were I defending her, and had I heard a whiff of your kind of language from the male prosecutor, it would not have been a pretty decimation.

Posted by: Fluffy | Jan 31, 2009 9:43:16 AM

Fluffy, are you saying the story is wrong when it says she had a major managerial role in the prostitution ring? If so, then I will apologize for calling her a "pimp." If it is accurate, though, that is what she is. You can throw a tantrum all you like, but the truth is still the truth, female pimps are just as culpable as male pimps, and they should be treated equally.

Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | Jan 31, 2009 9:23:14 PM

Kent Scheidegger wrote: "...female pimps are just as culpable as male pimps..."

Which is to say, not at all.

Posted by: DK | Jan 31, 2009 9:54:33 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB