Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Monday December 26 2016, @09:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the if-at-first-you-don't-succeed dept.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who will be resigning soon prior to joining Congress as a U.S. Senator, has filed new "pimping" charges against the CEO and other executives of Backpage. The previous set of charges were dismissed by a judge less than two weeks ago. Backpage is an online classified advertising website known for its listings of escort services:

Harris said the new charges were based on new evidence. A Sacramento County judge threw out pimping charges against the men on 9 December, citing federal free-speech laws. In the latest case, filed in Sacramento County superior court, Harris claims Backpage illegally funnelled money through multiple companies and created various websites to get around banks that refused to process transactions. She also alleged that the company used photos of women from Backpage on other sites without their permission in order to increase revenue and knowingly profited from the proceeds of prostitution.

"By creating an online brothel – a hotbed of illicit and exploitative activity – Carl Ferrer, Michael Lacey, and James Larkin preyed on vulnerable victims, including children, and profited from their exploitation," Harris said in a statement.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by bradley13 on Tuesday December 27 2016, @10:02AM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Tuesday December 27 2016, @10:02AM (#446291) Homepage Journal

    It's only peripheral to this case, but I have now heard of numerous situations where the big credit cards cut some organization off. For better or for worse, they have become fundamental to online commerce. I'm slowly of the opinion that they should be required to process any payments that are not provably illegal. Letting the credit cards pass their own judgements is essentially letting them become a second, independent legal system, but one with no recourse to due process.

    Any thoughts on this from the Soylentils?

    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 27 2016, @10:18AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 27 2016, @10:18AM (#446293)

    this is why I have a JCB card (available in some US states)... no monthly fee, no late fee, no overlimit fee, and is accepted by some merchants which have been cut off by Visa/MC

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 27 2016, @04:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 27 2016, @04:25PM (#446370)

    yes and this extends to paypal, stripe, etc. those socialist whores won't let you use their services if you're selling ammo, much less guns. they should be brought up on charges of sedition.