Has purplekow been banned?

[KMEM]

Lookin-

 

I think the key phrase here is NOT to do anything that lands one in the pokey.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[Txpaytoplay]

Well if you got thrown in the pokey ....you wouldn't have to worry about negotiating down a rate. You could get it free all day long!

[JT Brooklyn]

Lookin-

 

I think the key phrase here is NOT to do anything that lands one in the pokey.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

 

I'm beginning to think the Original Spelling was ..Poke-HE

 

But YES..Ending Up "giving it away" after "Working It" and getting Paid..A BITCH!

[+ Gar1eth]

Totally Out Of The Loop

 

Apparently so! If you pull up one of his posts, the title under his screen name now reads Banned.

 

I haven't looked at either the Lounge or MER lately. Could someone shoot me a private e-mail as to who was arrested? Much appreciated.

 

Gman

 

 

PS I Just to prove how out of it I am--I didn't even know MER had been updated until I just went to it trying to find out whom we are talking about (I know "whom" sounds awkward--but it's correct).

[+ Gar1eth]

Ok I found out who--it's very upsetting!!

 

I wish him the best.

 

Gman

[+ Charlie]

Here's a hypothetical for you: Suppose that a guy who works as an escort is arrested for assaulting/robbing someone who appears possibly to be a client, but the public record does not specify this relationship nor give the escort's working name; the escort is let out on bail, and continues to advertise under his working name. Is it acceptable for a Hoovillite to start a thread which links to this official record and identify the assailant by his escort name? Or does the ambiguous public record require you to respect the escort's privacy?

[Boston Guy]

By my standard, if there was a clear record of it someplace so that it could be verified that it wasn't just someone making something up to slam an escort, I'd consider it a rather large disservice to the community not to post it. In such a hypothetical case, the escort could easily pose a clear and direct danger to an unsuspecting client. If that kind of information were known to a review site and subsequently withheld, I, as a client, I would consider the site to have lost much, if not most, of it's credibility. Others may see it differently.

 

Edit: Charlie, you said "arrested". That's different than "convicted". In the latter case, I'd want the detail published. In the case of an arrest only, I'd think it would depend a bit on the circumstances. But I'd really lean toward protecting the physical safety of clients, just as I would lean toward protecting the physical safety of escorts if we had knowledge of an abusive client.

[jgoo]

Innocent until Proved Guilty

 

May be a bit simplistic, but aren't we all forgetting that until someone is proved guilty they should be assumed innocent and as such the issue of this escorts alleged crimes shouldn't be a matter for public consumption. There are probably tons of facts that aren't known and the risk is to taint an individual who otherwise might be totally innocent. If it goes to trial and there is a conviction, then it is a done deal. Being arrested is far from the same as being convicted.

[Boston Guy]

That's a good point. But consider, too, why details of the arrest of a citizen have always been considered public records. First, the public nature of the arrest serves an important function in preserving our constitutional rights against false imprisonment. But there's also the flip side of that: it's not just the accused who needs to be protected but also the community.

 

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a constitutional right and we shouldn't grant any less to anyone who has been accused of a crime. But it applies to the government. As private individuals, we are free to apply whatever judgment we feel is appropriate to any case and there are cases that seem pretty clear from the get-go. However, if someone is accused of something and arrested and then subsequently found not guilty, we should be just as willing to accept that judgment.

[+ Charlie]

I fully agree with "innocent until proven guilty." However, given the nature of our justice system, there is often a very long time between arrest and conviction, and the accused is often free to practice his profession (and potentially commit new crimes) during that time. An arrest is a matter of public record, and it seems strange to me that the fact of arrest would be unmentionable until after a conviction.

[Guest zipperzone]

So let's see if I've got this right. Innocent until proven guilty..... that's fairly clear so I can understand that part.

 

But what if we know damn well a person is guilty and the courts find him innocent, perhaps on a technicality or because he had a persuasive lawyer? Then what?

 

Do we all invite OJ Simpson over for drinks?

[Guest EuropTravl]

http://www.companyofmen.org/showthread.php?t=55399

 

I guess if he is imprisoned (or found guilty I mean), escort name and real name is A-OK. Or are batterers fair game from the get go?

[KMEM]

http://www.companyofmen.org/showthread.php?t=55399

 

I guess if he is imprisoned (or found guilty I mean), escort name and real name is A-OK. Or are batterers fair game from the get go?

 

TOS aka rules are an expression of the owner's sensibilities. Do you expect them to make sense too?

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[JT Brooklyn]

Times seem to have changed!

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/showthread.php?t=55399

 

I guess if he is imprisoned (or found guilty I mean), escort name and real name is A-OK. Or are batterers fair game from the get go?

 

It's been almost 4 Years since the very Public "Mark Dalton" Duscussion (11/05) that JT BKLYN was involved in.

 

How Times seem to have changed!

 

Let us see IF there is a "Discussion" after this so far "Alleged Drug Deal/Posession" involving a well known at least around here, due to all his Advertising "Working Guy" comes to a Judicial Climax!

 

The Hunk "Mark Dalton" survived the Chit-Chat.. so I see no reason for someone else not being able to!

[Guest greatness]

What is Village Voice Website?

 

??? I know I am a bit slow but can anybody explain what village voice website is?

 

Today's Village Voice website appears to have found, fact-checked and reported this story today as relevant to it's readers, constituencies and community.

[Boston Guy]

??? I know I am a bit slow but can anybody explain what village voice website is?

 

http://www.villagevoice.com/

 

It's been a staple in NYC for more than 50 years:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice

 

BG

[Guest EuropTravl]

Today's Village Voice website appears to have found, fact-checked and reported this story today as relevant to it's readers, constituencies and community.

 

 

deej says:Our standard is well-established: public record. When a news outlet of record ties an escort's working name to his real name, it becomes a public record story. Note that this does not include gossip blogs or (in the immortal words of Tampa Yankee) handwriting on bathroom stall walls.

 

I would think Michael Musto would be highly offended should anyone call his column anything BUT "handwriting on the bathroom stall walls".

[Guest greatness]

oh thanks

 

Thanks BG!

 

http://www.villagevoice.com/

 

It's been a staple in NYC for more than 50 years:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice

[Boston Guy]

deej says:Our standard is well-established: public record. When a news outlet of record ties an escort's working name to his real name, it becomes a public record story. Note that this does not include gossip blogs or (in the immortal words of Tampa Yankee) handwriting on bathroom stall walls.

 

I would think Michael Musto would be highly offended should anyone call his column anything BUT "handwriting on the bathroom stall walls".

 

Musto might well be offended but the circulation, history and reputation of The Village Voice most definitely make it a news outlet of record. They might condone publishing unconfirmed blind items, I suppose, but The Voice will most certainly not knowingly publish false stories.

 

BG

[Guy Fawkes]

ahhh..... The Village Voice which lifted it straight out of the The Sword... Which lifted it straight out of...

 

Have we really reached the "Party Monster" rule of:

 

"Number two, once something is printed it automatically becomes true."

 

Somehow I really don't think that the parties involved are the least bit "Fabulous".

 

Can't we simply wait for the result, or must we watch the piranha go into a feeding frenzy in the shark pool because they're drooling over the wounded shark?

 

 

It's still boring, It's still personal information, and if you must be tempted to lower your IQ the gossip sites have the same URLs they did last week. It must of have been a very slow week over at the Village Voice.

[Guest greatness]

Anyways,

 

I hope you feel much better.

 

ahhh..... The Village Voice which lifted it straight out of the The Sword... Which lifted it straight out of...

 

Have we really reached the "Party Monster" rule of:

 

"Number two, once something is printed it automatically becomes true."

 

Somehow I really don't think that the parties involved are the least bit "Fabulous".

 

Can't we simply wait for the result, or must we watch the piranha go into a feeding frenzy in the shark pool because they're drooling over the wounded shark?

 

It's still boring, It's still personal information, and if you must be tempted to lower your IQ the gossip sites have the same URLs they did last week. It must of have been a very slow week over at the Village Voice.

[Guest EuropTravl]

"ahhh..... The Village Voice which lifted it straight out of the The Sword... Which lifted it straight out of..."

 

The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles from what I've seen. Or is there a dispute that he's even been arrested?

[Boston Guy]

Daddy,

 

I respect your opinion. I always have and likely always will. But I think in this case you might be confusing two separate things and the distinction is important for they are important parts of what makes us American.

 

When you quoted "Number two, once something is printed it automatically becomes true.", that seemed to imply that something being discussed might not be true. I understand your concern and, to a degree, share it. But the fact of an arrest is far from the fact that an accused person is guilty. That distinction is critical.

 

If an arrest has been made, it can reasonably be reported as truth (at least in public newspapers) for the fact of the matter is that a person was arrested. What they cannot reasonably report -- and which, we as observers, should not infer -- is that the accused is guilty of the crime he or she was arrested for. That's what a trial is for.

 

You are right to point out that there is often a "feeding frenzy", which people of good will should choose not to participate in. But that is not the same as ignoring an arrest or trying to pretend it didn't happen, for false arrests do occur and one of the most important tools that we, the public, have to prevent them is a free and vigorous press. When it comes to accusations of criminal behavior, sunshine is far better for all parties than darkness.

 

This is not a public newspaper. It is your website and I respect that. You get to make the rules and I will try, as always, to abide by them. I think the rules are fair and reasonable and I have no quarrel with them. I also applaud the very vigorous way in which you strive to uphold each person's right to privacy. That is truly laudable.

 

Regardless of whether or not you choose to allow details of this affair to be reported here, the details will leak out. Evidently, an arrest has been made and reports will begin to surface here and there. I think your caution is well taken by all of us, who should stand on principle and try diligently to hold our judgment on any guilt until any judicial proceedings that might occur are complete. It's what any one of us would want for ourselves.

 

BG

[+ Lucky]

If I were the owner of the website, I would invite all of those who wish to discuss this case to do so, at their own time, at their own expense, and on their own website. There are a whole lot of people out there who have no intention of hiring the escort in question but feel it necessary to discuss at length what has happened to him. Gossip queens all of them. For the rest who might have hired him, you know now who was arrested, hire him or not, it's that simple.

[Guy Fawkes]

Excuse me while the Umpire yells: "Foul Ball"...

 

Personal Information is Personal Information. Just because one particular person has a feather up his ass doesn't change that rule. Just because people don't like the rule, doesn't change the rule.

 

The thread was objected to, A moderator made the call, and I concurred.

End of Story. End of Patience, and End of Thread!

 

P.S. Lucky slipped in before I could get the thread locked.