March 13, 2008
The case for clemency for Eliot Spitzer
Further to Eliot Spitzer, I agree in principle with the surprising editorial in the Wall Street Journal this morning, arguing that Client 9 should be treated on a par with Clients 1 to 8. The Journal is no fan of Mr Spitzer, and neither am I, but it is correct to say that, now he has resigned, state-backed vengeance is inappropriate.
Not being a US legal expert, I don’t know whether he broke federal prostitution laws by paying for “Kristen” to take a train down to Washington, or money laundering regulations by “structuring” his payments to avoid tax or scrutiny.
But it is fairly clear that Mr Spitzer was not laundering money - he was simply trying to hide his use of the Emperors Club. So it is not obvious why he should now be treated any differently from the others. He is plainly suffering quite a lot anyway.
ES, The Former Governor may be charged for breaching the Mann Act , which makes it illegal to cause a person to cross State lines for prostitution.
If anyone should know the breadth of federal laws- whether antiquated or not- is him, the former Attorney General. I can hardly see how he could plead ignorance of the Law..
We dont know yet what are the circumstances of the fellow “clients” 1-8..
ES was cought because he intentionally structured financial transactions to conceal the use of the funds for illegal purposes: prostitution and channelling money to a money laundering outfit as the Club proved to be. Isn’t this money laundering? It is in my language..
.
How did ES omit to do his due diligence on that one? He has been very successful in busting a few similar ones in the past..
No clemency is deserved. He is just beginning to enjoy the justice he has earned.
Posted by: Marie-Athena ,lawyer | March 16th, 2008 at 4:22 pm | Report this comment“As District Attorney he offered no quarters, now as Defendant he should be provided none”