On Deborah Palfrey's SUICIDE: Matt Janovic

Why the Suicide of Deborah Jeane Palfrey Was Not Unexpected

[Ed. note: When someone is convicted their record is wiped-clean, please do in regards to Jeane's fate. Her record is now clean, and the assets they took from her are no longer the government's legally. ]

J-7/Tarpon Springs, Florida--I would like to express my deepest condolences to the family of the deceased Ms. Palfrey. This writer never met Jeane--as she liked to be called by friends--and I only spoke with her a few times telephonically--our correspondence occurred through the Internet. That doesn't make this any easier to write.

Jeane claimed--she claimed a lot of things, most-of-which were accurate--that James Grady, author of "Three Days of the Condor" told her (paraphrased), "They've handed you a gun to blow their heads off with." He wasn't wrong, and this story opened a door into things that most of us assumed were going on in Washington D.C. It confirmed our suspicions. Expect it to keep delivering.

What's disturbing is what Jeane told myself and others on the defense team: that she had had contact with Brent Wilkes, the convicted Poway defense contractor who bribed GOP Rep. Randall Cunningham, and likely many-many other congressmen, primarily Republican ones.

Predictably, the comment boards are already flowing with a lot of ignorant speculation that Jeane was somehow "murdered" by a "conspiracy." This is not only disrespectful to the memory of a human being who felt compelled to kill herself by hanging, it's cracked and has no basis in reality whatsoever.

Here's why: being a researcher on her defense team gave me an inside-view of things. Just weeks before the trial, Jeane sent this e-mail out to Jason Leopold--formerly of Talkout, whose editors forced him from covering the story this year--and forwarded it to the rest of us on the legal defense team. It contains an entire exchange in it for context. From February 28th, 2008 (paragraph-breaks added):

Jason… let’s put it like this, the bastards aren’t going to take me alive. Of course, anytime that you want to do an interview – I will make myself available. However, I doubt that I will be doing any interviews once I am in D.C., for the trial. –Best, Jeane


-----Original Message-----
From: jasonleopold@hotmail.com [mailto:jasonleopold@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:40 AM
To: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com; 'Justice League'
Cc: myboigie@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: "D.C. Madam trial scheduled for April 7th" (Jeane Palfrey)...

Jeane

I have no doubt that you will prevail. Your fighting spirit is infectious. I am in the process of setting up my own shop. I will actually be in DC for your trial and would love to get you on camera theb for the new nesit if possible.

Best

Jason

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

From: "Jeane Palfrey"

Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:25:30

To:"'Justice League'"

Cc:,

Subject: RE: "D.C. Madam trial scheduled for April 7th" (Jeane Palfrey)...

Bil… thanks for the kinds words. If USA’s can’t file racketeering charges, then who can? More specifically, who filed them in my case? -Jeane

-----Original Message-----

From: Justice League [mailto:spbiloxi00@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:11 AM

To: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com

Cc: jason leopold

Subject: Re: "D.C. Madam trial scheduled for April 7th" (Jeane Palfrey)...

Good Morning Jeane:

Thanks for your update and concerns in your case. I am copying Jason. I will post your email on my blog and on the Newsinkling.org. Jason and I know that you are innocent. Just remember. This is a battle of a much corrupted justice system. And we are with you on the long haul no matter what happen. Keep in mind that your case is in the hands of 12 jurors. You are innocent until proven guilty.

Also, I wanted to bring this to you and Jason. I was watching a webcast of the House Judiciary Committee hearing that was held on Tuesday about the matter of the procedures of a Special Prosecutor. There were two panels of attorneys that were experinced attorneys that dealt with a Special Prosecutor or was a Special Prosecutor or Independent counsel. I watched carefully to the last person to testify in the second panel: USA and Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. One the committee asked this question to Fitzgerald that was interesting:


Cannon: Distinction between special counsel and normal prosecutor.

Patrick Fitzgerald: One common misunderstanding is that we didn't follow DOJ guidelines. I was bound by those guidelines. Many of the procedures I was the decision maker. When you prosecute as USA, you have to follow the guidelines. In an ordinary case, USA has an awful lot of power. In many cases, the volume of our cases, we can bring charges that will imprison people with out possibility of parole. No wiretap without DOJ, no immunity for witnesses, no govt appeal or attorney or member of the media. USAs can't file racketeering charges.

I found the last part of Fitzgerald's statement about racketeering charges interesting. And I appreciate him explaining what the role of as an USA. His statement is a very clear indication on why certain USAs were fired, why certain USAs were selected as interims, and what role within the WH and AG played in allowing certain charges to stick on certain individuals for political and personal means, and finally the handpicking of certain judges in certain cases. It would be interesting on how much power [especially USA Taylor] the selected USA interims with the DOJ by the WH. Here is the link of the webcast. Fitzgerald's testimony is about 15 minutes toward the end: 2:20.52

http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/real/judiciary/commercial/comm022608.smi

Bil [Monique Rawlings]

On 2/28/08, Jeane Palfrey > wrote:

My and defense counsel's various efforts the past 17 months to resolve the charges levied against me by the Department of Justice have been unsuccessful. Therefore, a full-jury trial is scheduled to take place on April 7th, in Federal District Court, in Washington, D.C.

I intend to defend myself vigorously against the charges of racketeering, money laundering and conspiracy. I will call witnesses to testify on my behalf about the legal, sexual nature of my former business – Pamela Martin & Associates. These witnesses likely will be culled from the existing research – conducted over the past 8 months - by a variety of press/media, bloggers and interested third parties.

It should be noted ALL charges are predicated upon the seldom utilized Travel Act, which allows the Government to claim jurisdiction for ANY crime – including misdemeanor offenses such as prostitution – when state lines are crossed. In the course of regular business operation in the Washington, D.C. area, state lines are crossed routinely by any number of businesses, including escort services. In fact, all one has to do is quite literally cross the street in hundreds, if not thousands of locations in the vicinity to cross a state line.

The Travel Act is important here because – unlike the state misdemeanor crime of prostitution – the Travel Act can be used to satisfy the requirement of an SUA (specified unlawful activity), which must be in place in order for the Government, not only to claim jurisdiction, but to be able to charge racketeering, money laundering and conspiracy. Federal law recognizes dozens of SUAs. Normally, such activities involve murder, treason, rape, kidnapping, drug trafficking, white slavery, extortion, embezzlement, etc and subsequently are utilized to support broader crimes like racketeering and conspiracy.

Perhaps, it also should be stated (and clarified) the racketeering charge is based in part upon the belief my previous business – to this day - is an ongoing criminal enterprise. Pamela Martin & Associates ceased to exist the day phone service was disconnected by me, in August of 2006. Any/all affiliated parties went their separate ways, at this time. The money laundering charge has been built upon the fact that payment transaction was done through the U.S. Mail.

Since I did not live in the Washington, D.C. area, during the 13 year period, PM&A was a viable concern – there realistically was no other logistical way for the women in my employ to send agency revenue onto me. Lastly, conspiracy – from what I have been able to ascertain – ostensibly occurs when two minds agree to commit a crime. Strangely, a person also can conspire with himself/herself, without the inclusion of a second individual.

Without doubt, I am in the fight of my life.Unfortunately, the Government will not capitulate, nor will I in this extremely bizarre case; one,where no person other than myself–including all former clients and escorts-is being charged with any crime here. Technically the Government has been successful in making the charges against me work on paper.

As a result, I have no choice- nor have I ever had any alternative - but to fight on and clear my name via the facts of the case, particularly since - if convicted, federal sentencing guidelines allow for a maximum sentence of 55 years imprisonment. Realistically, it has been calculated I would receive 8 to 10 to 15 years. Nonetheless for me at age 51, such a harsh penalty would be tantamount to a virtual life sentence – stripping me of some of the most productive years remaining in my life.

Jeane Palfrey

There's an image I have of Blanche Palfrey finding her daughter's body, hanging in the shed outside of her residential trailer. It's an image that should stick in the minds of all the "Johns," the privileged ones, forever. This is the real face of our elected (and appointed) representatives, and Republican Senator David Vitter is hardly alone in all of this. This is the face of lawlessness, a profoundly sexist patriarchy...it is the face of a homegrown American Fascism.

This political and economic system uses women like Deborah Jeane Palfrey and her former escorts to facilitate government contracts. When things get uncovered, the press acts as gatekeepers, and they throw them away through prosecution. Jeane, I hardly knew you, but you didn't deserve this ending. I have to wonder what the dirty political prosecutors told you about sentencing, and whether it contributed to your decision to kill yourself. Your story will be told, and what I've learned in all of this will become public. This I vow.

Follow up information:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. 07-046 (JR)

:

v. ::

DEBORAH JEANE PALFREY, :

:

Defendant. :

JOINT SUGGESTION OF DEATH AND ANTICIPATION

OF MOTION FOR ABATEMENT OF PROSECUTION

The United States of America, by and through its attorney, the United States Attorney for the

District of Columbia, in consultation with and with the concurrence of counsel for defendant, Preston

Burton, herewith files this joint suggestion of death. The parties file this suggestion on information

and belief that defendant, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, died on or about May 1, 2008. Once the certificate

of death is received, the parties will jointly move to abate the prosecution.

A defendant’s death is a basis for abatement of all prosecution proceedings from their

inception. Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481, 483 (1971); United States v, Asset, 990 F.2d 208,

211 (5

th Cir. 1992) (death of defendant before entry of judgment abates prosecution ab initio); United

States v. Oberlin, 718 F.2d 894, 896 (9

th Cir. 1983) (similar holding); cf. United States v. Pogue, 19

F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (death pending direct appeal abates prosecution); Howell v. United States,

445 A.2d 1371, 1373 (D.C. 1983) (quoting Howell).

In light of the apparent recent death of defendant and in anticipation of the resulting joint

motion for abatement of prosecution, the parties request that the Court stay the need for either party

to file any pleadings that are coming due for a response in the interim. Furthermore, defense counsel

requests that he be authorized to contact the defendant’s family and representatives of her Estate in

Case 1:07-cr-00046-JR Document 312 Filed 05/02/2008 Page 1 of 2

2

connection with matters related to the criminal and civil forfeiture proceedings before the Court. The

United States does not object to defense counsel’s request.

Respectfully submitted,

JEFFREY A. TAYLOR

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

DC Bar No. 498610

/ s /

Daniel P. Butler

DC Bar No. 417178

Catherine K. Connelly

Mass. Bar No. 649430

William R. Cowden

DC Bar No. 426401

Assistant United States Attorneys

555 4th Street, N.W.

(202) 353-9431, 616-3384

Washington, D.C. 20530

Daniel.Butler@usdoj.gov

Catherine.Connelly2@usdoj.gov

William.Cowden@usdoj.gov

/ s /

______________________________________

Preston Burton, Esq., D.C. Bar No. 426378

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFF, LLP

1152 15

th St., NW

Washington, D.C. 20005

(202) 339-8400

See also:

'D.C. Madam' apologized to mom, sister in suicide notes

By MITCH STACY – 2 hours ago

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — The woman known as the "D.C. Madam" apologized to her mother and sister in suicide notes, saying she couldn't bear going to prison and saw killing herself as the only "exit strategy."

Deborah Jeane Palfrey, convicted last month of running an elite Washington prostitution ring, wrote to her mother that she could not "live the next 6-8 years behind bars for what you and I have come to regard as this 'modern day lynching,' only to come out of prison in my late '50s a broken, penniless and very much alone woman."

The notes were released by police Monday.

Palfrey, 52, hanged herself with a nylon rope Thursday in a shed outside her mother's mobile home in the Florida Gulf Coast community of Tarpon Springs, northwest of Tampa. Her mother, 76-year-old Blanche Palfrey, discovered the body.

Deborah Palfrey was convicted of running a prostitution service that catered to members of Washington's political elite, including Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. She denied her escort service engaged in prostitution, saying that if any of the women engaged in sex acts for money, they did so without her knowledge.

She was free while she awaited sentencing on July 24 and had been staying with her mother.

Her suicide appeared to have been planned for days. The note to her mother was dated April 25, nearly a week before she killed herself. Police said the notes were found on a night stand in the bedroom where she'd been staying. One of the notes said, "Do not revive. Do not feed under any circumstances."

In the note to her younger sister, Bobbie, Palfrey expressed her love and told her to "be strong for mom."

"Also, you must comprehend that there was no other way out, i.e., 'exit strategy,' other than the one I have chosen here," she wrote. "Know I am at peace, with complete certainty, I believe Dad is standing watch — prepared to guide me into the light."

Also Monday, police announced that the medical examiner's office officially ruled Palfrey's death a suicide by hanging. A toxicology report is pending.

Her death last week had sparked widespread Internet chatter among those who speculated that someone killed her to keep her from identifying more prominent clients of the escort service.

"Tarpon Springs Police Department detectives, after following up on several investigative avenues have not discovered any new evidence which would indicate anything other than a suicide by hanging in this case," spokesman Capt. Jeffrey Young said.

Palfrey's mother and sister identified her handwriting in the suicide notes, Young said.

A federal jury convicted Palfrey on April 15 of money laundering, using the mail for illegal purposes and racketeering. Prosecutors said she ran the prostitution service for 13 years. The trial concluded without revealing many new details about the service or its clients. Vitter was among possible witnesses but did not take the stand.

Palfrey had vowed that she would not go to prison, even telling a Washington writer that she would commit suicide first.

DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey found guilty by federal jury , by Matt Janovic

Washington D.C.--It's over...or is it? Is this story ever over? It certainly hasn't been for me since early-June of last year. There will, of course, be an appeals process, but will it lead anywhere? That's unlikely. For the record, I was employed for the defense in December of 2007 to do specific research. An interesting fact is that I was finally paid by the federal defender's office the day the trial began, on April 7th. The likelihood is that the prosecution didn't want any openings for a claim of an unfair trial and that proper resources weren't allocated to the defendant.

The research was factual not legal. This is why I generally stopped writing on the story. To do so would have been a conflict of interest. I know this doesn't bother many in Washington, the press, or in corporate boardrooms, but it bothers me. And the "Johns"? They get their free-pass as usual. Guilty? It's a matter of degree. There were other players here, and most of them never had to testify, because that's how Washington works (or doesn't, depending on your viewpoint).

It's my hope that the defendant releases myself and others to disseminate the raw-materials we may have uncovered. It's also hoped she can provide further context for these materials. The heat's off for the politicians and defense contractors for now, but a window was opened here. Now that the defense on the technicalities surrounding money laundering, racketeering, and prostitution charges have all failed, it's possible that there's more-to-come. She pulled-her-punches for a defense strategy that wasn't going to go anywhere; that's the cold, hard truth. It's up to her now, unless most of this has been a bluff. But has it?

I don't think that's the case: we've seen very real damage inflicted on the Bush administration and her appointees. There has been a political body count, a record that Congress should envy. We saw the downing of now former USAID director Randall Tobias at the State Department, and much needed pressure applied on Senator David Vitter for his illegal solicitation of prostitutes in multiple-locations.

We've seen people like Harlan Ullman--the military strategist who devised the "shock and awe" strategy used in the invasion of Iraq--dragged into the spotlight, and quite a few others. For many of them, this story is never going to end, and it never should. It should dog them for the rest of their lives. The fact that many of their former phone numbers are now in the public record is a victory. Did I always think she was guilty? That's not exactly the right question.

Does the verdict prove Palfrey's guilt? Ask me some time. What I believe to be certain is this: the prosecution and the defendant did their best to drag the process out for different reasons. Deborah Jeane Palfrey was found guilty by a federal jury on tax day. This had to end months before the 2008 elections, but also had to continue long enough to limit any potential damage to the White House and the GOP in a general sense. Tax day. It all makes a certain sense.

Jury Begins Deliberations in Escort Service Case

By Paul Duggan

After hearing four days of testimony ranging from the X-rated recollections of 13 former call girls to tedious tutorials on paper-trail evidence by IRS and postal investigators, jurors in the federal trial of the alleged "D.C. Madam" began deliberating yesterday on the key issue in the sordid legal...

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., takes part in a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, in this July 17, 2007 file photo. Vitter will not have to testify about his ties to an upscale Washington escort service, a defense attorney said Monday, April 14, 2008, sparing the Louisiana Republican an embarrassing trip to the witness stand. (J. Scott Applewhite - AP)

"SENATOR DAVID VITTER SHOULD RESIGN" , by Matt Janovic

"Anybody who looks at the two cases will see that there is an enormous difference between the two of them. The people that are trying to draw comparisons to the two cases are people who've never agreed with me on important issues like immigration and other things." --Louisiana Senator David Vitter

New Orleans--You think he should resign? Who doesn't these days? The Republicans have no reason to protect him anymore, he's served his usefulness. Do it now, he's hoping you'll forget again. If Spitzer had to go, so does Senator Vitter, the only difference is the statute of limitations. It's great that Republicans in Congress held-up any potential ethics investigations of the Louisiana senator for about nine months, but then, so did Barbara Boxer. You might ask her why sometime.

Sitting-on any inquiries gave the Republicans time to wait-out the outgoing Democratic governor Kathleen Blanco who had been in a great deal of conflict with Vitter's bosses (he was literally the errand-boy for Karl Rove during the aftermath of Katrina) in the White House. It seems she didn't want to be their scapegoat, but she wasn't running around having-sex with prostitutes, and touching escorts:

Until recently, Vitter at least had a political rationale for not resigning. When he was first ensnared in the D.C. Madam criminal case last June, Republicans were one vote shy of controlling the U.S. Senate. Had he quit then, Louisiana's Democratic governor, Kathleen Blanco, might have named a Democrat as his interim replacement. Now, however, Louisiana has a Republican governor in Bobby Jindal, who can name a Republican to replace Vitter. Thus, there no longer is any rational basis for the GOP to protect Vitter. Indeed, Republicans in and out of New York did not hesitate to demand that Democrat Spitzer resign as that state's governor last week. Like Vitter, Spitzer had been a crusading moralist. Unlike Vitter, Spitzer recognized and admitted his sins, including that of rank hypocrisy. He resigned within days.

David Vitter should do likewise. (www.bestofneworleans.com, 03.18.2008)

The ditching of Vitter could be coming very soon, and most definitely for the reasons enumerated in the words of bestofneworleans.com. They aren't the only voices calling for Vitter to resign--he has enemies within his own party in Louisiana, and they've been trying to make him accept responsibility for his serial-solicitations of escorts and prostitutes for many years now. But enough on Wendy Vitter, some marriages-of-convenience can become so...inconvenient.

For enemies of Vitter within the Louisiana GOP, their time appears to be ripe and they are already striking. David Vitter's days in office are probably being numbered to the single-digits as this is being written, a happy thought indeed. What we know is that in 2001--shortly after some of his contact with escorts of Deborah Jeane Palfrey--Vitter was flying down to New Orleans to have sex with prostitutes around Canal Street.

The FBI was recording phone "chatter" to-and-from the brothel he solicited, entered into logs, and then they sat on it. This wasn't under Clinton, it was under the current administration during their first term. The timing puts it with former Attorney General Ashcroft, and continued into the embarrassing tenure of Alberto Gonzales.

Vitter couldn't be more wrong in the above quote. There are many Republicans who agree with him on the issues of "immigration and other things," but they can say it more articulately under duress. Maybe not. Stammering and stuttering seem to be an acquired-habit in the current GOP incumbency, and it's likely to become contagious in the next few weeks when the economy keeps crashing and the dollar keeps plummeting globally.

The public isn't having it anymore, and the outrage isn't likely to end with former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer. Corruption is in the air, and Spitzer was the least of it--but David Vitter is someone who is up-to-his-neck in it, and so is the entire Republican Party. They don't even have Lincoln Chaffe to kick-around anymore. It's time that they be held-responsible for their actions. All you have to do is look at their voting-patterns and their lockstep unanimity. How much of it is ensured through sexual blackmail?

BestOfNewOrleans.com, 03.18.2008: http://www.bestofneworleans.com/dispatch/2008-03-18/commentary.php

Search my site for more on the Palfrey/Vitter saga (An exciting new film noir!): http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/search?q=Vitter