Sadly this doesn't surprise me.
The rating system for movies and television places a higher priority for cleavage than it does murder. You can have one murder in a movie and it can stay pg -- maybe PG-13. But if you have *a* nipple, that's probably "R".
Another question that is somewhat more "grey": Which is worse? A pedophile or a serial killer?
Most people in this country of mine would say the former. Me... I'm not so sure. The kids will have chances to have their lives straightened out, after all -- the murdered are, well, dead. (Both are horrid; but it's a matter of degrees).
This is nothing short of horrible.
The police have become a bunch of bullying cowards. More and more they resemble the criminals that they are supposed to catch - they prey on the weak and defer to the strong. Why bust up protection rackets when you can toss hundred-pound hookers into the paddywagon? Why solve murders when you can hand out speeding tickets?
Unbelievable comments. The woman had a regular 9 to 5 like the rest of us, chose to throw it asside to become a prostitute knowing it is illegal(most likely for the extreme amounts of money some prostitues earn). You all have lost your minds to think the city has done anything wrong. They enforced their laws on someone who chose to make more money instead of being a law abiding citizen. She also chose suicide instead of working through it. Her death, while unfortunate, shows how selfish she was and her judgement was off a few notches.
Anonymous -- A few points:
* It is virtually impossible to avoid breaking the law, these days (and it's getting worse); for example, consider: It is illegal to be a traffic hazard on the highways; part of that definition includes varying in speed by more than 5 mph than those around you. Traffic routinely travels more than 15 mph above the posted limits in most cities (this is actually ENCOURAGED by the fact that the roads are engineered to be traversed at 75 mph with 1950's designed-vehicles, yet have posted limits in most places of 55 mph.)
* This article discussed rampantly faulty prioritization. What was more harmful to society, which the greater law to be enforced, with limited resources available; the routine assault and robbery of pedestrians, or so-called 'private escorts'?
* IF this woman was so well off in her previous position, why was it that very shortly after being arrested, her house went into foreclosure? That takes MONTHS to occur.
* This very blog takes the position that laws which are designed to impose moral decisions (i.e.; it's "wrong" to trade your sexuality for cash), are themselves unjust and ought to be changed -- and here we have an example how their enforcement resulted in someone facing such horrific circumstances that suicide was the *BETTER* option in their mind.
Your entire position is, frankly, misguided as currently represented.
Would anyone care if this was a man, I doubt it.
The ultra radical feminist agenda.
Woman = Victim (not matter what the circumstances)
First, she 'hanged' herself.
Lot's of speculation about exactly what her social and character attributes were, when in fact, the other side of this woman's behaviors aren't presented. Pity, that, but typical of agenda-driven articles.
A peculiar woman, about whom the kindest thing one might say is "didn't play well with others". As a faculty member, she was always at odds with the department and the administration. How many other choices of employment were available to an educated woman, yet, she chose prostitition. Most feel that was a social statement, not a means to make a living, and I'm among them.
Even as Libertarian as I am, I probably wouldn't care to live next door to a person who conducts illegal activities, no matter how how one feels about the activity as it regards legality. Her neighbors weren't pleased, and this woman wasn't particularly discrete about her "job".
To infer that the weight of the state's prosecution and resources was so overwhelming that it caused a completely normal person, who had done nothing wrong, to take her own life, is simply unrelective of the facts. This case has gone on for some 2 years. There have been plenty of opportunities for this person to deal with this more effectlively.
I firmly believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. People freely exchange goods for a price determined by the market. And that is fair.
I don't believe that we owe this woman an appology for the way that the police and prosecution acted. They are the arm of the executive branch and have a duty to enforce the law. As point of fact, they were simply enforcing the law and this woman was aware that she was committing criminal acts. It is unfortunate, but certainly not because her neighbors noticed her criminal acts.
She does not illustrate some point about reckless prosecution by police and DA's. She represents reckless acts by every single one of the residents of Baltimore that elected a legislature that passed the laws outlawing this kind of behavior. A hooker that only screws high end customers, is still a hooker, whether her pimp rolls up in his caddy with a cane and feathered cap.
Fact is that the crime of prostitution is only one part of things. I can't imagine she is paying taxes on her income. Now we can take the position that prostitution should be legal and that income taxes should be abolished, which I believe, but the fact is that they are existing laws and wanting to whore yourself out does not exempt you from the laws no matter how wrong the law may be in our minds.
Just to correct one point: The police in question were Baltimore County police, not Baltimore City police. Baltimore City is not part of Baltimore County.
Hey, did you guys know that the police are the arm of the executive branch?
Yup, it's true!
Commenting by HaloScan
