Your guide to the region's top events, mixed with some commentary about life, media, gossip and politics in Washington, DC.
|
DC Madam Tells (Not Quite) All
By
Alicia C. Shepard
The "DC Madam" (center) talks with Nathan's owner Carol Joynt (right).
She prefers to be called the "Washington Madam" but insists that she is just an innocent businesswoman being victimized by the federal government because she was "sitting on a power keg of information" about the sexual peccadilloes of Washington's elite. On Tuesday, Deborah Jeane Palfrey talked openly at Nathan's during one of the regular luncheon Q&As with the restaurant's owner, Carol Joynt.
The former law student said she's a conservative Democrat who ran a legal escort service here for 13 years. The government believes otherwise, insisting that Palfrey, who lives in the San Francisco area, was providing DC men with $300 an-hour prostitutes. Joynt kept the conversation light, asking Palfrey why she had chosen to run her escort service—Pamela Martin & Assoc.—in the nation's capital. It wasn't because the men here are more "needy," Palfrey said. "It was either here or New York City....The men here are sophisticated, very cosmopolitan." Palfrey has 10,000 names to prove it, which she plans to use in her legal defense. Among the thousands of names the government has are 25 that are recognizable, said Palfrey's attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley, who is representing her pro bono. But both refused to even give Joynt a "hostess present" of even just one name.
Dressed in a conservative grey pinstripe pantsuit accented by her red nail polish and red lipstick, Palfrey and her attorney regaled a packed lunchtime crowd who paid $35 a head for 30 minutes. After Palfrey, a last-minute addition, came scheduled guest, Peter Greenberg, the "Today" show's travel correspondent.
The government began proceedings against Palfrey last October, and indicted her in February. "Many people don't know that prostitution was legal until October 2006 when the civil forfeiture case was started against Jeane," said Sibley. "When you start getting into laws prohibiting sexual behavior in DC, you realize they are vague. There's a whole long list of behaviors you can get away with without your clothes on."
Joynt asked her about Randall L. Tobias, 65, who resigned as deputy secretary of state on April 27 after acknowledging he'd been a customer. "I haven't heard from Mr. Tobias," she said. "I don't remember him." When pressed about who actually used her cash-only business, Palfrey sighed and said she hadn't been much interested in "who they were ID-wise as much as security-wise." Some did use their real names. Some even called from their homes. Usually her "independent contractors," as she calls the escorts, went to their homes or a hotel. Sometimes, though not often, the escorts would go to an office. "The girls weren't even curious who the men were," said Palfrey. "They respected their clients' privacy. Once in a while, I would hear: 'As soon as he opened the door, I recognized him. He was on the cover of....'"
For the last question, Joynt asked Palfrey if she had any advice for other madams. She did. Don't give up. "This is an aberrant situation," she said. "There's a lot about my story people don't know."
They'll have to wait for the book she intends to write some day.
After Palfrey and Sibley left Nathan's, a small flock of reporters followed them down Wisconsin Avenue peppering them with questions. Palfrey encouraged anyone who wanted to know more to check out long radio interviews where she tells her story on www.wsradio.com.
Perhaps tired of walking and talking, Palfrey decided to stop and answer questions. Coincidence or not, she stopped to talk in front of The Pleasure Palace, Georgetown's classy sexual toy shop.
As she talked, a white van drove by and a man yelled out: "You go girl!" She said that happens a lot. And then she was off to a photo shoot for the August Vanity Fair.
|
Comments
I’ve interviewd Ms. Palfrey in a way that is more in-depth than the luncheon. Would anyone care to publish? Here’s my first article from my blog (http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/index.html)
"It’s my understanding that there really was no investigation."
--Deborah Jeane Palfrey to the author.
Washington D.C.--"Do you realize that the information contained in the search warrant was 3-to-3 1/2, to 5-years-old?" states an exasperated Jeane Palfrey. The first thing one notes in speaking with Palfrey is her directness and approachability. She’s a very well-spoken woman who sees the implications of her case, and that they go well-beyond her own peculiar predicament. I point-out that the AP used the same excuse in October of 2006 as ABC recently did for not naming names on their 20/20 segment--she calls ABC’s decision "curious."
Palfrey’s clients might have included wealthy doctors and lawyers in Washington and its Maryland and Virginia suburbs, but now well-known names have so far surfaced, said a law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing. The escort service, Pamela Martin & Associates, advertised in newspapers, on Web sites and in the Yellow Pages. It operated since 1993 “as an out-call prostitution business” of college-educated women with other jobs, the affidavit says. (AP, 10.10.2006)
The piece is careful not to use the words "confidential informants," but that’s exactly what they were and are. Palfrey adds, "They would have had no knowledge of who the clients were at that point [October 9th when the interview for the above quote took place]. These folks did not have a black book--there never was one. They passed-up 46 lbs. of phone records...they were already making statements about the doctors and lawyers on the 9th of October." Could this suggest they already had an prepared outline of what to charge Ms. Palfrey with?
It appears at this point that the prosecution has lost the script, with the defendant shut-out of court--an obvious abrogation of due process, a Kafka hell. The good news is that the Supreme Court could be her venue-of-choice soon. Interestingly, the decision is being pushed by Justice Clarence Thomas. Also of-note: her "gentleman’s agreement" not to divulge any information expired after the 20/20 broadcast (they wanted the other nine years of her phone records too), and the gag order barring her from releasing more phone records appears to be floundering with a lot of back-peddling by Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler.
The AP article on October 10th, 2006: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20061010/news_1n10hookers.html
More primary-documents: www.deborahjeanepalfrey.com
Posted by: Matt Janovic | Jun 12, 2007 09:23:13 AM
She’s a pimp. She makes money by selling girls bodies. I’m amazed how nonchalant the author is about the business of pimping. I’m amazed because I would never read an expos’e on the pimp on the corner of 12th and K St.
Posted by: andrew | Jun 02, 2007 08:33:21 AM
|
Post a comment
Feel free to leave a comment or ask a question. Because of the prevalence of spam, comments are moderated and will not appear immediately on the site. By posting here, you affirm that you are 13 years of age or older.
|
|
We've selected the finalists for this month’s sports-themed photo contest. Who made the cut? Read on to see and cast your vote for the winner. Voting closes Monday at midnight!
more
Miss out on some of our blog posts from this week? Worry not—we're here to fill you in on what the most popular blog posts were from the past seven days. See below for our top five.
more
|