Deborah Jeane Palfrey Legal Defense Fund

Deborah J. (Jeane) Palfrey’s assets and entire life’s savings were seized by the Internal Revenue Service, on October 4, 2006, without notice. This was done via the civil asset forfeiture process and based upon the government’s allegations that Ms. Palfrey had operated a prostitution business, in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, from 1993 through August of 2006, when she ceased operation and retired.

Ms. Palfrey adamantly disputes the government’s claims of illegal behavior. The business, Pamela Martin and Associates, functioned as a high-end adult fantasy firm which offered legal sexual and erotic services across the spectrum of adult sexual behavior and did so without incident during its 13 year tenure.

The unfairness of the civil asset forfeiture procedure as currently applied in the present day makes the intended target, as it has here with Ms. Palfrey, indigent and thus incapable of mounting a proper legal defense, either civilly or criminally. The strategy is to place an individual in a position whereby they are forced to accept whatever “deal” the government offers, as they are minus the necessary resources to fight back; a true David and Goliath scenario.
. . .

Additionally, consideration is being given to selling the entire 46 pounds of detailed and itemized phone records for the 13 year period, to raise the requisite defense funds. [emphasis added]

An example from a randomly selected 6 day period in August of 1996 is available for review now. [pdf file]

Deborah Jeane Palfrey Legal Defense Fund

See any phone numbers you recognize?

2 thoughts on “Deborah Jeane Palfrey Legal Defense Fund”

  1. Hmmm… Benicia, California. My mom grew up there. Not that she’d have one thing in common with this, um, whatever this is. lol

    Lots of calls to Washington, DC and a church.

    Interesting.

    And all for .3, .4 minutes. There are very few actual minutes used.
    Weird.
    Huh.

  2. this seizure of palfrey’s assets –and her resultant inability to mount a defense– reminds me of padilla’s predicament — the federales say his claims of mistreatment leading to mental instability cannot be given legal credence –insofar as he is now mentally unstable.

    we are falling down various rabbit holes, alice.

Comments are closed.