Posted on 12/17/2009 6:55:17 AM PST by End Times Sentinel
Susan Finkelstein sat down with undercover Officer Michael Brady at a Bucks County bar and allegedly gave him a bold confession for a first meeting, according to his testimony yesterday at her preliminary hearing.
"I admit it. I'm a prostitute. I love sex. I'm a whore," the Bensalem police officer testified that Finkelstein had told him as he posed as "Bob" at Manny Brown's in Bensalem.
[excerpted for graphic content]
The Southwest Philadelphia woman believed Brady had three tickets to a Phillies-Yankees World Series game and, Bensalem police say, was willing to exchange sex for at least one.
In reality, it was a sting operation by Bensalem cops, who had found the "desperate blonde," as Finkelstein reportedly called herself, while trolling Craigslist for illegal activities.
Finkelstein, 43, was also told in an e-mail written by Sgt. Robert Bugsch that "Bob" had a brother, Bugsch said on the stand. That apparently upped the possibilities for Finkelstein.
[excerpted for graphic content]
Brady's and Bugsch's testimony - along with the introduction of topless photos as evidence, images Finkelstein purportedly sent to Bugsch before the meeting - was apparently enough for Falcone. He held the case over for trial in Common Pleas Court, set to begin Jan. 5 in Doylestown.
She was charged with promoting prostitution and, yesterday, with general prostitution.
Brennan suggested he may appeal the ruling, claiming that Falcone's decision was based on "unsubstantiated, unrecorded testimony of one officer," he said, referring mainly to Brady's testimony.
Finkelstein, a woman with a self-avowed "big mouth," spoke with the swarm of media after the hearing, despite Brennan's assurances that she would not comment on the proceedings.
"It was very hard to hear the untruths that were said about me and my actions without being able to respond," she said in a soft, melodic voice. Later, she said, "It is not in my vocabulary to use those words."
Earlier, when Brady used the term "whore" in court, Finkelstein let out a sigh of disbelief.
After the hearing, Brennan wondered aloud why Bensalem police didn't record the conversation or why three other police at the bar weren't close enough to listen in on the conversation.
Regarding the topless photos, Brennan said, the police officers admitted that sending them was not illegal.
"She's here charged with a crime," he said. "The crime isn't bad taste. The crime is prostitution."
So you meet a woman on Craig’s List, you take her out, you wine and dine her and she takes you to her bed.
You probably spent at least $100.00 but you think you got laid for free and the woman isnt a whore?
You meet a woman on craigslist, take her out for a $100 dinner and she sleeps with you? Oh, she's a whore, that's for sure. She's just not a prostitute. She hasn't obligated herself to "service" you in the "Macaroni Grill" scenario.
If the ad on craigslist said she was selling her services in exchange for dinner, that'd be prostitution.
From the article:
After the hearing, Brennan wondered aloud why Bensalem police didn't record the conversation or why three other police at the bar weren't close enough to listen in on the conversation.
So, where were they? In the bathroom, on the dance floor? Ordering drinks? They were not witnesses, they had no idea what was discussed, no tapes, no video, no substanciating witnesses - nothing. Heck, they could have been in DisneyLand as far as this case is concerned. As I said earlier, my POS cell phone can record, and we are supposed to accept the word of ONE policeman as good enough to convict a woman?
Now, did she do it? Yeah, I think she did. But, do we KNOW that she did this? No. There is no excuse for this lapse in competence. We convict based upon what a 'reasonable' person would consider 'proof'.
All we have are 3 policemen in a bar that can truthfully testify that "We were there, and so was the arresting officer - and since he made an arrest we have reason to believe that the accused was there too". Nice.
I’d hit it.
Which is all they need to testify.
It just disproves the possibility that this was some rogue cop acting alone.
Look, we'll agree to disagree. I tend to think there's a greater degree of lee way for folks to make an upstanding and moral society for them to live in. That's not saying those who have greater libertarian leanings are wrong, that's just not my opinion.
I'll agree, but just barely.
After seeing people convicted and serving time for rape, or child abuse, and in one case where a man is still in jail after serving 15 years, when he is clearly innocent. I demand absolute, indisputable proof. We have the technology, the police have the funding, training and skill to use these tools. This isn't rocket science. This is a wire, or a bug or a freakin' cell phone sitting on the bar. This is a cop sitting with his back turned, apparently engaged in a converstation. Heck, we have High School students doing more sophisticated work than this trying to figure out who the cute girl in class really likes.
As far as we know, the cop could have been discussing the weather with this woman. And that is what I object to. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. We don't, and are unable to ever find out what was discussed.
Because we have no idea what the conversation was, we are forced to ASSUME that the cop is telling the truth. Based upon nothing more than his word, a woman is going to be charged, humiliated and possibly carry a prostitution conviction with her for the rest of her life. Before I saddle ANYONE with a charge they will carry for the rest of their life, be it theft, DWI, drug possession, distribution or even shoplifting - there is something more substancial than one person's word.
I'm old enough to remember the Vice Squad in the Norfolk Virginia area in the 1960's as a young sailor. This was before the huge influx of drugs, and the Vice Squad enforced morals laws as a means of providing income to the city. You could be arrested for taking off your shoes (that equated to beginning the process of disrobing) in the same house as a female who was anyone other than your wife.
I think we're basically on the same page. I don't approve of legalized prostitution, but it upsets me more to have a representative of our government sticking their nose into my affairs (pun intended).
They can continue to make it illegal, but decriminalize it as they do a lot of places now for small amounts of marijuana. If people are putting themselves in a position where it becomes noticable to the public.....give them a ticket like you would for running a stop sign. Having a police officer spend a lot of time undercover trying to bust people for following their human instincts seems like a huge waste of time.
Unsubstanciated evidence is not evidence, it is in this day and age. Police routinely prevail in traffic court on only the word (speeding tickets). This is just a step further. This is part of the reason that many no longer trust the police.
Don't know about your state or area; but in my area the cops have video camera and the radar gun speed is displayed on the recording. This is evidence.
If there is no way for the Radar gun to imprint the read speed, then it comes into question. On the plus side, I have experienced several officers who have given me reduced tickets (87 went to 80mph) simply because I was polite and civil to the officer. Yeah, I was guilty, but having the policeman show a little mercy was appreciated.
So, I like the way things are done here; but in the article I have a lot of heartburn with the way things went down.
I do not know what they have here, but in the past it was the cops word against yours. Last ticket I got was my fault so that is not my real issue. Mine is like yours, his statement is not enough for me. To many instances of corruption withe the police now.
Who runs Barter Town?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.