Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
elrond

Anyone Know About The Larissa Miesnieks Case

14 posts in this topic

Larissa Miesnieks is in Southwark court charged with controlling prostitution for gain. The case has been running all last week. I assume it's still ongoing. The only report I have seen was in last Thursday Telegraph.

She ran Atlantic Companions and Pure Brit.

She was caught after she was burgled, and her lap top was sent off for forensic analysis, and emails linking her to the websites were found.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9098247/Woman-who-ran-prostitutes-trapped-by-her-laptop.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the lesson that I, driven to burglary by the recession, draw, is that I should restrict my nefarious activities to Madams - they won't dare complain now will they?

But interesting that so little publicity - probably because the evidence would seem to be dry accounts, with no glamourous escorts giving evidence of being forced to pander to excitingly perverted footballers or bankers!

Justice? Sorry, what is that?

Edited by Irgendeiner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is thought that criminals often target the sex industry partly because they think their victims will not dare to report their crimes. The guy targetting agency girls in London (as per main board), was still reported so it's not all doom and gloom, and of course many participants on the sex industry are actually quite legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the lesson that I, driven to burglary by the recession, draw, is that I should restrict my nefarious activities to Madams - they won't dare complain now will they?

But interesting that so little publicity - probably because the evidence would seem to be dry accounts, with no glamourous escorts giving evidence of being forced to pander to excitingly perverted footballers or bankers!

Justice? Sorry, what is that?

I suspect WGs and agencies at risk when victims of crime because they are easy targets for official theft under the Proceeds of Cime Act

Edited by akanostromo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larissa Miesnieks is in Southwark court charged with controlling prostitution for gain. The case has been running all last week. I assume it's still ongoing. The only report I have seen was in last Thursday Telegraph.

Reading the Courts List it appears to still be ongoing - Court 3, before Mr Recorder A Layton QC.

It would seem rather silly of her to hand over her laptop to the police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Handing over the laptop sounds odd. Had the Police recovered the laptop, the story would make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I do wonder about why she handed over the laptop for a burglary. Maybe she felt she was doing nothing wrong, but why would the laptop help secure the conviction of a burgler? I assume the burglary had nothing to do with the agency, and was a run of the mill burglary. Odd. I am glad she has no pleaded guilty, so many do, so I expect the argument will be on what is control.

It's now into the 7th day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jury to consider the verdict, so verdict today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible she'd had threats, or the laptop was touched by the burglars, so they wanted to take it for forensics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. Not guilty, the jury was out in 40 minutes.

The recoder before the jury went to make their decision summed up, prostitution is not illegal in this country, running an agency for profit is not illegal in this country.

The prosecution case was there was control. She had guide lines for underwear, and also if had 3 bad reviews you were out. Also the girls had to ring within 10 minutes of meeting the client.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. Not guilty, the jury was out in 40 minutes.

The recoder before the jury went to make their decision summed up, prostitution is not illegal in this country, running an agency for profit is not illegal in this country.

The prosecution case was there was control. She had guide lines for underwear, and also if had 3 bad reviews you were out. Also the girls had to ring within 10 minutes of meeting the client.

She was lucky in both her Recorder and (very much more so) her Jury - We so often hear about a "Post Code Lottery" in the NHS, but, oddly, perhaps, not about the justice system. Luck of the draw.

Long ago, in another jurisdiction, three guys killed a pimp, when the brothel he took them to wouldn't admit them. The slouching defence, who looked like a waste of rations, objected to any juror who was female or who'd passed his eleven plus, so we had a jury of illiterate farm labourers, whose verdict was all the boys could legitimately expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting result.

As the lady correctly says, an interesting result indeed! I fear that CPS will just put it down to bad luck or a maverick jury and carry on as before. The Area Chief Prosecutor will, of course, be hit in the bonus, given that he's lost his chance of a POCA. The way that our "justice game" works, acquittals at first instance do not establish any precedent - you have to be convicted, and then have a successful appeal to do that.

If Elrond's synopsis (good word that!) of the Recorder's summing up is correct, that Recorder has guts! I'm quite sure that there are channels through which DPP can indicate to the Lord Chancellor's Department that a particular Recorder is "unreliable", and thereby terminate his hopes of appointment to the bench full-time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0