The House Judiciary Committee's democratic counsel contacted the DC Madam in late 2007: the exchange

Ed.--This one is long overdue and comes thanks to a recent comment from a reader who wishes to remain anonymous. Forgive the layout, courtesy of Blogspot bugs that never seem to get fixed. That said, read from the bottom-up.

Really? Then – why I wonder – am I getting the brush off?

-----Original Message-----
From: Justice League [mailto:spbiloxi00@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:36 AM
To: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com
Cc: Matt Janovic
Subject: Re: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA

Jeane:

Let's hope that the HJC respond to you. The HJC certainly responded to the cases Siegelman and Katheryn Shields and her husband.

Bil

On Dec 17, 2007 11:24 AM, Jeane Palfrey <jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com> wrote:

Matt and Bil… FYI - speaking of the House Judiciary Committee. Let's see what, if any response I receive here. -Jeane

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeane Palfrey [mailto: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 10:49 PM
To: 'Diana.Oo@mail.house.gov'
Subject: RE: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA

Ms. Oo…

It is my understanding from the following thread and conversations with my attorney, Mr. Montgomery B. Sibley, that the House Judiciary Committee is interested in the civil asset forfeiture portion of my case. Accordingly, you made an appointment to speak with Mr. Sibley, on Thursday, December 5 ^th; an appointment, you did not keep. Despite messages – email and voicemail – from Mr. Sibley inquiring of your absence, to date you have chosen not to deign him and correspondingly me, with an explanation or apology here.

Your "on/off" behavior is rather interesting. It is particularly so, in light of similar actions by Judge Kessler, of late. It should be noted though, my case is replete with a history of sudden and inexplicable events, which seemingly shut down any and every opportunity I am given to uncover the truth in my bizarre situation.

I truly hope this is not the case with the House Judiciary Committee. You see, I take your statement regarding the Committee's interest in the due process rights of citizens in civil forfeiture matters quite literally.

Mr. Sibley and I look forward to speaking with you, as soon as possible.

Your attention to this concern is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jeane Palfrey

-----Original Message-----
From: Montgomery Sibley [mailto: mbsibley@civilforfeiture.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 7:39 AM
To: 'Oo, Diana'
Subject: RE: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA

Diana,

Do you still want to discuss the government's abuse of the forfeiture laws in my client Jeane Palfrey's case?

Montgomery

---

From: Oo, Diana [mailto:Diana.Oo@mail.house.gov]
Sent: 12/04/2007 12:33 PM
To: mbsibley@civilforfeiture.com
Subject: Re: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA

Montgomery, are you available to discuss by phone tomorrow afternoon, say around 2?




----- Original Message -----
From: Montgomery Sibley <mbsibley@civilforfeiture.com>
To: Oo, Diana
Sent: Mon Dec 03 14:17:39 2007
Subject: FW: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA

Diana,

Can you update me?

Thanks,
Montgomery


________________________________

From: Montgomery Sibley [ mailto:mbsibley@civilforfeiture.com]
Sent: 11/30/2007 7:04 AM
To: 'Oo, Diana'
Subject: RE: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA


Diana,

I am committed on Monday to matters I can't change without a court order. However, I can meet with you at your offices on Tuesday next most anytime. Let me know what works best for you.

yours,

Montgomery


________________________________

From: Oo, Diana [mailto:Diana.Oo@mail.house.gov]
Sent: 11/29/2007 4:05 PM
To: sibley@civilforfeiture.com
Subject: Deborah Jeane Palfrey & CAFRA



Hi Montgomery,

Thank you for your letter on this matter. The Committee is of course interested in ensuring that the due process rights of all citizens are preserved during the civil forfeiture process. I have some questions. Would you like to discuss this case on Monday?


Diana Oo

Democratic Counsel

House Judiciary Committee

2138 Rayburn

Washington, D.C. 20515

P: 202.225.3951

F: 202.225.7680

Michael Mukasey - Will You Help Me?, by Deborah Jeane Palfrey

Michael Mukasey – will you help me?

The dubbed D.C. Madam Deborah J. Palfrey seeks fairness in a sea of injustice.

55 years imprisonment and my entire life’s savings – this is what they want to take from me, in my real life ‘David and Goliath’ struggle with the United States Department of Justice.

For the past year, I have discovered myself immersed in the world of the Justice Department; a world, replete with on-the-record faulty memories, omissions of fact and out-and-out lies; one where political motive and groupthink usurp integrity and the rule of law and where as hard as one might try, justice is nowhere to be found. This is the setting I have been placed in to do battle with a bureaucratic behemoth.

As I fight for my very life ostensibly on a daily basis, I have experienced a legal and financial pounding– a premeditative orchestration created to best the most resolute among us, by the Department of Justice or the Department of Injustice, as it more widely regarded these days.

On October 4^th of last year, a dozen plus federal agents descended upon my sedate, restored Victorian home in Northern California armed with a search warrant and arrested - of all things - my property (my turn came later in March). The process known as civil asset forfeiture allows the government to seize a person’s property and assets, without due process often leaving them destitute, when there is suspicion – not actual proof, but merely a suggestion of wrong doing.

In my case, the Federales claimed I had proffered the unthinkable – pleasures of the flesh - for financial gain, to the male denizens and visitors in our nation’s capitol. Accordingly, I found myself – besides instantaneously broke - charged with over-the-top and obscene federal crimes. My job description was elevated exponentially from retired escort service operator to the powerful, to money launderer and conspirator over night and later to racketeer.

What particularly made and continues to make my case so unusual, actually bizarre is no one ever has been charged similarly to me, in the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area. Over time, I have come to understand my case is truly one of a kind. Considering there are more adult service businesses than McDonald’s restaurants in operation in the overall vicinity, a virtual array of rich targets for the Feds to pursue – I and I alone appear to be the only subject of their interest. Furthermore, none of the estimated 10,000 or so clients, who patronized my agency or the almost 150 subcontracted women, who worked for me over the years have been charged.

The question begs. Why me and why only me? In part, the answer may lie in the fact I operated a high-end, erotic outcall service continuously (a bit of an anomaly) for a thirteen year period, from 1993 through 2006, in a part of the world laden with politically influential men; many with high level security clearances. Although, my firm routinely was patronized by the typical, garden-variety doctor, lawyer and perchance even, Indian chief; it nonetheless saw more than its share of the high and the mighty.

As flattering as it might be – albeit in a rather perverse way – for me to think I was ever the real object of the DOJ’s attention, it would be sheer folly to believe such. The clientele base, specifically the more notable customers were the true persons of interest and the reason I believe I was surveilled personally and professionally, for at least a five year period, before I decided to close shop and retire to Europe, in August of 2006. Ironically, it was this very decision to shut down the business and disrupt the status quo, in conjunction with my desire to move out of the country, which I feel ignited the raid on my home, in early October.

The combination of selective prosecution, a politically sensitive clientele and an extended surveillance period points to a matter, which has less to do with the goings-on of an alleged prostitution ring than it does with spying activities involving a constitutionally protected, American citizen. As I often have stated, my case has something to do with something, but it sure as heck has very little, if anything to do with a small-time escort business. My case - had it been more customary in nature - would have been under the sole purview of the state courts and never entered the federal realm.

But then the culture at the Justice Department, under former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has been revealed – particularly of late with the suspect attorney firings - as one more concerned with the inclinations of the White House, i.e. the GOP than with those of truthfulness and fair dealing toward a society at large; a society, which most assuredly includes me and my idiosyncratic case. The founding fathers desire for a wide divide to exist between the Executive Branch of government and the Judiciary appears to have been profanely abused by former AG Gonzales and his cohorts outside Justice.

I rather suspect that as time marches on, with it will come a multitude of eye-opening disclosures, which will call into question further the practices of the DOJ, the past several years. I believe my case is part and parcel of any such coming revelations. That is of course, if the newly appointed Attorney General – be it Bush nominee, Judge Michael Mukasey or another – chooses to do right by us, the American people; to ally with us and not the current administration. For me in my politically charged case, such a decision by the future Attorney General holds particular weight; quite possibly, whether or not I will spend the remainder of my natural life behind bars or as a free person.

Nonetheless as I begin my second year combating the beast, I do so with significant hope. After a full twelve months of being stonewalled at every twist and turn along the way, including access to discovery materials, by the assigned Assistant U.S. Attorneys - my counsel, Mr. Montgomery B. Sibley, a small band of interested third parties and I have pieced together sufficient reason to believe my case - simply put - is rotten to the core. Since the Government for all intents and purposes has run out of tactical maneuvers to prohibit me from uncovering the truth any longer, I anticipate exposure of considerable wrongdoing by the DOJ, in short order. Additionally, the fact Alberto Gonzales, perhaps one of the most dishonest and politically aligned attorney generals in U.S. history, the very one who has reigned over my specific case this last year has resigned – leaves open the hope that his predecessor may correct the direction of a wayward and seemingly corrupt Justice Department and in its wake my increasingly frightening tale of woe.

However, time will tell. In the interim, I only can remain determined and trust in the final analysis, I indeed will find justice in this dark and terrifying sea of injustice I have been thrust.

[Ed., 08.28.2008--Why she felt a shill and an apparatchiki like Mukasey would help her is beyond my ken.]