Caligulaugh

It was once written by one of the great Roman chroniclers that the insane emperor Caligula once remarked after his football team lost (brutish athletes liked molesting adolescent boys then too) that, were he able, that he'd cut the throats of the Coliseum audience, collectively, if only they had one throat. They'd been rooting for someone else it seems. I think a simple collective pimp-slap (with rings on) would have been adequate, or instructed the Praetorian Guard to inoculate them with laryngitis, yo.

Series: FORTUNE COOKIE EXEGESIS TIME

Ed.(Wood)--Because it requires little effort with more "BOOM!", I decided the time has come to unravel the annoying Mystery Cult that is the fortune cookie. Hey, fuck decorum and other Latinate wording for the dumbshow crowd. After consuming a variety of tasty Americanized Chinese dishes, after gorging, and gorging (I don't eat like this, but many fat-assed A'murkans do), heading to the neighborhood vomitorium, then going back for sixths, the pigs go and eat a fortune cookie too. So do I, not that I gorge, and I'm not obese or from Mississippi, the worst state in the nation.

And so, there comes the fortune, encased by what would never normally pass the muster as a real cookie. For some weird-assed reason, simpletons read these fortunes thinking (if you want to call it that, I don't) this shit can somehow come true, or that it's unique, sage fucking advice of some kind for the yokels who are more superstitious than an ancient Sicilian peasant woman.

Nonetheless, the cookies occasionally do actually make some kind of sense--certainly more than the people who think the advice and aphorisms (look it up) have some bearing on their cowardly way of unliving. Great, fine, whatever. I'm not even going into the "Lucky Number" bullshit, since that's yet more irrational pap for magical thinkers, crazies, and of course, the mooks. I don't normally enjoy the role of "Satan-the-accuser," but hey, this shit invites it, people invite it when they flap their gums too much. Americans have turned it into a pastime.

And so, without any adieu whatsoever, because no one's paying me for this shit except Dennis Marrero (thanks):

"Your present plans are going to succeed."

Uh, shit--how did they know? OK, I was planning to mount (heh) Schlieffen Plan attempt #3, it's true. This time we decided to burn down the Louvre, demolish the Arch de Triumphe, turn the Bastille into a whorehouse, and make a pinata our Napoleon's carcass, I admit to this, kidding aside folks, and this time the trains will run on time and be able to be recalled.

Stratfor settles on security breach (document)

Ed. (my name is not Ed)--This is all she wrote. Wikileaks published many thousands of emails from the private intelligence firm, Strafor, in December of last year after hackers caused a security breach and made off with them, and so on. This is the settlement between the soon-to-be-defunct firm and various plaintiffs who were compromised. Enjoy...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK A class action settlement involving Stratfor's online service will provide benefits to those who qualify. A court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer. ·         There is a class action concerning whether Stratfor Enterprises, LLC, Strategic Forecasting, Inc, and George Friedman (together called "Stratfor") improperly contributed to the loss of personal information that occurred when Stratfor's servers were illegally hacked in December 2011. ·         A proposed settlement has been reached with Stratfor (the "Settlement") and is pending Court approval. ·         Under the terms of the Settlement, you may be eligible for certain benefits if you qualify ·         Your legal rights are affected whether you act or do not act.  Read this notice carefully. YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT: ASK TO BE EXCLUDED Get no compensation. The only option that allows you to individually sue Stratfor over the claims resolved by this Settlement. OBJECT Write to the Court about why you don't agree with the Settlement. GO TO A HEARING Ask to speak in Court about the Settlement. DO NOTHING Receive benefits, if eligible. Give up rights. ·         These rights and options-and the deadlines to exercise them-are explained in this notice. ·         The Court in charge of this case still has to decide whether to approve the Settlement. If it does, and after any appeals are resolved, benefits will be distributed to those who qualify. Please be patient. QUESTIONS? CALL 1-866-322-4455 TOLL FREE, OR VISIT WWW.StratforSettlement.COM BASIC INFORMATION 1.   Why was this notice issued? 2.   What is this lawsuit about? 3.   Why is this a class action? 4.   Why is there a Settlement? WHO IS IN THE SETTLEMENT 5.   How do I know if I am part of the Settlement? 6.   I'm still not sure I'm included. THE SETTLEMENT BENEFITS-WHAT YOU GET IF YOU QUALIFY 7.   How do I qualify for compensation? 8.   How  can I receive the benefits? 9.   When would I receive the benefits? 10. What am I giving up to get a benefit or stay in the Class? EXCLUDING YOURSELF FROM THE SETTLEMENT 11. How do I get out of the proposed Settlement? 12. If I don't exclude myself, can I sue the Defendants and the other Released Parties for the same thing later? 13. If I exclude myself, can I get compensation from this Settlement? THE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU 14. Do I have a lawyer in this case? 15. How will the lawyers be paid? If so, how much? OBJECTING TO THE SETTLEMENT 16. How do I tell the Court if I do not like the proposed Settlement? 17. What's the difference between objecting and excluding? THE COURT'S Settlement Fairness HEARING 18. When and where will the Court decide whether to approve the proposed Settlement? 19. Do I have to come to the hearing? 20. May I speak at the hearing? IF YOU DO NOTHING 21. What happens if I do nothing at all? GETTING MORE INFORMATION 22. Are there more details about the proposed Settlement? BASIC INFORMATION 1.    Why was this notice issued? A Court authorized this notice because you have a right to know about a proposed nationwide settlement of this class action with Stratfor, including the right to claim benefits and about all of your options before the Court decides whether to give "final approval" to the Settlement. If the Court approves the Settlement, and after any appeals are resolved, benefits will be distributed to everyone who qualifies. This notice explains the lawsuit, the Settlement, your legal rights, what benefits are available, who may be eligible for the benefits, and how to receive the benefits. United States District Court Judge Denis R. Hurley in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York is overseeing this class action. The case is known as Sterling et al. v. Strategic Forecasting, Inc. et al. Case No. 2:12-cv-00297-DRH-ARL.  The entities who sued are called the "Plaintiffs," and the parties they sued are called the "Defendants" or "Stratfor." The Settlement includes these Stratfor Companies: Stratfor Enterprises, LLC, Strategic Forecasting, Inc., Stratcap Management Company, LLC, and Stratfor Holdings, LLC and their officers and directors. 2.    What is this lawsuit about? The lawsuit generally claims that Stratfor took improper action or improperly failed to take action both leading up to the hack and after the hack of their servers and Stratfor's improper actions or omissions contributed to the theft of customer's personal information, specifically their credit card numbers. Stratfor has denied all of these claims and maintains that they did not act wrongfully or unlawfully. 3.    Why is this a class action? In a class action, one or more people called "Class Representatives" (in this case David Sterling and Sterling & Sterling, Inc.) sue on behalf of individuals who have similar claims. All these individuals are a "Class" or "Class Members."  A court resolves the issues for all Class Members, except for those who exclude themselves from the Class. 4.    Why is there a Settlement? The Court did not decide in favor of the Plaintiffs or Stratfor. Instead, both sides agreed to settle in order to avoid the cost of a trial, and the people who qualify will get compensation. The Class Representatives and their attorneys believe the Settlement is best for all Class Members. The Settlement does not mean Stratfor admits any wrongdoing. WHO IS IN THE SETTLEMENT? To see if you are eligible for benefits from this Settlement, you first have to determine if you are a Class Member. 5.    How do I know if I am a Class Member? The Class includes all individuals who were current or former subscribers to the Stratfor Service as of December 24, 2011. The Settlement excludes (1) Stratfor, or any entity in which Stratfor has a controlling interest, and its respective legal representatives, officers, directors, employees, assigns and successors; (2) the judge to whom this case is assigned and any member of the judge's staff and immediate family; and (3) any person who, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, properly executes and submits a timely request for exclusion from the Class. 6.    What if I am still not sure if I am included? If you are not certain whether you are included in the Class, you may call the Settlement Administrator at toll free number 1-866-322-4455 with questions. THE SETTLEMENT BENEFITS-WHAT YOU GET IF YOU QUALIFY 7.    How do I qualify for compensation? The Settlement will compensate eligible Class Members for Stratfor's alleged improper actions or omissions in relation to the theft of customer's personal information. To qualify for a benefit you must be a Class Member and have been a current or former paying subscriber to the Stratfor Service as of December 24, 2011, whose credit card number Stratfor had on file on December 24, 2011, and whose credit card information was obtained by third-parties due to the breach of Stratfor's computer storage systems. Benefits to persons who qualify will be calculated as follows: If you were a current or former paying subscriber to the Stratfor Service on December 24, 2011, and you had credit card information on file with Stratfor on December 24, 2011, and your credit card information was obtained by third-parties due to the breach of Stratfor's computer storage services, you are eligible for one month of access to the Stratfor Service, valued at $29.08, free of charge. If you were a current or former paying subscriber to the Stratfor Service on December 24, 2011, and Stratfor had your credit card number on file on December 24, 2011, and your credit card information was obtained by third-parties due to the breach of Stratfor's computer storage systems, you are eligible for an "e-book" entitled "The Blue Book" published by Stratfor, valued at $12.99, free of charge. If you were a current or former paying subscriber to the Stratfor Service on December 24, 2011, and Stratfor had your credit card number on file on December 24, 2011, and your credit card information was obtained by third-parties due to the breach of Stratfor's computer storage systems, you are eligible for a per-capita distribution of any monetary relief obtained (after costs and attorneys' fees) from Stratfor's Business and Management Indemnity Policy with Scottsdale Indemnity Company ("Scottsdale Action") as further explained in the subsection III(F) of the Settlement Agreement. If you were a current paying subscriber or you were a former subscriber who re-subscribes, you will receive the additional benefit of Stratfor's enhanced services, which will include the engagement of information technology (IT) companies, IT developers, and providers of IT data migration and development, to ensure the future safety of Stratfor subscribers.  If you do not exclude yourself from the Class and remain a Class Member (as explained in Questions 12 and 13), the only benefits you could ever recover from Stratfor on any claim released in this Settlement are described in the above paragraphs.  If you believe you are entitled to or want to seek a recovery larger than that described above, you must exclude yourself from the Class through the procedure described in Question 11 below. 8.    How can I receive the benefits? If you do not opt out of the class and are eligible to receive benefits, and the Settlement is given final approval, you will be contacted by Stratfor to receive your benefits. 9.    When would I receive the benefits? Benefits will be made available to eligible Class Members after the Court grants "final approval" of the Settlement, and any appeals are resolved. If the Court approves the Settlement after a Settlement Fairness Hearing on September 28, 2012 (see the section "The Court's Settlement Fairness Hearing" below), there may be appeals.  It's always uncertain whether these appeals can be resolved, and resolving them can take time. Please be patient during this process. In addition, you can check the website or call the toll free number listed below in order to get a status update on the final approval of the Settlement, the claims administration process, and when the benefits will be made available. 10.  What am I giving up to get a benefit or stay in the Settlement Class? If you stay in the Class, you will agree to "release and discharge" Stratfor as described in Section IX of the Settlement Agreement and Question 10.  More specifically, Class Members will release the "Released Parties" (as defined below) for all "Settled Claims" (as defined below), including "Unknown Claims" (as defined below).  The Settlement Agreement is available at www.StratforSettlement.com. "Settled Claims" means any claim, Unknown Claim, allegation, right, demand, action or cause of action for damages of any kind (including, but not limited to, compensatory, consequential, special, statutory, exemplary or punitive), injunctive relief, penalties, administrative remedies, or other form of relief based upon any statute, common law principle, rule or regulation of any governmental, regulatory or self-regulatory authority or organization or any other legal theory whatsoever, whether known or unknown, asserted or unasserted, latent or patent that (i) is, has been or could have been asserted by the Releasing Parties against the Released Parties arising from or relating to any of the matters, events or facts alleged in the Action and/or (ii) arises from or relates in any way to an alleged unauthorized disclosure to, or unauthorized acquisition by, any Person on or before December 24, 2011 of any information provided to Defendants by Plaintiffs and/or Settlement Class Members, including but not limited to claims based upon any statements or alleged misrepresentations or omissions in Defendants' privacy statement and/or any alleged increased risk of identity theft or actual identity theft. This release does not release or purport to release any claims of any governmental entity.  Upon the final approval of the Final Settlement, each Class Member shall be subject to and shall be bound by the Final Judgment, and shall be conclusively deemed to have expressly waived and released any and all Settled Claims that he, she, or it has or might have against Released Parties arising from or in any way related to any acts or omissions which have been alleged or which could have been alleged in the Action by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves or on behalf of the Settlement Class, on behalf of a putative class or by a Class Member, to the full extent of res judicata protections. Provided, however, that the Settled Claims do not include any claim for enforcement of this Agreement and/or the Final Judgment. Included within the Settled Claims are Unknown Claims. "Unknown Claim" means any claim arising out of newly discovered facts and/or facts not now known but which could reasonably be discovered, and/or facts found hereafter to be other than or different from the facts now believed to be true.  The Settled Claims defined above, include all Unknown Claims.  Upon the final approval of the Final Settlement, each Class Member shall be subject to, and shall be bound by the Final Judgment, and shall be conclusively deemed to have expressly waived and released any and all Unknown Claims that he, she, or it has or might have against Released Parties arising from or in any way related to any acts or omissions which have been alleged or which could have been alleged in the Action by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves or on behalf of the Settlement Class, on behalf of a putative class or by a Class Member, to the full extent of res judicata protections. "Released Party(ies)" means Defendants, their predecessors, successors, assigns, their past, present and future parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, divisions, departments, and all of the past, present and future officers, directors, employees, stockholders, partners, agents, servants, successors, attorneys, auditors, consultants, representatives, and subrogees, of any and all of the forgoing.  It is expressly understood that Scottsdale is not a Released Party. Unless you exclude yourself, you are staying in the Class, and that means the Court's orders in this case will apply to you and legally bind you.  Therefore, if you do not exclude yourself from the class and remain a Class Member, you will be giving up your right to sue Stratfor individually on any of the Settled Claims described above, including the Unknown Claims. If you have any questions, please visit the website or call the toll-free number.  EXCLUDING YOURSELF FROM THE SETTLEMENT If you are a Class Member and you want to keep the right to sue Stratfor about the issues in this case or the Settled Claims, then you must take steps to remove yourself from the Settlement Class. This is called excluding yourself from-or is sometimes referred to as "opting out" of-the Settlement Class. If you want to preserve a right to pursue an independent legal remedy against Stratfor, you must exclude yourself from this Settlement by following the procedures described below. 11.  How do I get out of the proposed Settlement? If you are a Class Member and you want to exclude yourself from the Settlement, you must send a letter by mail stating that you want to be excluded from the Settlement Class in Sterling et al. v. Strategic Forecasting, Inc. et al.  You must include the case number (2:12-cv-00297-DRH-ARL), your full name, address, telephone number, email address, and signature.  You must mail your request for exclusion postmarked by August 15, 2012 to: Exclusions Stratfor Settlement Administrator c/o BMC Group P.O. Box 2002 Chanhassen, MN 55317-2002 You cannot exclude yourself on the phone, by email, or at the website. Please understand that with only one exception, only you can request exclusion from the Class.  That exception is that a request for exclusion may be submitted on behalf of deceased or incapacitated Class Member by his or her Legally Authorized Representative.  While your lawyer may assist you, your lawyer cannot request exclusion from the Class on your behalf. Requests for exclusion that are on behalf of a group or class of persons are invalid and ineffective. 12.  If I do not exclude myself, can I sue the Defendants and the other Released Parties for the Same thing later? No. As explained in Question 10, unless you exclude yourself, you give up any right to individually sue Stratfor for the claims that this Settlement resolves. You must exclude yourself from this Class to individually sue Stratfor over the claims resolved by this Settlement. Remember, the exclusion deadline is August 15, 2012. 13.  If I exclude myself, can I get compensation from the proposed Settlement? No. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get compensation from the proposed Settlement. THE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU 14.  Do I have a lawyer in this case? The Court appointed Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik LLP to represent you and other Class Members as "Class Counsel." You do not have to personally pay Class Counsel. If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, and have that lawyer appear in court for you in this case, you may hire one at your own expense.  If you have questions about the Settlement or anything contained in this notice, you can visit the website or call the toll-free number.  15.  Will the lawyers be paid?  If so, how much? Class Counsel will file a petition for an award of attorneys' fees and costs. The Court will determine the amount of the award, but the total amount cannot exceed $400,000 less the costs of administering this Settlement, plus 1/3 of any recovery from the amount recovered from the Scottsdale Action. OBJECTING TO THE SETTLEMENT If you are a Class Member, you can tell the Court if you don't agree with the Settlement or some part of it. 16.  How do I tell the Court that I do not like the proposed Settlement? If you don't want the Court to approve the Settlement or want the Court to modify a portion of the Settlement, you must file a written objection in the case with the Eastern District of New York and send by email and physical copy to Plaintiffs' Counsel and Defense Counsel as noted below. You must include the name of the case (Sterling et al. v. Strategic Forecasting, Inc. et al.), case number (Case No. 2:12-cv-00297-DRH-ARL), your full name, address, telephone number, your signature, the specific reasons why you object to the Settlement, and whether you or your attorney will appear at the Settlement Final Approval Hearing (See the section on the "Court's Settlement Fairness Hearing" below).  The objection must be mailed and delivered to the following addresses on or before September 07, 2012: Court Filing Address HON. DENIS R. HURLEY U. S. District Court Eastern District of New York Long Island Courthouse 100 Federal Plaza Central Islip, NY 11722-4438 Plaintiffs' Counsel: Hunter J. Shkolnik Adam J. Gana Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik, LLP 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7413 New York, NY  10118 Hunter@napolibern.com agana@napolibern.com Defense's Counsel: Bill Cobb Jackson Walker L.L.P. 100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1100 Austin, Texas  78701 bcobb@jw.com You do not need to go to the Settlement Fairness Hearing to have your written objection considered by the Court. At the Settlement Fairness Hearing, any Settlement Class Member who has not previously submitted a request for exclusion from the Settlement Class may appear and be heard, to the extent allowed by the Court, to state any objection to the Settlement or Plaintiffs' Counsel's motion for reimbursement of expenses. Any such objector may appear in person or arrange, at that objector's expense, for a lawyer to represent the objector at the Hearing. 17.  What is the difference between objecting and excluding? Objecting is simply informing the Court that you don't like something about the Settlement. You can object only if you stay in the Class. Excluding yourself is informing the Court that you don't want to be part of the Class. If you exclude yourself, you have no basis to object because the case no longer affects you. If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, and object to the Settlement, you will be a member of the Class.  If you object, you will not have another opportunity to exclude yourself and you will be bound by any judgment entered by the Court. THE COURT'S SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS HEARING The Court will hold a hearing to decide whether to grant final approval of the Settlement. You may attend and you may ask to speak, but you don't have to. 18.  When and where will the Court decide whether to approve the proposed Settlement? The Court has scheduled a Settlement Final Approval Hearing at 3:00 p.m., on September 28, 2012, at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Alfonse M. D'Amato United States Courthouse, 100 Federal Plaza, Central Islip, NY 11722.  At this hearing the Court will consider whether the Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate. At the Settlement Fairness Hearing, the Court also will consider the applications of Plaintiffs' Counsel for attorneys' fees and costs. The Court will take into consideration any written objections submitted in accordance with the instructions. The Court also will listen to Class Members who appear and speak at the hearing; but decisions regarding the conduct of the hearing will be made by the Court. After the hearing, the Court will decide whether to approve the settlements. We do not know how long these decisions will take. You should be aware that the Court may change the date and time of the Settlement Fairness Hearing. Thus, if you want to come to the hearing, you should check with Plaintiffs' Counsel before coming to be sure that the date and/or time has not changed. 19.  Do I have to come to the hearing? No.  If you are a member of the Class, Class Counsel will represent you and will answer any questions that the Court may have. But, you are welcome to come at your own expense. If you send an objection, you don't have to come to Court to talk about it. As long as you filed and mailed your written objection on time, the Court will consider it, but Class Counsel will not argue your objection on your behalf.  You may also pay your own lawyer to attend, but it's not necessary. 20.  May I speak at the hearing? If you object to the Settlement, you may appear and speak at the Settlement Fairness Hearing. Persons who intend to object to the Settlement and who desire to call witnesses to testify or to introduce exhibits into evidence at the Settlement Fairness Hearing must submit a written objection as provided in the response to question 16, and must provide the identity of any witnesses they may call to testify and exhibits they intend to introduce into evidence at the Settlement Fairness Hearing. You cannot speak at the hearing if you excluded yourself from the Settlement Class. IF YOU DO NOTHING 21.  What happens if I do nothing at all? If you do nothing and are an eligible Class Member, you will receive benefits as described in Question 7. GETTING MORE INFORMATION 22.  Are there more details about the proposed Settlement? This notice summarizes the proposed Settlement. More details are in a Settlement Agreement.  You can get a copy of the Settlement Agreement at www.StratforSettlement.com. You may call the toll-free number listed below or visit the website or write to the Claims Administrator at: Stratfor Settlement Administrator c/o BMC Group P.O. Box 2002 Chanhassen, MN 55317-2002

---

If you wish to UNSUBSCRIBE from future email from the Settlement Administrator about this case, please click here.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

To all the trolls and goobers trying to--fuck, who knows what's going through their nearly empty minds? You're not accomplishing anything with the fake comments, the fake cease and desists related to my upcoming DC Madam book. Do you realize that this tends to embolden (look it up) people to push harder, to keep going to the very limits? That's what you've accomplished, at least that. Congratulations. Thanks for the STFU. I'll tag you back harder--I'll fuck you up with language--every single time. Former Pamela Martin & Associates escorts: you have no credibility.

DC Madam book update

I've been sick for the last couple of weeks, so work has slowed down. Yesterday, I got back on the horsie, and it appears that things are wrapping-up, this is about over. That's about it. Harassment has ceased with fake cease and desists, and this is a warning to the next asshole that tries that shit: I will find your site hit and publish the IP for anyone interested. I will come after you, and I will unmask who you are. After that, I will sue your ass off for legal harassment, and win. Have fun, and Adam Parfrey: kiss my ass.

An observation on Breaking Bad & Libertarianism

I'm sure that others have noticed this, but here goes anyway: in the third season of BB we're introduced to a character named Gale. He identifies himself as a Libertarian, no question about it. A brief glimpse in a couple episodes of his lab notebook show us that he's a Ron Paul supporter. Gale was a great character, a nice guy who never deserved to die. I won't go into the plot mechanics, but he gets caught in the middle.

What's fascinating is this: Gale's shot in the face with an unregistered gun. Take from that what you will, but that's a pretty direct statement on regulation that's not going in the same direction as Libertarians. Impressive.

Expect a sprawling cultural essay on Breaking Bad in the near future.

Former AUSA Allison Leotta writes a novel including elements of the DC Madam narrative

Not so very long ago, I signed up for Google news updates on Deborah Jeane Palfrey. Most of the updates have been articles simply invoking her name so that the site posting it got more hits, but nothing of any substance. Mission accomplished on both counts. This is just one more example of suited turds making a living off of air. The National Law Journal published an interview with former DC AUSA (Asst. US Attorney) Allison Leotta on June 11th. 

Leotta's a professional woman (it's unclear to me at this stage whether she's married or not) who left her secure, good paying job (benes too) of over a decade as a federal prosecutor of sex crimes and domestic violence cases in the District of Columbia to pursue a career...in literature. Hell, I'm sure I write better than her, but never would I have the temerity to refer to what I write as that. And, sure, right, we all do that in the middle of the biggest economic crises in American history, we do an abrupt career change that would wreck the average working person's life--and believe me, I know the dynamics of this, I cannot be shitted about it. But no, there were no silver spoons there whatsoever--not even her getting into Harvard, all bootstraps, a Horatio Alger wet dream fantasy--and even if it's not true, it sounds good on an author's bio and resume. Did I mention that her very first novel was with a subsidiary of Simon & Schuster? Keep in mind here that on average it takes two years simply to get the chance to speak with a genuine literary agent, so forget it mom and pop, self-publish if you ever want that pet project to see the light of day, or to ever get paid.

Somehow, I don't think Leotta's ever going to have worry about either. Fixers get that assistance, and that's a huge part of the job being a federal prosecutor in DC.

What's the point of all of this? She worked in the same offices as the DC Madam's prosecutors and considers one of them a "good friend," which says it all for me at least.  I'll get to who that friend is in a moment. OK, so former minor Inquisitor writes a first thriller for Simon & Scheister, must have sold well, or she still knows the right people, and she's got another one being made from shattered forests somewhere. I've never read her writing, but it's unlikely that a cop lover or a prosecutor is going to write something as good as a Hammett short or novel, ain't gonna happen, wrong side of the tracks. I don't see Leotta ever making the hard choices he made, ever, not really. That, after all, would require genuine conviction that doesn't come easy, no pats on the back, much of a wrong-headed society disagreeing with you--doing the right thing is rarely ever rewarded. Luckily, her bank account will never have to worry about this. Do I have to point out to the reader that she's part of a monstrous criminal justice system that's used to solve social problems mainly through punishment, the wrong way, not proactively? Maybe in her next incarnation she can drive the trains to the new death camps, maybe sell whiskey to the next unfortunates who get their land stolen from them...

So, she's writing a novel that contains some elements of the DC Madam case, because she was "following it closely," which would have been pretty easy working in the same offices with the AUSAs that were on the case, like Daniel Butler, Catherine Connelly, William Cowden, other delusional assholes, yadda-yadda, and their interim appointed boss, Jeffrey A. Taylor. Her novel drops on July 3rd, so rush out and get it before the system she protected in her job takes a crap and dies, finally, belatedly, out of all of the contradictions created by power relationships and an abundance of cowards in these here U-nited States. The novel is going to be titled Discretion, which at least makes sense when you're covering a prostitution ring. Someone's going to have to remind me about this book an hour from now, I'm already forgetting it. Yes folks, ascendant police states produce writing outside of the standard government forms, it's true, behold it yourself on July 3rd.

Leotta has created an alter-ego of a prosecutor in the character Anna Curtis...oh, never mind, here's what they said about the DC Madam in the interview that garnered a solid plug for the upcoming membrane of cellulose:

The remarks below have been edited for length and clarity.

The National Law Journal: This is your second novel, both involving a fictional federal prosecutor of sex crimes in D.C. Your first book, Law of Attraction, focused on a domestic-violence case. This novel delves more into the uniquely political world of D.C. Why did you decide to center your second book in this part of D.C.?

Allison Leotta: Part of it was I'd seen this really interesting case that happened around the time I was writing Law of Attraction. It was the D.C. Madam case — a woman in D.C. running a large-scale, high-end escort agency, and there were all these reporters speculating that her black book held names of powerful men in D.C. I was fascinated by it — by both the woman running the organization and the women who chose to work for her. They came from all different walks of life and did it for different reasons.

I was fascinated as to why they would take these risks and the effect it would have on their lives going forward. In the D.C. Madam case, she was convicted but before she was sentenced, she committed suicide. There was a lot of speculation that it wasn't suicide, but murder. That got the crime novelist side of my head thinking, "What if? How would somebody do it? Who would do it if it was really a murder?"

[The body of the accused madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, and a suicide note reportedly were found in Tarpon Springs, Fla., in 2008.]

NLJ: Did you work on the D.C. Madam case?

A.L.: Someone in the office did. She was a good friend of mine, so I was following it pretty closely. ...

That friend was Catherine Connelly, an AUSA on the case. It could be no one else. Why she didn't bother mentioning her is odd since it's in the public record and press coverage, but whatever.

Question: when is Leotta going to grab a shovel and dig Jeane up to pose for photographs? I wrote the author of the piece--Amanda Bronstad--a letter voicing my concerns, I don't expect a response, so here it is, and long to annoy the lazy reader:

 

 to: abronstad@alm.com
date: Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:39 PM

subject: Leotta interviewmailed-by: gmail.com

Dear Ms. Bronstad, you may publish this as a comment if you wish,



Wow, where to begin about Mrs., Leotta and her recent change in occupation.

My first question is, do accountants and plumbers write novels too, and wouldn't we also think it strange when they got a contract to release a novel through Simon & Schuster?

I haven't read her first novel; the new one isn't available as of yet, but this second novel raises some questions of ethics for me: like her AUSA friend, I was a part of the DC Madam case. That friend of hers, incidentally, is AUSA Catherine K. Connelly, and from what I read in the article she saw quite a bit firsthand. Is this why she resigned, to be able to use more of that in the novel? I don't know.  These former cops and prosecutors becoming "legal experts," talking heads more generally, media figures, celebrities, novelists, is nutty.  This mining social problems for writing fodder by people who prosecute and investigate the subjects verges on cannibalism at times, we can do better than this. We incarcerate more human beings than any nation on the earth, more even than the worst known human rights offenders like China, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, etc.  Law enforcement is key to this social engineering, so to take it further into the realm of entertainment seems pretty depraved to me. Certainly this true crime mill has been running since colonial times--people are fascinated by the depravity of others. But what we're seeing here with these criminal justice professionals is unacceptable and unethical, made worse by the fact that 95% of federal criminal defendants plea out because the odds are stacked so highly against them. What you have is the society of the spectacle where anything to turn a buck is OK in the US, the only thing that matters, and the forces of production (and those who use force to keep it in place) start talking about themselves in the culture, they become foregrounded. We solve so many social problems not by proactive policy, but through our crazy lock-'em-up conveyor-belt CJ system that's based around the profit motive, like our private prison complex. Crime writing by cops and prosecutors has always been suspect in the United States. Dashielle Hammett may have worked for the Pinkertons (he quit over being tapped to assassinate a communist labor organizer in Montana), but you rarely saw him empathizing with cops, prosecutors, or corrupt politicians, and he's the top of the heap with Jim Thompson in the annals of crime writing. Poe comes first in American literature, he invented the detective story. This is a populist form--where's the populism in this? I'll have to wait and find out. However, great artistic works elicit artistic truths, highlighting the meaning of something. My expectations are low here based on some comments in the interview with Leotta.

Decades ago, it was bad enough when cops and prosecutors who were on high profile cases (like, say, John Wayne Gacy, Bundy--take your pick, but you could say this all begins with Vincent Bugliosi and his prosecution of  the Manson Family) began to resign when the cases were over, signing book deals (Palfrey herself did this, another depravity), movie & media deals, etc. This was considered beyond the pale, but now, in these crazed, depraved times, it floats without much comment if any. That's appalling. What you have is a class of law enforcement and criminal justice professionals making their little cottage industries, Leotta less so, but close.  Some of us are simply lucky enough to be on the other side of the badge in bad times. Or is it luck at all? Leotta has taken it to a new place, for me at least: someone who knows someone who was close to a big sex scandal case (DC Madam, it was far more than a mere sex scandal) is writing a novel based partly upon it, a thriller. Great. So, how did you get the writing gig? Who pulled that string, and when is Connelly doing a novel? What's her next plum position? Qualcomm/Ernst & Young with Jeffrey A. Taylor? This is careerism run completely amok, my opinion, and what's really underneath the veneer of civilization.

As you can tell, my perspective is different and adversarial to government prosecutors, hence with at least a slightly better chance at balance here! I was a researcher for the defendant, the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey. The fact that Leotta is going for the "she were suicided" theory in the novel is her right, and a curious choice that I assume has commercial considerations. At least she makes it plain that Palfrey committed suicide in the interview. As a writer of fiction, she can fuse characters, change dates, all kinds of things, but what's the angle when they're not supposed to be telling us sensitive information from a case? I assume that won't be the case in the novel at all, we won't be learning new information. You can't have it several ways: you either take some information from inside the prosecution and investigation, which is profoundly illegal, or you make it all up, maybe indirectly extrapolating on some facts. She seems to be melding other cases she did with the DC Madam narrative, or some permutation of it, since it has yet to be told coherently by anyone, fine, but when you consider what went down in the case it's distasteful. Figuring in the fact that she was close to it, if not directly involved, doesn't ring well when she refers to the member of a prosecution team that broke the law as a "friend." I applaud Mrs. Leotta for debunking CSI shows when they're wrong about procedure, glad to the point of admiration that she was working sex crime and domestic abuse cases, but I doubt that she's going to add anything of any significance to our understanding of the DC Madam scandal (which was really part of Hookergate).

I find her comment that Connelly (it couldn't be anyone else) is a good friend and that she was "following it very closely" troubling because of the clear prosecutorial misconduct that occurred in the case during the proceedings (this leaves out a procedural error made at trial by AUSA Butler that staggers.  Robertson let it slide). The most egregious of all was when they leaked an unsigned warrant-affidavit to Bill Bastone, editor of The Smoking Gun, no more than five days of the search of Palfrey's home, a felony under federal law. Where's the discussion on that? There was virtually none. I want to make it plain that I consider Palfrey's death a suicide--she was not murdered. But who benefits from that kind of a conspiracy theory? It isn't just the conspiracy theory mills, it's federal law enforcement who create the impression of an ubiquitous State that could very well resort to murder of American citizens in the confines of the Continental United States, an absurd contention in the context of the charges against her, what happened during the proceedings, and the kangaroo court trial that was conducted after some very open judge shopping was done with the replacement of Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler by FISA Court Judge James Robertson. Kessler had ruled that, indeed, this case had national security issues to it, granting the defendant broad subpoena powers over essentially the entire intelligence community. Where was the National Law Journal on this one? Excuse if I'm wrong, but I could literally research the background on this into next month and have writing my own account of what I witnessed in the case, my unique vantage.  Leotta is too coy. Why yes, you can "follow" a case "closely" when you're working in the same offices, sure, a tad cagey there, which raises questions about propriety.

As to who would have a motive to murder Palfrey in a hypothetical, that would have been former clients or even CIA assets, defense contractors, intelligence contractors (like SAIC), and so on. But that's not what happened. There were two suicide notes, one to her mother, and one to her sister.

This undignified mess is of former CJ professionals [sic] becoming part of the entertainments world is all about class: not just anyone snags a contract for a novel from Simon & Schuster, these are more revolving doors that are improper in my opinion. You have to obtain a major league literary agent, and that gets into connections. How are AUSAs appointed? Often by other appointees, all of it politicized. I don't know if that's the case with Mrs. Leotta, but you have to factor these things in, because again, this is all about class. Not everybody gets to go to Harvard, for example, and so, you know where I'm going with this. Are many of the people she's writing about from the lower depths of society? Now I'm going to have to find out and get around to reading her first novel, but it sounds like it would predominate when you're dealing with domestic violence. While she wasn't on the case with Palfrey, she would be of a higher class than the madam's background as the daughter of a grocer from the dying industrial city of Charleroi, Pennsylvania was never going to make Harvard. That's about opportunity and being part of the club. We can kid ourselves and insult everyone's intelligence, or we could admit that it really is about who you know, and always has been. I could go on and on--and have--about these issues surrounding Palfrey's case, but we'll leave it at that.

Regards, Matt Janovic, writer, private researcher

And that's that.

 http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202559060068&This_prosecutor_turned_to_a_life_of_literature&slreturn=1