And, ultimately, did nothing as there are now a bunch of clone sites operating under functionally identical names.
The thing that gets me is that if prosecutors like Harris know that sites like this is used for human trafficking; where is the bragging that they helped take those people down? Just like the article states, all they did was take down the site and let the actual offenders roam free. Everyone knows how flexible and versatile the internet is. Take down one site and several take it’s place. When you brag about taking down a site and not doing anything about the reason why the offenses on the site exist, then you’re just working to score political points.
EDIT: In case it wasn’t clear in my comment I want to stress that I am commenting on why prosecutors like Harris brag about taking down these platforms without ever bragging about taking down the human traffickers using said platform. I am not criticizing her for not going after the owners. I know she went after the owners. The article talks about it. But it also talks about not doing much to actually helping the people who need help.
One of the 3 founders committed suicide before the trial completed, one was convicted, and the 3rd still has over 30 charges that haven’t been ruled on yet. None of them are ‘roaming free’.
You’re kind of missing the point of my comment. I wasn’t talking about why didn’t they go after the actual owners. I was talking about why they didn’t go after the human traffickers using the site. The article goes in depth about how it did nothing but make it worse for the people stuck in the situation where they are forced to sell their bodies.
The California Department of Justice employs 5,000 people. Do you think they have only done this one thing? Do you think they have press conferences for every individual person they prosecute? Do you understand why a whole mainstream platform facilitating criminal behavior is worth more attention than an average criminal?
Except my comment wasn’t regarded the California DoJ. It was regarding Kamala Harris. She spearheaded the initiative to take down the site. She talked about it and used it as a talking point on how tough she is on human trafficking. Except, what actions did she actually take on human trafficker’s? Why go for the platform that is easily replaceable and not the actual people perpetrating it? All she ended up doing was creating an environment that is less safe for sex workers and victims of human trafficking.
She was the Attorney General of California when the backpage founder was arrested.
let the actual offenders roam free
One of them got 5 years for fraud so not everyone got off with a warning.
Last month, after a meandering legal saga in that follow-on case, the website’s 76-year-old co-founder was sentenced to five years in prison on a federal money-laundering charge. He reported on Wednesday to begin serving his sentence, while his lawyers appeal.
That was the co-founder. Not the actual perpetrators.
Harris has talked repeatedly about her work taking down sex traffickers. Usually within the context of her work against transnational gangs.
“I went after transnational gangs, drug cartels and human traffickers that came into our country illegally. I prosecuted them in case after case,” she said at a campaign rally in Nevada
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/17/kamala-harris-immigration-border-gangs-00173819
But also within context of protecting sex workers.
In one of her first acts as an elected official, Harris sponsored a bill signed into law by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that increased penalties for adults who solicited sex from minors and was considered revolutionary for its push to transform children from criminals into victims.
My comment was more of a criticism on how she approached this specific case where she took down a platform known for cooperating with authorities and forced people in desperate situations to be in even more desperate situations.
That being said, I didn’t know about the examples you provided so thanks for sharing.
