Thursday, October 29, 2009

Domestic Trafficking Part II: How Nicky Became a Criminal

Read Part I Here

Nicky never told anyone about Frank’s molestation, not even to her lawyer. Just as many victims of sexual abuse in the United States, she felt nothing but the shame and guilt about Frank’s molestation. She hence never wanted to talk to anyone about how much it bothered her to have Frank coming into her room every night for the past 10 years. Since she had poor academic performance, none of her teachers really paid attention to her behavior changes, either.

Her mom’s negligence out of her drug abuse only drove Nicky to isolation. In Nicky’s mind, if her own mother would not care to listen to her story, no one else would. Nicky felt lonely, depressed, and isolated. Therefore, when some people showed affection or were interested in her, Nicky became emotionally dependent on them. Her emotional dependency becomes worse when a guy shows attention to her. Nicky always let her boyfriend walk all over her. When she was in 7th grader, she once stole her friend’s wallet because her 17 year-old boyfriend asked her to do so to buy a pack of cigarettes.

Likewise, Nicky was more afraid of Leo’s rejection than sleeping with Leo’s client who would only remind her of the nights of the molestation by Frank.[1]

Her fear of Leo’s rejection was also the reason why Nicky refused to testify against Leo before the court. The night when Nicky walked into the motel room to meet Leo’s client, Leo told Nicky that if anything went wrong, Leo would come find her no matter where she would be. Leo also told Nicky that unlike her parents or Frank, he would be the only one who would stand right next to her.

Meanwhile, Nicky’s lawyer felt like her hands were tied. Unlike the Federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), the Florida human trafficking statute does not include clarification that “fraud, force, or coercion by the trafficker is not required elements of the crime when the victim of trafficking is under 18 years of age.”[2] Therefore, without proving Leo’s involvement, Nicky would be treated as a prostitute rather than sex trafficking victim.

Nicky’s fear of losing Leo’s affection was not helping Nicky’s lawyer’s case either. When the prosecutor aggressively accused Nicky of committing prostitution, Nicky’s lawyer had no ground to prove that she is a victim of sex trafficking. Nicky refused to testify against Leo or even showed willingness to drop a hint that she was lured into prostitution as she did not, by any means, want to endanger her relationship with Leo or lose his affection towards her.

Nicky was holding onto Leo’s only promises: that he would never leave her even if she would be locked up in a juvenile detention center and that he would never treat her like anyone else has. He even promised Nicky that he would come visit her.

Today, just like many other victims of domestic minor sex trafficking, Nicky is locked up in a juvenile detention center in Florida. Just like yesterday, she is waiting for Leo to visit her with his warm affection.

[1] “a dependent pattern of behavior is more pervasive than regressed behavior. A child who exhibits this dependent pattern of behavior often allows other people to make important decisions, such as whether or not the child is hungry or needs help. Dependent children who fear rejection may agree with people even when the child knows that these people are wrong. The child may volunteer to do things that are unpleasant or demeaning in order to get other people to like him/her. A dependent child is vulnerable to exploitation and revictimization because he/she has a tendency to attach to anyone who he/she feels attends to their physical or emotional needs. This pattern of behavior can create major long-term developmental and relationship problems.”


1 comment:

  1. Anonymous1:17 PM

    The charity 'Raising Malawi' (PR firm) founded by Madonna AND TWO OTHERS over three years ago held fund raisers for over two years before finally getting registered as a non-profit. In other words, Madonna and the others were free to squander the lion's share of that funding any way they saw fit for those first two years. She also pleaded with her fans worldwide for donations along the way. In the meantime, she toured the world to promote her latest CD and raked in another $280,000,000 gross in just over 12 months. To date, the basic financial info for 'Rasing Malawi' still hasn't been posted on the website or anywhere else. The 'progress' page only tells of the collective works by over 20 seperate charities. Each of which have their own sources of funding and may have recieved some sort of promotion or support from 'Raising Malawi' in order to be considered 'partners'. But no indication is made how much of their funding came from 'Raising Malawi' or how much of their progress if any could be directly attributed to 'Raising Malawi'. The fans/donors have no clue how many millions of dollars were raised in that first two years, no clue how much Madonna herself chipped in, and no clue how the money was spent before they finally registered as a non-profit. No clue what tiny little fraction of funding or works listed on that 'progress' page could be directly attributed to 'Raising Malawi'. Nothing to go on but the vague word of Madonna. The vague and very misleading word of Madonna. For example: She states in her latest promotional video that she will match any contributions made to her charity (PR firm) "dollar for dollar". However there is a disclaimer posted on the website for 'Raising Malawi' that Madonna's total contribution will not exceed $100,000. Thats not per donation. Thats a maximum of $100,000 TOTAL. Less than a single days pay for Madonna. Also much less then she will surely rake in by promoting her own CDs, DVDs, and 'for profit' merchandise through this massive worldwide publicity stunt. So I called the office of 'Raising Malawi' in an attempt to verify some sort of efficient financial operation (310) 867-2881 or (888) 72-DONOR). These details are ALWAYS made available by legitimate charities to their potential donors. But not in this case. I got nothing but recorded messages and hangups. So I did some research on my own. 'Rasing Malawi' still hasn't been given any kind of rating by ANY independent charity watchdog like The vast overwhelming majority of 'celebrity' foundations never are. In general, they are inneficient and riddled with corruption. Like the promotion of CDs, world tours, commercial websites, entire lines of jewelry (not just the single piece from which proceeds are donated), and high end fashion retail flagship stores. Celebrity foundations are also notorious for squandering much of their funding on travel and super high end accomodations for their celebrity figure heads. Its legal even for a nonprofit but not noble or efficient by any stretch of the imagination. In general, 'celebrity' foundations are a twisted inefficient mutant of charity, self-promotion, and PR crap. They actually compete for funding with more efficient legitimate charities who do more work with less money. Its a sham. So if its not rated, then don't support it. Instead, support a top rated charity like any of those given high ratings at