Human Trafficking in scientology

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
Post Reply
User avatar
spacecootie
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am
Location: Thunderdome

Post by spacecootie » Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:20 am

Sea Horse wrote:
spacecootie wrote:Uhhh... did you miss my posts listing the California Penal Code sections that make it a felony,including the brand-new Penal Code §236.2 , effective January 1, 2009, which requires law enforcement to "use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking, regardless of citizenship," on the prior page?
Law enforcement is NOT required to act on allegations, only on the discovery of a potential victim.

What spacecootie quoted a page back is FUTURE Calif Penal Code (not current):

* * *

Note: This is FUTURE code and cannot be found in the current code.

Yes, considering the fact that I noted it is effective on January 1, 2009, and I first posted about it on December 14, 2008, it's pretty apparent that it is a FUTURE code section. However, that FUTURE was just over two weeks away when I first mentioned it, and is now almost upon us.
If you read the whole thing, it does not say that law enforcement is required to investigate all ALLEGATIONS of human trafficking. It describes when a peace officer "comes into contact with a person who has been deprived of his or her personal liberty" he must use due diligence to determine if it is human trafficking ("regardless of the citizenship of the person"). In other words, first he has to have a potential victim, not someone asserting that victims occur.
I disagree. The first paragraph of new Penal Code §236.2, effective January 1, 2009 (which, for the calendar-challenged, has not yet occurred in any Teegeeack time zone, and certainly not in California) states:
Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking, regardless of the citizenship of the person.
That sentence stands on its own. If they receive credible information that human trafficking occurring, the cops must act as a reasonable person would to identify the victims, if any.

The second sentence states certain criteria the cops must consider if they encounter people who have been deprived of their liberty, are victims of domestic violence or rape, or suspected of committing the crimes of public indecency or soliciting prostitution. That part of the statute is designed to force the cops to consider whether people who are victims of other crimes might also be victims of human trafficking.... and that a nude dancer or hooker might also be a victim of human trafficking.

The point of the latter part of the statute is to alert police to situations where they otherwise might not realize they may have stumbled on a case of human trafficking; however, listing those specific guidelines would not excuse them from the obligation to "use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking," not just those who happen to have an encounter with the cops under certain specified circumstances.

User avatar
NineLives
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:37 pm

Post by NineLives » Sat Dec 20, 2008 2:50 pm

spacecootie wrote: If you read the whole thing, it does not say that law enforcement is required to investigate all ALLEGATIONS of human trafficking. It describes when a peace officer "comes into contact with a person who has been deprived of his or her personal liberty" he must use due diligence to determine if it is human trafficking ("regardless of the citizenship of the person"). In other words, first he has to have a potential victim, not someone asserting that victims occur.
If Human Trafficking were being investigated in the way Sea Horse suggests, we would have a major witch hunt on our hands. Thankfully, for all its flaws, our government hasn't descended to this level and there does have to have good cause and credible reports, rather than hysterical exaggerations from people who clearly have bias and an agenda. This is how much of the world outside of a small circle of critics and ex-members sees ex-cult members, unfortunately, and it is because of these sorts of unsubstantiated allegations. I can see, though, that it is futile to try to convince her or some of the others here otherwise because they are just too close to this situation to see it the way an objective outsider would.

Monica

User avatar
NineLives
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:37 pm

Post by NineLives » Sat Dec 20, 2008 2:58 pm

Sea Horse wrote:The recruited are not told...
NineLives wrote:From the website you linked to:
Traffickers primarily target women and girls, who are disproportionately affected by poverty, the lack of access to education, chronic unemployment, discrimination, and the lack of economic opportunities in countries of origin. Traffickers lure women and girls into their networks through false promises of decent working conditions at relatively good pay as nannies, maids, dancers, factory workers, restaurant workers, sales clerks, or models. Traffickers also buy children from poor families and sell them into prostitution or into various types of forced or bonded labor.
Sorry, but this just doesn't fit the profile of the vast majority of people recruited into Scientology and/or the SO. Although there could be a few isolated exceptions, that population is obviously not the target of Scientology recruiters.
You do NOT know what Scientology recruiters are telling their foreign recruit-prospects to get them recruited. You do not know what is going through the minds of the recruited. You do not know the conditions in the foreign country.

I have enquired with (non-scientology) people in the USA who seem to be in horrific conditions making little to no money. I have heard from them about how it's worse in their home country.

Sea Org pay of $50 per week is TWICE THE SALARY that some people make in some countries. I know of an actual case where this is true, and I know the person IN the other country. They are not in the USA. And they are not uneducated. They work a white collar job. Such are the economic conditions in that country and the differences in currency exchange between USA and their country.

It is not so far-fetched to imagine that some people would join the Sea Org in order to get that oh-so-hard-to-get visa and be able to work legally in the USA and send money back home (or save their earnings and return home later).

What's a billion year contract when you're told that "We have it so we can call ourselves a religious order and get you a religious visa. But you can leave at any time." ?

What the recruited are not told is that the long work hours and low pay are not legal in the USA, that it amounts to slave wages.

The recruited are not told that as soon as they arrive, they will become indebted to the Sea Org with their first "no charge invoice" on their Welcome to the Sea Org Course.

The recruited are not told (in advance) that they will have to give up their passports "to keep them safe" or that such practice of holding passports is illegal in many places of the USA.

The recruited are not told that they will not be given sufficient English instruction and tutoring to make it possible to train for a better post or even to complete Staff Status II requirements and that they will remain on 1/2 pay forever ($25/week).

The recruited are not told that there will be times that they will receive no pay at all. (Like when CC Int decided they had to mail out a glossy mag and not one of the 200+ staff received any pay for over a month.)

The recruited are not told that they will likely be given a lowly manual labor post and that without training (which they cannot effectively get) they will never be able to do anything else in the organization.

The recruited are not told that they will be separated by thousands of miles from their also-recruited spouse.

The recruited are not told that they will be placed on gulag work programs (RPF) if they ever say they want to leave the Sea Org.

The recruited are not told that they will be dumped on the streets (and not transported back to their country) if they persist in their decision to leave the Sea Org, or if they are kicked out for any reason.

I'll stop here. That's enough "The recruited are not told..." lines.
This may be, regarding foreign recruits, but you seem to be reversing the burden of proof. The burden of proof is not on people to prove it is not happening. The burden of proof is on people who claim it is happening. There has to be actual evidence, rather than second-hand assertions, which would be thrown out as heresay. I'm open to evidence but all the evidence on Scientology and the SO I have seen is that they do not target the kinds of vulnerable people written about on the HT website. The obvious fact that the cost of living is lower in some countries than the US has nothing to do with it -- they're talking about people who are destitute, even by their own country's standards. The anons say Dox or STFU, but the government is even more demanding when it comes to the requirement of evidence and good cause for an investigation. So unless the purpose is just to preach to the converted, I'd suggest finding a way to get some evidence to support your assertions.

Monica

User avatar
NineLives
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:37 pm

Post by NineLives » Sat Dec 20, 2008 3:05 pm

Sea Horse wrote:I paid a hefty freeloader debt. I know others who have as well. I know some who worked for years, flowing money to pay off their freeloader debt to get back in good standing and do services. I know someone who was saddled with a freeloader debt around $150,000 after 20-30 years in the Sea Org. He is still working to pay it off.

Get it? They are WORKING TO PAY IT OFF.

These people are NOT figuring it out and walking away.
Instead of paying off the hefty freeloader debt, you could have checked with a lawyer and found out it wasn't binding. No one was preventing you from doing that. Come on now. Most people know that the freeloader debt is not legally binding. They work to pay it off because they don't want to be banned from Scientology. That kind of "mind control" has nothing to do with HT. The vast majority do figure it out and walk away and those who stay and pay it off do so because on some level they are making a choice to stay in Scientology, a choice that the US Constitution protects. This is how our government sees it and the governments of most free countries see it.

Monica

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:18 pm

spacecootie wrote:
Sea Horse wrote:What spacecootie quoted a page back is FUTURE Calif Penal Code (not current):
* * *
Note: This is FUTURE code and cannot be found in the current code.
Yes, considering the fact that I noted it is effective on January 1, 2009, and I first posted about it on December 14, 2008, it's pretty apparent that it is a FUTURE code section. However, that FUTURE was just over two weeks away when I first mentioned it, and is now almost upon us.
The reason for adding the date disclaimer wasn't to crapola all over you. But simply to indicate that here was a copy of the new code and would not be found online at the usual link for California Penal Code, which is at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html. I'm not sure you ever provided a link to the new code, and I didn't feel like looking for it. So I merely used what you quoted.
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:29 pm

spacecootie wrote:That sentence stands on its own. If they receive credible information that human trafficking occurring, the cops must act as a reasonable person would to identify the victims, if any.
I disagree, but it is certainly open to interpretation by many different viewpoints.

You cannot simply take a single line from California Code and take it out of its context and try to apply it broadly in all situations. It wasn't written broadly for all situations. It was written by a human. It's new. It hasn't been tested, found deficient, then edited to more closely match what the drafters wanted it to mean.

Here is how you quoted it:
spacecootie wrote:Penal Code §236.2, new on Jan 1 2009
Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking, regardless of the citizenship of the person. When a peace officer comes into contact with a person who has been deprived of his or her personal liberty, a person suspected of violating subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 647, or a victim of a crime of domestic violence or rape, the peace officer shall consider whether the following indicators of human trafficking are present:
(snip of criteria)
I think the more important point of the first sentence is "regardless of the citizenship of the person". Many Human Trafficked victims are not in legal status with regards the Immigration Service. If such a victim is found, many would ordinarily be deported. The police departments, if they want to convict the perpetrator, must keep these "out of status" or "undocumented aliens" (aka "illegal aliens") for a long time (even years) until the case comes to trial. They must work with the Immigration Services (USCIS & ICE) to enable them to keep these victims (witnesses) here to effect a prosecution.

It's possible that the drafters of the new piece of Calif Penal Code wanted to ensure that law enforcement would not discount a victim (discriminate) based on their potentially illegal immigration status.

You might want to find the reports which lead to the change in the Penal Code. That will describe what they were trying to fix in the code (what the earlier problems or code deficiencies were) and what solutions they wanted with the new language.

Posting a link here would be most helpful.
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:16 pm

Found some cool references.

Executive Summary: Human Trafficking in California
http://safestate.org/documents/HT_Final_Report_ADA.pdf

Some good excerpts:
In September 2005, California enacted its first anti-trafficking law (Assembly Bill 22, Lieber) to make human trafficking a felony in this state and assist victims in rebuilding their lives.
...
Between March 2006 and July 2007, the Task Force held nine meetings to explore these issues.
...
Based on the result of these efforts, the Task Force prepared this report, Human Trafficking in California.
...
The perception that most human trafficking is sex trafficking must be dispelled, and other forms of forced labor recognized.
...
A complete list of the Task Force’s findings and recommendations follow. The full report includes background information and a discussion of each of these points.
The 2005 law mentioned can be read here: http://safestate.org/documents/ab_22_bi ... ptered.pdf

Interesting findings in the report:
Protecting and Assisting Victims of Human Trafficking
FINDING 1: Many members of law enforcement, health and social services providers, labor agencies and other first responders may fail to recognize the signs of human trafficking, and thus miss precious opportunities to help victims escape to freedom.

Investigating and Prosecuting Human Traffickers
FINDING 1: California’s human trafficking law needs to be strengthened to make it a more powerful tool to prosecute traffickers.

Preventing Human Trafficking in California
FINDING 2: Lack of awareness about human trafficking and societal attitudes that perpetuate this problem result in lost opportunities to help victims escape from their traffickers.
-----------------
From the Introduction wrote:Nearly 150 years ago, the United States abolished slavery. However, slavery does still exist. Most Californians would find it hard to believe that today’s version of slavery, human trafficking, may be occurring in their own communities. This new form of subjugation, concealed behind layers of deception, deprives people of their freedom and violates our nation’s promise that every person in the United States is guaranteed basic human rights.

Today’s slavery is different from the days of old, when people were publicly bought and sold for forced labor. Human trafficking means controlling a person through force, fraud or coercion – physical or psychological – to exploit the person for forced labor, sexual exploitation, or both.

Human trafficking is a term behind which a desperate reality exists. Garment workers crammed in crowded rooms with little ventilation and hidden behind covered windows and barbed wire fences, girls held against their will and forced into prostitution, domestic servants compelled to do around-the-clock household chores, welders held in slave-like conditions in rooms with no gas or electricity – all without freedom to leave. Most of these victims are hidden from view.

This report examines the scope of human trafficking in California, reviews the state’s response thus far to combat trafficking, identifies challenges in protecting victims and punishing traffickers and offers recommendations to strengthen California’s strategy against this violation of human freedom. The report was prepared by the California Alliance To Combat Trafficking and Slavery (CA ACTS) Task Force pursuant to the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act (CTVPA) (Assembly Bill 22, Lieber, 2005).
----------------
Traffickers lure victims into the United States with deceptive promises of good jobs and better lives, and then force them to work under brutal and inhuman conditions, and deprive them of their freedom. Victims of human trafficking may be involved in agricultural labor, construction labor, hotel and motel cleaning services, illegal transporters, organized theft rings, pornography, prostitution, restaurant services, domestic services, servile marriage (mail-order brides) and sweatshops. Once in this country, many suffer extreme physical and mental abuse, including rape, sexual exploitation, torture, beatings, starvation, death threats and threats to family members.*

* U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. No date. Trafficking in Persons: A Guide for Non-Government Organizations. Available online at
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/wetf/trafficbrochure.html.

-----------------
Definition of Human Trafficking

There are multiple definitions of human trafficking (see Appendix A). Federal law defines trafficking in persons as “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery”; or “sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age.”

Human trafficking is often divided into two types – forced labor and sexual exploitation, or coercing a person to perform sexual services for the trafficker’s profit or pleasure. The terms “forced labor” and “trafficking” are often used interchangeably, but are somewhat different actions. Forced labor, according to the International Labor Organization, is “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the person has not offered himself voluntarily.” People who are trafficked have been coerced into leaving their homes or deceived about the nature and conditions of their employment.

Forced labor can involve “peonage,” or holding people against their will to pay off a debt. It can also involve “debt bondage” – when the captor claims that the trafficked person owes more than the original price agreed on for services to bring the victim into the country, with the victim then pressured to pay off the debt. “Involuntary servitude” occurs when people believe that an attempted escape from their situation would result in serious physical harm to them or others – a belief often caused by physical and verbal abuse and threats.

There is also a difference between smuggling and human trafficking. A person who is smuggled into the United States is free to leave upon payment of the fee for the smuggling service. A trafficking victim is not free to leave once he or she is smuggled across the border, and becomes enslaved. However, smuggling can become trafficking once a person is compelled to provide labor or services.

It is important to note that the crime of human trafficking does not require that victims cross national or state borders. Many victims are trafficked within the borders of a country, and are themselves legal residents of that country. Although the majority of human trafficking victims in the United States are foreign nationals, there are many U.S. citizen victims who are trapped in forced labor and involuntary servitude.
-----------------
page 40 of 130 wrote:Scope of Trafficking in California: As mentioned in “California’s Response to Human Trafficking,” the Human Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley conducted a study of human trafficking, using the same methods and time period of the national study mentioned above. Over 80 percent of the documented cases took place in urban areas: Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco and San Jose, and the majority of victims were non-citizens, with or without valid travel documents.

The authors of the report acknowledge that the relatively small number of cases of forced labor represents only media publicized incidents; they suspect the actual number is considerably higher. The largest number of foreign victims came from Thailand (136), followed by Mexico (104) and Russia (53). Thirty victims were American citizens. Prostitution represented the most common economic sector (47 percent), followed by domestic servitude (33 percent), sweatshops (5 percent), and agriculture (2 percent), for a total of 40 percent of the cases being labor rather than sex trafficking.

The national and California studies give us a glimpse into the problem, and suggest the extent of human trafficking, but accurate estimates cannot be drawn from research that relies on media as one of its major sources because they are not scientific and the results are likely to be skewed. Moreover, media sources can easily be inaccurate. For example, if a particular case is described as smuggling instead of trafficking, or is not specifically described as a forced labor case, such a case may not have appeared in the report’s data set. Forced prostitution is also likely to be over-represented because of the extensive media and public interest in such cases. Finally, law enforcement agencies are more active in cases involving forced prostitution and other sex crimes while cases involving other forms of forced labor are often investigated by labor agencies.
-----------------
page 49 of 130 wrote:Victims of human trafficking live in brutal, desperate circumstances behind a wall of secrecy and deception – unable, because of physical or psychological trauma, to escape. traffickers instill trauma through a sense of terror and helplessness and by destroying the victim’s sense of self. They threaten death and serious harm against victims and their families. They isolate their victims from sources of information and emotional support. Consequently, some victims experience symptoms of long-term psychological damage and chronic illness. Some attempt suicide.
Last edited by Sea Horse on Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:30 pm

Ah, here's the part about why CA Penal Code 236.2 included the words "regardless of the citizenship of the person" and why that is a key part of the sentence and intimately connected with the prior phrase "Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking" -- and why the two phrases cannot be separated and only the first phrase used (as per spacecootie's assertions).
page 54 of 130 wrote:It was also brought to the Task Force’s attention that, in addition to the many hurdles trafficking victims must overcome in coming forward to report their condition, they also can face problems in the workplace. During federal law enforcement or labor department “sweeps,” they are often not identified as victims. While many federal sweeps result in providing assistance to victims, others can lead to deportation or punishment. Many victims become scapegoats, while employers receive minor rebukes. Sex workers suffer even worse sanctions because they are often designated as criminals (prostitutes), which make it more difficult for them to re-enter the country once they are deported.
page 56 of 130 wrote:Recommendations: 2. The California Labor and Workforce Development Agency should train their field investigators to look for the signs of human trafficking with a caution that in “enforcement sweeps,” victims of human trafficking should be identified and helped. Investigators should report such findings to their superiors for further investigation and service referral rather than potential deportation. The Agency should also monitor businesses and industries it oversees to assure that forced labor abuses are not occurring.
page 77 of 130 wrote:FINDING 2: The lack of trained law enforcement officers, district attorneys and judges impedes opportunities to arrest, prosecute and sentence traffickers under California’s law.
Discussion: As mentioned previously, human trafficking is a new crime, defined by the federal government in 2000 and added as a new California felony in 2006. Increased identification of human trafficking victims will occur when law enforcement officers are trained to look “beneath the surface” of a child abuse, domestic violence, prostitution or labor violation case to determine if it is trafficking. In turn, prosecutors and judges will benefit from training on the complexities of these cases as traffickers begin to appear in courtrooms across the state.
Source http://safestate.org/documents/HT_Final_Report_ADA.pdf

In other words, the reason for including the entire sentence ("Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking, regardless of the citizenship of the person.") is to encourage -- nay, require -- law enforcement personnel to determine if HT was occuring when they were originally investigating into or raiding for "something else".
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Sat Dec 20, 2008 9:33 pm

Federal, CA and ILO definitions of human trafficking are:

Federal: Federal law defines trafficking in persons as “sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age”; or “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.”

California: California law defines human trafficking as “all acts involved in the recruitment, abduction, transport, harboring, transfer, sale or receipt of persons, within national or across international borders, through force, coercion, fraud or deception, to place persons in situations of slavery or slavery like conditions, forced labor or services, such as forced prostitution or sexual services, domestic servitude, bonded sweatshop labor, or other debt bondage.”

International Labor Organization: The ILO, an agency of the United Nations, defines human trafficking as “the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.” - SOURCE: Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (article 3 (a)).

Source: page 98 of 130 of http://safestate.org/documents/HT_Final_Report_ADA.pdf
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
spacecootie
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am
Location: Thunderdome

Post by spacecootie » Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:34 pm

Sea Horse wrote:You cannot simply take a single line from California Code and take it out of its context and try to apply it broadly in all situations. It wasn't written broadly for all situations. It was written by a human. It's new. It hasn't been tested, found deficient, then edited to more closely match what the drafters wanted it to mean.

<snip>

I think the more important point of the first sentence is "regardless of the citizenship of the person". Many Human Trafficked victims are not in legal status with regards the Immigration Service. If such a victim is found, many would ordinarily be deported. The police departments, if they want to convict the perpetrator, must keep these "out of status" or "undocumented aliens" (aka "illegal aliens") for a long time (even years) until the case comes to trial. They must work with the Immigration Services (USCIS & ICE) to enable them to keep these victims (witnesses) here to effect a prosecution.

It's possible that the drafters of the new piece of Calif Penal Code wanted to ensure that law enforcement would not discount a victim (discriminate) based on their potentially illegal immigration status.

You might want to find the reports which lead to the change in the Penal Code. That will describe what they were trying to fix in the code (what the earlier problems or code deficiencies were) and what solutions they wanted with the new language.

Posting a link here would be most helpful.
So authorities are required to expend less effort to find victims of human trafficking who happen to be US nationals? That would ignore the volumes of analysis of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

By "the reports which lead to the change in the Penal Code," do you mean the legislative history? It is included in the link I posted in my initial mention of the new statute.
spacecootie wrote:I just learned today that California has new laws relating to human trafficking, which go into effect January 1, 2009.

For the full text of the primary bill, go to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html and search for Assembly Bill 2810.
(Note: you will need to search the prior legislative session, not 2009-2010.)
Sea Horse wrote:Ah, here's the part about why CA Penal Code 236.2 included the words "regardless of the citizenship of the person" and why that is a key part of the sentence and intimately connected with the prior phrase "Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking" -- and why the two phrases cannot be separated and only the first phrase used (as per spacecootie's assertions).
Sea Horse wrote:In other words, the reason for including the entire sentence ("Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking, regardless of the citizenship of the person.") is to encourage -- nay, require -- law enforcement personnel to determine if HT was occuring when they were originally investigating into or raiding for "something else".

It is a basic maxim of statutory construction that a former clause controls over the latter; the broader command to use due diligence to identify victims of human trafficking takes precedence, so the statute is not limited to the narrower requirement of using certain criteria to identify victims in certain circumstances.

The stuff you quoted is not part of the legislative history of this particular statute, so not relevant (as is so much of your copypasta). The Legislative Analyst's report on the final draft of AB 2810, as passed by both chambers of the state legislature, signed by the governor, and chaptered, states:
Legislative Analysis of AB2801 wrote:COMMENTS: According to the author, "Trafficking into the United States is an acknowledged problem, but often ignored is the fact that trafficking of American citizens also occurs domestically within U.S. borders. Law enforcement personnel, social workers, and legal personnel must be trained to understand that American Citizens as well as non-citizens are trafficked within the United States."
Viewed in light of the comments that are part of the history of this particular legislation, it becomes apparent that the "regardless of citizenship" language is there to express legislative intent that US Citizens are not ignored as victims of human trafficking.

The due diligence requirement to "identify victims of human trafficking" speaks for itself. The following clauses, requiring law enforcement to consider specific criteria when contacting people who have been confined, or arrested for specific sex crimes, are subordinate to the due diligence requirement.

However, it is really unnecessary go get into the legislative history. "If there is no ambiguity in the language of the statute, 'then the Legislature is presumed to have meant what it said, and the plain meaning of the language governs.' [Citation.] 'Where the statute is clear, courts will not "interpret away clear language in favor of an ambiguity that does not exist." [Citation.]' " Lennane v. Franchise Tax Board (1994) 9 Cal. 4th 263, 268

1. The command to law enforcement to "use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking" (emphasis mine) is unambiguous.

2. The phrase "regardless of the citizenship of the person" means just what it says: that due diligence must be used to identify all victims, without considering, one way of the other, whether or not they are US citizens.

3. The remaining mandates that law enforcement consider certain criteria when encountering people under certain circumstances do not limit the requirement to "use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking."

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:44 pm

The more you attempt to make me wrong, the more I research and learn, and the more it proves your viewpoint/interpretation wrong. I hope you take this in the spirit of debate, and not as a personal assault -- because I could care less who you are or your motives. But I won't let you dirty up the thread and debate subject of Human Trafficking in Scientology without challenge or correction where I feel it is important. (I say "where important!"; unlike some people here, who like to nitpick on things that don't really matter to the subject.)

Though I find it a "nice idea" that law enforcement would be required to follow up on every single report of allegation of Human Trafficking, that ain't gonna happen, and that's not what the code says.
spacecootie wrote:It is a basic maxim of statutory construction that a former clause controls over the latter
This is incorrect. Here are the real rules:
"A fundamental rule of statutory construction requires that every part of a statute be presumed to have some effect, and not be treated as meaningless unless absolutely necessary." Raven Coal Corp. v. Absher, 153 Va. 332, 149 S.E. 541 (1929).

It is presumed that a statute will be interpreted so as to be internally consistent. A particular section of the statute shall not be divorced from the rest of the act.

Last in Time (Leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant): When two statutes conflict, the one enacted last prevails.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation
The general rule of statutory construction is that when there is an irreconcilable conflict between two statutes, later-enacted legislation, as the most recent expression of legislative will, controls over earlier-enacted provisions.

Source: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/D ... eID=445716
What we don't have here are:
a) ambiguousness
b) two irreconcilable statutes

What we do have here is:
a) clarity
b) a phrase in a sentence which modifes the prior phrase.

Without the ability to add a modifying phrase after a prior phrase, you would never be able to "clarify" a statement, or "exclude" things which are meant to be excluded. To use your logic, a sentence in the code could never then use the word "except" if it follows a comma.
spacecootie wrote:The phrase "regardless of the citizenship of the person" means just what it says: that due diligence must be used to identify all victims, without considering, one way of the other, whether or not they are US citizens.
I agree with you on this point. Specifically, that law enforcement must not discount that a US Citizen might be a victim of HT, and that they cannot assume that only "imported foreigners" could be victims.

Thanks for the link to the "history" of the bill and changes in the code. Here's the full link of the final version of Assembly Bill No. 2810 (passed on 08/28/2008 by 76 "Ayes" and 0 "Noes"):
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bil ... ptered.pdf

The original section 236.2 is renumbered to 236.5:
page 34 of 38 wrote:SEC. 3. Section 236.2 of the Penal Code is amended and renumbered to read:
236.5. (a) Within 15 business days of the first encounter with a victim of human trafficking, as defined by ...
A new section 236.2 is added:
Page 35 of 38 wrote: SEC. 4. Section 236.2 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
236.2. Law enforcement agencies shall use due diligence to identify all victims of human trafficking, regardless of the citizenship of the person. When a peace officer comes into contact with a person who has been deprived of his or her personal liberty, a person suspected of violating subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 647, or a victim of a crime of domestic violence or rape, the peace officer shall consider whether the following indicators of human trafficking are present:
(a) Signs of trauma, fatigue, injury, or other evidence of poor care.
(b) The person is withdrawn, afraid to talk, or his or her communication is censored by another person.
(c) The person does not have freedom of movement.
(d) The person lives and works in one place.
(e) The person owes a debt to his or her employer.
(f) Security measures are used to control who has contact with the person.
(g) The person does not have control over his or her own
government-issued identification or over his or her worker immigration
documents.
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
spacecootie
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am
Location: Thunderdome

Post by spacecootie » Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:21 am

Sea Horse wrote:The more you attempt to make me wrong,
Oops! Scilon-ism is fair warning that I can't tell you much without clay demos.

While Wikipedia and websites can provide a good starting point, a one-sentence definition cannot possibly address such a broad legal topic.

(I also note that you ignored the equal protection issue.)

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:47 am

spacecootie wrote:(I also note that you ignored the equal protection issue.)
Didn't ignore it, just never heard of it and so it was passed by in your writing. I did a quick lookup (it's late) on that subject. I don't see what point you wanted to make with it unless it was the part about affording the same protections to US CITIZENS as to foreign nationals when determining or investigating if HT had occurred. THAT, I did address.

To wit:
previous in the thread wrote:
spacecootie wrote:So authorities are required to expend less effort to find victims of human trafficking who happen to be US nationals? That would ignore the volumes of analysis of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
spacecootie wrote:The phrase "regardless of the citizenship of the person" means just what it says: that due diligence must be used to identify all victims, without considering, one way of the other, whether or not they are US citizens.
Sea Horse wrote:I agree with you on this point. Specifically, that law enforcement must not discount that a US Citizen might be a victim of HT, and that they cannot assume that only "imported foreigners" could be victims.
If you meant more than the previously addressed subtopic, you'll have to be more specific about what the 14th Amemdment and "equal protection issue" has to do with whatever in this thread. I'm open to hearing what you have to say on it.
spacecootie wrote:
Sea Horse wrote:The more you attempt to make me wrong,
Oops! Scilon-ism is fair warning that I can't tell you much without clay demos.
As for the phrase "make wrong", it's not a Scientology term. Even though it's used frequently and abusively within the realm of Scientology, it is not exclusively used there. Your "dig" at me on "make wrong" is less of interest than what you would have to say about "14th amendment equal protection issue" or about Human Trafficking in Scientology.
spacecootie wrote:While Wikipedia and websites can provide a good starting point, a one-sentence definition cannot possibly address such a broad legal topic.
As for the use of wikipedia definitions (I suppose on the subject of statutory construction), I had done quite a bit of reading around the internet on legal websites and other places before settling on the wikipedia summaries as well-written and concise, which summarized what I found elsewhere, and were very useable for quotes.

I notice that you don't counter what I wrote to refute your interpretation of "statute construction". Is it because I was right?
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:34 am

More definitions. Good finds.
“Trafficking in persons” shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of a threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.

Article 3 (a) of the Trafficking in Persons Protocol

Source: http://www.unodc.org/documents/human-tr ... ol_1-1.pdf
United Nations, Office on Drugs and Crime, Checklist: Criminalization of Trafficking under the Protocol.

Image
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

User avatar
Sea Horse
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: Clearwater Florida USA

Post by Sea Horse » Fri Dec 26, 2008 4:03 am

I found a motherload!

United Nations Online Edition - Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons.

Link: http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-tra ... index.html

Goes through all the legal arguments and interpretations. All those various things we've been discussing here, including CONSENT OF THE VICTIM, is broken apart and delineated in language an idiot could understand. No legalese training required.

Here are some good bits:

Tool 3.3, Page 2 of http://www.unodc.org/documents/human-tr ... ol_3-3.pdf
shows "Offences committed at various stages of the trafficking in persons process, and other related crimes".
It includes (surprise surprise!) FORCED ABORTION.

Tool 1.3 (http://www.unodc.org/documents/human-tr ... ol_1-3.pdf) covers the issue of CONSENT, such as when consent is nullified due to actions of the trafficker. The page includes:
Trafficking occurs if consent is nullified or vitiated by the application of any improper means by the trafficker. In other words, consent of the victim at one stage of the process cannot be taken as consent at all stages of the process—and without consent at every stage of the process, trafficking has taken place.
Tool 3.4 Liability of legal persons (http://www.unodc.org/documents/human-tr ... ol_3-4.pdf) contains:
Trafficking offences and associated serious crimes are often committed through or under the cover of legal entities, such as companies or fake charitable organizations. Complex criminal structures can often hide the true ownership, clients or particular transactions related to trafficking."
There's a whole section "5. Law enforcement and prosecution" which covers investigative methodologies, investigative methodologies, Proactive investigation, and more. These might be of interest to spacecootie.

That's enough snippets. I'm tellin' ya, this is a motherload!

Anyone interested in this topic should stop by this webpage:
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-tra ... index.html
We are the architects of our own lives. Design and build the life you want.

Post Reply

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 4 guests