« Previous | Main | Next »

D.C. Lawyer Demands ABC News Keep His Client Secret

May 02, 2007 12:44 PM

Dc_lawyer_deman_mn The lawyer for a "government witness" in the federal prosecution of Jeane Palfrey, the accused D.C. Madam, is demanding his client's name not be broadcast by ABC News.

In a letter to ABC News, Steven Salky of Zuckerman Spaeder in Washington, D.C., said he has "reason to believe" that his client might be named in this Friday's "20/20" report about the alleged prostitution ring.

But Salky did not identify who his client is.

ABC News has made contact with an extensive list of men traced to phone records of Palfrey's escort service business.

In his letter to ABC News, Salky claimed broadcasting his client's name would violate a court order preventing "Ms. Palfrey from engaging in acts or actions against Government witnesses."

The court order, issued March 22 by Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler, ordered Palfrey to stop her lawsuit against a number of former employees of her escort service.  She alleged they had breached their employment agreement by having sex with customers.  Palfrey says her service only provided "legal, fantasy sex" and not any actual sexual intercourse.

Judge Kessler said Palfrey's lawsuit was "harassment" of a government witness and ordered her not to engage in any "similar acts." 

Prior to the court order, Palfrey provided four years' worth of phone records to ABC News. She said she wanted to "stand up to the government" and "show the hypocrisy of the situation that's going on."

ABC News did not pay for the records or agree to provide research to Palfrey or her legal team.

One customer, Randall Tobias, resigned last week as deputy secretary of state after confirming to ABC News he had placed calls to the escort service to have "some gals come over to the condo for a massage." Tobias denied there was any sex involved.

He resigned prior to any public mention of his name. 

May 2, 2007 in D.C. Madam Affair | Permalink | User Comments (262)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

There is far, far too much evil being hidden in Washington today. The politicians are basically thumbing their noses in our (the people, their bosses) face. Look around the office as I am now. How many people in a professional environment can do that and get away with it? I say “release the hound!”

Posted by: JoeOffice | May 2, 2007 4:13:30 PM

I suspect that when all this comes out there will be embarrassment on both sides of the aisle. Sex certainly knows no idealogy. However, I see no reason to protect the clients that engaged in this business. If you are ashamed of your behavior, then you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. Besides, in this day of sexually transmitted deseases, wives have a right to know if their husbands are putting their health at risk as well as being unfaithful.

Posted by: xargaw | May 2, 2007 4:37:52 PM

Stings to publically out the users are the modus operandi in these kinds of liasons, so ABC should drool out the names so we can put more faith in these kinds of pubic servants...dern spellcheck is down I see

Posted by: frodaddy | May 2, 2007 5:05:01 PM

I'm having a hard time waiting for your 20/20 show. I look forward to seeing the names of some of the pious government employees that have tried to lord it over us. I only hope ABC doesn't hold back too much or too long so the courts don't gag you before you get it all out. Keep up the good work, you owe us after that mockudrama you showed about the Iraqi War and the fake Clinton stuff you used. This goes a long way in redeeming yourselves in my eyes.

Posted by: Cranky | May 2, 2007 5:12:17 PM

I think Brian Ross is doing the right thing. He is investigating the list, and he will report on what is newsworthy. If a politician, political appointee, or policy level civil servant is on the list, I think that easily qualifies as newsworthy.

As far as the poster who wouldn't want to hire a doctor or lawyer that patronizes prostitutes, why do you depend on others for this information? Wouldn't it just be easier to ask your doctor or lawyer yourself? Why this roundabout means of gathering consumer information when you haven't bothered to take the easiest and most direct route?

At any rate, I'm finding the lot of you who want an unabridged list released to be ethically challenged and in no position to criticize the ethics of Brian Ross or anyone at ABC.

Posted by: marcos | May 2, 2007 5:15:04 PM

Wow, reading the opinions of the common folk is very revealing on what is happening in our country, we complain and complain but when it comes down to it, we really don't do anything about it. I mean where were the american public nearly 4 years ago when they reelected this President and in doing so giving his cronies 4 more years of disgusting behavior, with no incentive to to clean up their act. Are we so blind? Can we not see that the politicians that we elect into office mirror ourselves and how hypocritical we are. No matter who will be exposed in this latest news fiasco, it will not change anyone's position in the long run, because the american people allows this to happen time and time again, so don't blame the Bible or put down morality, we as a people deserve what we get in Washington no matter what the political party may be, because we are those people we put in office.

Posted by: Olga Salazar | May 2, 2007 5:19:01 PM

Olga, it's beyond party lines...EVERYBODY likes to get laid...and why is whoring illegal anyway?

This is not news, it's just Ameican entertainment...

Posted by: Jazz | May 2, 2007 5:38:00 PM

Hold on Olga. What is this "We" elected this administration?

I didn't vote for these yahoos and I was also busy warning people not to vote for these yahoos. But nobody listens to bleeding heart liberals these days. The fact is that half of this country is like this. Pretending to be something they are not while the only thing they care about is their mortgages and SUV and the lifestyle they live. This administration fed into the greed that half of all Americans seem to demonstrate in their carelessness of the consequences of mindless consumerism and immediate gratification. Which is essentially the forces at work here.

I did not elect these people. I will take responsibility for my country as an American Citizen but not for Gitmo, the Iraq War, the limiting of rights, the debt, the dead Iraqis, nor the lies of the WMDs, nor anything else this obviously depraved administration dishes out.

Posted by: Linda Cooper | May 2, 2007 5:43:57 PM

I agree, the list should be released. No better way to clean up corruption and ethical hypocracy in Washington than shining a bright light on it.

Posted by: michael mcleary | May 2, 2007 5:51:36 PM

interesting, the ad at the top of my page is for bras and undies. are we a little obsessed with sex? ya think? the conservative religious right think that if they control your sex life, they control you. perhaps they are correct? maybe that's why they have to pay for it or steal it away from children! sad day in america! perhaps they are the ones who need to be controlled. i guess that's why we vote!

Posted by: hotfroggy | May 2, 2007 6:01:34 PM

student in tn...

theres some difference between the latest washington powerbrokers of the past 4 years (or so)
and those of the more distant political past.one outstanding difference ,since politicians of old KNEW they lived in glass houses,they didnt throw too many stones but evidently todays bright and upcoming hooker hiring politico has never heard that maxim.

its one thing to be holier than thou,but if you talk the talk,you must be able to walk the walk,as they say. from mark foley on down its just one debaucle after another for the moral majority,and i think ms palfrey just wanted to let the mainsteam in on one more,just for good measure. more than 4 years of records might make some of her actual FRIENDS look bad,imo.

although im not so sure democrats as a whole (aka liberals) are generally held to such a high moral standard as the republicans/conservatives,who mostly purport to be the moral conscience and compass for this country.

Posted by: nate_mishkin | May 2, 2007 6:02:01 PM

How can ABC, having obtained the list, release it only selectively?

It's either news or it isn't. (I think it is).

I don't see how a news organization can put itself in the position of trying to decide which people on the list get "outed" and which don't.

On what journalistic merit would such selective release be made? I mean, they're either on the list, or they're not, right? ABC has already named one, and he's resigned.

To be perfectly honest about it, I think this entire scandal is repulsive. I mean, thousands are dying in Iraq - and we're sitting here gnashing our teeth over who got laid.

I understand the outrageous hypocrisy of it all - but really, we shouldn't give a damn who's on the list.

But it's out. So - now, why play favorites?

Posted by: Al | May 2, 2007 6:19:19 PM

I don't see anything wrong in releasing some of the names. Didn't the republicans run on familiy values and morals? Didn't they feel that a sexual encounter was enough to impeach a president, and let's not say it was because he "lied". If they had houded him on this he would haven't had to try and cover it up. I would be interested in seeing if any republican preaching others follows "Do as I say, not as I do".

Posted by: pcannon | May 2, 2007 6:22:55 PM

Can you release the names from White House? It will be a bigger shock if another big fish in the net.

Posted by: jane | May 2, 2007 6:34:46 PM

ANYONE connected to an anti-gay, "pro-life," "protecting marriage," or "family values" platform or administration should have his name released.

If a guy hasn't preached or profited-from a platform or set of policies that are inherently privacy-invading, then he should have a right to his own privacy, since he's not invading anyone else's.

Posted by: rhetoricus | May 2, 2007 6:43:50 PM

Well it seems that its all over Washington and if they can find out who is on the list then maybe the people will see that our find WDC group is all about "COVERUP" That is why the judge ordered her not to give the names, but hahaha she beat him to the punch. A very smart lady! Im sure she knew that would happen and that is why she got the list out before she was told not to. Like all in our Congress and others they will do anything to protect themselves from a crime and all they are is a bunch of catch me if you can people. Im sure the judge was told by higher ups to issue the order.

Posted by: John | May 2, 2007 7:04:03 PM

Hearing funny stories about sex, babies, heroes, idiots (Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice) are what we demand from a responsible new service; don't stop the movie during intermission or you'll have real riot!

Posted by: John | May 2, 2007 7:07:31 PM

Oh please please please reveal the list.

I'm sure everyone will deny any wrongdoing (money for sex) and that's just the point.

What goes on between adults, even when it involves money, is no one's business but their own.

The "johns" will deny everything... so they'll be OK.

Ms. Palfrey will make her point... sexual fantasy is not illegal and there is no evidence of paid sex...

And, best of all, even though they deny it, a bunch of powerful Republicans will be revealed as the hypocrites that most of us already knew they were, since paid sex or none, I'm pretty sure their churches and faith communities don't support the use of escort services for massages and fantasies, any more than they support their use for prostitution.

All is for the best in this most perfect of perfect worlds.

Posted by: mikey | May 2, 2007 7:28:01 PM

I'm sure she sent the list to other organizations as well. If ABC does not publish it it will be "leaked". Unavoidable.

Posted by: John | May 2, 2007 7:37:00 PM

Why do so many of you people think that the media only reports the positives about Bush? Can someone name a few? Iraq is always on the news - it definitely is NOT good news for him. Gonzales is also on the news - NOT good news either. Karl Rove, global warming, high gas prices,immigration.... are all bad news for the administration. Economy is doing good, but it always ends up in the back pages.

Posted by: iCan | May 2, 2007 8:12:08 PM

Post a comment