What happens in Cartagena doesn't stay there

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/27/po...ice/index.html

So, what is the outrage all about? Prostitution is legal in Columbia, and since the rules for these agents are being changed because of this incident we can surmise that it wasn't against their rules at the time when this happened. I can see that some people will consider it an embarassment, but does that excuse firing nine people over it?

One argument I heard is that using of this kind of services makes the agents vulnerable to blackmail, or liable to divulge sensitive information in their post-coital mellowness. But is that a sufficient reason to A) ban it, and B) fire the agents over it even when it wasn't banned?

I believe part of the problem was failure to pay for services. I mean, if you're going to engage a prostitute, you should at least pay for the privilege.

Apparently one of the working girls felt insulted when one of the agents tried to barter and suggested a ridiculously low price. No idea what happened next, or how it got out.

Is there actually a federal law against prostitution? I thought that in Nevada, at least, it was legal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Is there actually a federal law against prostitution?

---

Darn good question. I'm not seeing it, but maybe someone with stronger Google-fu can find something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Its only legal in nevada in certain establishments. I'm rather sure that according to federal law it is illegal to pay for sex. But that aside, the Secret Service (as well as any other high-profile government agency, including the military) has its own rules and regulations regarding acceptable conduct.

---

Plus, I believe there is a question of abuse of office, didn't one of the agents basically do the "I'm Secret Sevice, I shouldn't have to pay that" thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I believe part of the problem was failure to pay for services. I mean, if you're going to engage a prostitute, you should at least pay for the privilege.

---

This. Secret Service types have big egos and one decided he didn't want to pay.

The thing that upsets me is that the other guys paid up and either didn't help him with the cash or he didn't want their help. That's unprofessional.

If paying for sex is illegal per federal law, shouldn't all prostitition be illegal across the entire US?

In the CNN article I linked to:

Quote:

---

Called Enhanced Standards of Conduct, the new guidelines given to all Secret Service personnel make clear that standards of behavior required in the United States apply on missions abroad, the sources said.

Effective immediately, the new standards require detailed briefings before each trip that will include safety precautions and any necessary designations of establishments and areas that are "off limits" for Secret Service personnel, the sources said.

Also in the new standards, foreigners are banned from Secret Service hotel rooms at all times, except for hotel staff and host nation law enforcement and government officials on official business, according to the officials, and all Secret Service personnel are prohibited from going to a "non-reputable establishment."

The new standards specify that U.S. laws apply to Secret Service personnel when traveling, rendering invalid the excuse that specific activity is legal in the foreign country, the officials said.

---

Allthough vague on some points, the bolded part would suggest that those agents didn't violate any rule that applied to them.

Employment carries its own set of expectations that are dependent on the employer that go beyond the law. Those expectations may or may not even be detailed in writing; however, they are well understood. For example,itt is perfectly legal to post lots of nasty or revealing things on Facebook, but, in my current occupation, I would be fired for doing so. My guess is that these agents knew that they were not living up to the standards of the agency but thought they could get away with it since it had been done before.

I doubt there is a federal statute on prostitution, you might find something about trafficking, interstate solicitation, etc., but the act itself is not in the federal government's jurisdiction.

If you hire a legal $900/night escort and insult her with $30 instead, you get trouble. The idiot got what he deserved. I'm not surprised that stuff like this goes on, but I am curious to see if any of these shenanigans ended up on expense reports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Is there actually a federal law against prostitution? I thought that in Nevada, at least, it was legal.

---

Counties with population less than 400000 can license brothels. Weird I know, but hey.

In my job, if I were to go an have a drink at the bar at a conference I would be in breach of the ABPI code of conduct and could be fired. If I don't like the rules, I'd best get a different job.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

In my job, if I were to go an have a drink at the bar at a conference I would be in breach of the ABPI code of conduct and could be fired.

---

Wait a cotton-picking minute, are you referencing the 2012, 2011, 2008 or 2006 version of the ABPI code? I need to know before I go downloading these PDFs.

C'mon, we're on the 2012. Always the most recent. Another one is due in 2013. The leash is so far up our collective backsides it's almost impossible to mislead professionals... ~;)

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory

In my job, if I were to go an have a drink at the bar at a conference I would be in breach of the ABPI code of conduct and could be fired. If I don't like the rules, I'd best get a different job.

---

I assume those conferences count as work hours? I realize that the agents of this topic are expected to abide by certain rules even when they're not on the clock, but it seems that no actual rule was broken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Employment carries its own set of expectations that are dependent on the employer that go beyond the law. Those expectations may or may not even be detailed in writing; however, they are well understood. For example,itt is perfectly legal to post lots of nasty or revealing things on Facebook, but, in my current occupation, I would be fired for doing so. My guess is that these agents knew that they were not living up to the standards of the agency but thought they could get away with it since it had been done before.

---

I'm not saying I disagree, in theory. In that light however it's surprising that there wasn't already anything in the conduct rules about visiting prostitutes in foreign countries. Surely this issue must have come up before, even if it didn't reach publicity. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that secret service agents have been doing this since the beginning of time and that it's tolerated as long as they manage some discretion, both in regards to publicity and to security.

Also it amuses me that the new conduct rules tackle this by means of euphenisms: don't allow foreigners in your hotel room

When you're on a job, you don't do hookers.

That applies to any job, at least the ones you want to tell your mother you have.

Is the $800 figure being tossed around still? If so, this dude was extorted. 800 USD is like 1.3 million pesos. High end escorts in the US don't even cost 800 USD, believe me I know.

So, she maybe gave him the normal price and then upon figuring who he was she upped the price to 8 bills?

800 is completely unreasonable, I don't buy for a second that this was ever the negotiated price

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/27/po...ice/index.html

So, what is the outrage all about? Prostitution is legal in Columbia, and since the rules for these agents are being changed because of this incident we can surmise that it wasn't against their rules at the time when this happened. I can see that some people will consider it an embarassment, but does that excuse firing nine people over it?

One argument I heard is that using of this kind of services makes the agents vulnerable to blackmail, or liable to divulge sensitive information in their post-coital mellowness. But is that a sufficient reason to A) ban it, and B) fire the agents over it even when it wasn't banned?

---

We want the people responsible for the presidents life to be sober minded and dedicated...

Though I do think some people were too eager to make jokes about the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

If you're acting as an agent of the US Government on foreign soil, you are required not only to abide by their laws but by our laws as well. The upcoming policy change is aimed at trying to make that less vague and more specific, but it should have been understood by those agents that what they were doing was against the rules.

I mean, they're Secret Service Agents. What if one of those girls had been a spy? An assassin? Something else? They were on the job, and no matter how you slice it they screwed up. In the Army they would have called this a breach of OpSec, and you would be hammered for it.

---

absolutely...I would expect a secret service agent to be able to pull this off without getting caught.
that's the reason to question their professionalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I assume those conferences count as work hours? I realize that the agents of this topic are expected to abide by certain rules even when they're not on the clock, but it seems that no actual rule was broken.

---

I imagine that they count as "unpaid overtime". It's the job. The benefits and negatives were clear to start with. If being in a nice place on company time but being unable to party with the other docs is an issue then there are many other jobs where this isn't a facet of it.

The rules on expenses specifically state that massages are not to be expensed. Again, it seems that someone tried to do so. I've not asked if this was a euphemism or not.

@Ronin, pulling it off would have meant there was no problem in the first place...

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Is the $800 figure being tossed around still? If so, this dude was extorted. 800 USD is like 1.3 million pesos. High end escorts in the US don't even cost 800 USD, believe me I know.

So, she maybe gave him the normal price and then upon figuring who he was she upped the price to 8 bills?

800 is completely unreasonable, I don't buy for a second that this was ever the negotiated price

---

Really?

How many hours was she there? Irrc a decent hooker here can be £90-120 an hour, if she was an above-average escort I can well see a few hours being worth £600/$800.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Irrc

---

You're not fooling anyone with that, PVC ~;)

If I remember correctly, the escort that took down Spitzer was asking ~$1500 a night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

You're not fooling anyone with that, PVC ~;)

---

Nice try, but it's a fact I've never been able to afford a prostitute, even a cheap scuzy one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

@Ronin, pulling it off would have meant there was no problem in the first place...

~:smoking:

---

My point exactly....
they are guilty of breaking the 11th commandment.
Thou shalt not get caught.

Ah yes the 11th commandment, a somewhat uncommonly known addition, that is almost as obscure as the 12th "Thou Shalt Not Forsake Thy Bro's For Thy Ho's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Ah yes the 11th commandment, a somewhat uncommonly known addition, that is almost as obscure as the 12th "Thou Shalt Not Forsake Thy Bro's For Thy Ho's.

---

I always wondered what 11-15 were...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAtRCJIqnk

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/colombia/9248446/Colombian-prostitute-thought-Obama-bodyguards-were-fools.html

So, $800, or about £500 for the whole night, not exactly breaking the bank are we boys?

That's what, £60 an hour?

A shocking lack of decorum