The Improbability of the D.C.
Madam's Suicide
To comment on this article go to BÕManÕs
Revolt.
In 2005, 20.2 percent of women who committed suicide in the United
States did so by hanging, strangulation, or suffocation.
In 2004, the rate was 19.7 percent. Proceeding upon the reasonable assumption
that the lion's share of those were by hanging because it is easier to
accomplish than either of the other two, that still means that Deborah
Jeane Palfrey, the so-called D.C. Madam, if she really killed
herself, used a relatively unpopular method to do it after having been
convicted of prostitution-related activities by a federal jury in Washington,
D.C. Poisons, at 39.1% in 2005 and firearms, at 31.0%, were much more
popular methods for women to do themselves in.
The probability that she hanged herself decreases dramatically when
other factors in the case are considered. Only recently have we learned
that a Maryland woman who is said to have hanged herself in January or 2007
shortly before she was to go to trial for prostitution, Brandy
Britton, had been an employee of Palfrey's escort service, Pamela Martin and
Associates. By the laws of probability, if there is a one in five chance
of an event, the chance of the event happening again at random is one-fifth
times one-fifth, or one chance in twenty-five. Those are the kind of odds
that would pay off very handsomely at a track if applied to the chances of a
horse winning a race.
Then we have the chances that these two women would have been singled
out for prosecution in the first place. That was a subject that we
addressed in a previous article. If you're out to crack
down on the prostitution business, do you go after "escort services"
with large, salacious-looking advertisements in the telephone Yellow Book with
names like "Escorts Exxxtreme," "Experience Ecstassy,"
"A One Night Stand," "Bad Girls," "Passionate
Playmates," or "Klimaxxx," or do you prosecute the very low
profile Pamela Martin and Associates? Similarly, among the hundreds of
employees that these companies have, why was Brandy Britton singled out for
prosecution? In fact, even though the press told us their names as they
were paraded to the witness stand in the Palfrey trial to establish that the
Pamela Martin business was really a prostitution ring, it seems that none of
these women are looking at any jail time for what they have admitted to doing,
because, apparently, none of them are going to be charged with
anything.
Small wonder it is, then, that Palfrey had told reporter Neil Augenstein
of WTOP in Washington, as Augenstein reported after the suicide on May 1, that
she thought that "someone in the government had targeted her for
prosecution." Looking at her prosecution and that of Ms.
Britton in the larger context, one could say that that was true almost by
definition. With the revelation of the other selective prosecution and
the other very similar "suicide," the speculation of our earlier
article looks all the better. That is, that one of Palfrey's call girls,
backed up by Palfrey, had somehow run afoul of someone very powerful, vicious,
and vindictive in the upper reaches of the government.
Other reports (See "ABC News Shielding Cheney after DC Madam Hanging?", The Prissy Patriot, "Palfrey Suicide:
Wayne Madsen Goes On Record Against Cheney," and "9/11 Conspiracy Connection to DC Madam Murder" ) have
indicated who the person or persons might be as well as the high level
skulduggery, beyond the realm of sex, that might have been involved.
Again, as we noted in the first article, when what we are being told by the
government and the corporate press makes absolutely no sense, it is only
natural that we should look for better, more plausible explanations. In
that vein, we might draw the conclusion from the hangings of Britton and
Palfrey that their prosecutions were not so off-the-wall as they might
seem. If the decision had been reached that they were to "commit
suicide," there needed to be a motive. The prosecutions provided
that motive...and hanging provided the means.
With sufficiently cooperative press and authorities, shooting, poisoning, falls from high
places, beatings,
almost any form of murder can be made to look like a suicide, but, for a
skilled assassin, hanging is particularly easy. The victim, particularly
if she is a small woman, can easily be rendered unconscious by a garroting cord
or a good choke hold and then hanged to administer the coup de grace.
Speaking of skilled assassins, one should not forget that
prostitution and the spook
business, for fairly obvious reasons, have had a close relationship with one
another for about as long as those old professions have been practiced.
The likely involvement of the clandestine
community would be a very good explanation as to why virtually nothing we have
been told in this case rings true.
Corrupt Press Gives Away the Game
The national reporting on Palfrey's death also is a strong indicator of
high-level malfeasance. The suicide doubts of people close to Palfrey,
like those of the building
manager in Florida, where Palfrey owned a condominium, have been confined only
to local reporting, as was the report that Palfrey believed that she had been
targeted, first for prosecution and then for murder. Meanwhile, Time magazine was trotting out the noted
cover-up author, Dan Moldea, to give a national audience this suicide-sealing
quote: "She wasn't going to jail, she told me that very clearly. She told
me she would commit suicide."
Online reporter, Alex Jones, has reminded us of Moldea's penchant for
fabricating quotes as exhibited in his book, The Killing of Robert F. Kennedy.
If anything, his cover-up efforts were even more egregious in A Washington Tragedy, How the Death of Vincent Foster Ignited a
Political Firestorm. See my dissection of his
work in "More on Truth Suppression," "Dan Moldea's
America," "Moldea on Foster, Whitewater, and Impeachment," and part
5 of "America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent
Foster" (Scroll down to the section headed "Spin-Doctor
Moldea.")
The very fact that someone like Moldea has ingratiated himself into the
case on the side of the authorities, in itself, reduces the probability that
Deborah Palfrey's death was a simple suicide down to the level of the
infinitesimal. One might also regard it as a measure of the degree of
desperation to keep the lid on something that must be really important and
damaging to the powers that be.*
The Public's Protection
In the earlier article we exhibited the faint hope that the jury in
Palfrey's federal trial would take a cue from the Fully Informed Jury Association and find
her not guilty, not because she didn't violate the laws as charged but simply
because it was the right thing to do and they had the power to do it.
With today's general state of civic education, of course, it was a forlorn
hope. Palfrey might have been suicided all the same, but in the absence
of a plausible motive, it would have taxed the powers of even our press to sell
it to the public.
If the federal grand
jury that indicted
Palfrey had been aware of its powers and had been inclined to use them, some of
the key questions that we have been asking here might have been answered early
in the process and the tables might have been turned.
Although the power of the grand jury in the United States has been
diminished, it is still a powerful tool available to the citizens. Grand jurors
can issue subpoenas and question witnesses and they may pursue an investigation
anywhere it leads. Grand jurors can even subpoena and question federal
prosecutors. They can write a report and ask the judge to make the report
public. Grand jurors still have the power to refuse to indict citizens.
Wouldn't you like to know how the prosecutor who brought Palfrey before
the grand jury would have responded if put on the stand and asked, under threat
of perjury, why Pamela Martin Associates was singled out as a prostitution
business and who really ordered the prosecution?
Assistant U.S. attorney and former associate Independent Counsel Miquel
Rodriguez was once asked if the members of a grand jury would be able to
protect the public from corrupt officials, he replied, ÒtheyÕre all youÕve
got.Ó Rodriguez advised, Òempowering the grand jury, [by] letting them know
what they can demand, what they should be wary of, what their independent
subpoena powers are, whether they have the authority to ask questions on their
own in the grand jury. The real check and balance is the grand jury, the common
person, selected at random.Ó
It is indeed a slender reed to lean on for protection against tyranny
and injustice, but for Brandy Britton and Deborah Jeane Palfrey, it was really
all they had.
David Martin, May 14, 2008
* On May 25 I received the following email, with the subject, "DC Dave:
Still irresponsible," from Mr. Moldea:
Not that I think you're interested in showing any fairness towards me,
but here is my side of the bogus Sirhan-fabricated-quote story:
http://www.moldea.com/Mangan.html.
Please note that there is a link to a signed document from the person who
actually gave me the quote--thus, I couldn't have fabricated it.
(See: http://www.moldea.com/McCowanLetter.html.)
I'd appreciate you adding this to your bogus May 14 post--which essentially and
irresponsibly accuses me of participating in a cover-up of Jeane Palfrey's
murder.
And, just in case you're interested, here's my ongoing webpage about
Jeane suicide: http://www.moldea.com/JeaneSuicide.html.
BTW: During the past ten years since the publication of my book on
Vincent Foster's suicide--which you have spent so much time trashing--I haven't
seen anything to indicate that this, too, was anything but
another case of suicide. Have you moved the case-for-murder forward
at all?
I responded as follows on May 27:
I won't claim credit for it, but I believe that the case for murder and
cover-up (the latter participated in by my current correspondent) in the Foster
case has been moved past the point of retrieval by any number of paid
propagandists by the Miquel Rodriguez tapes, which you can see here: http://www.fbicover-up.com/Miquel/Miquel.htm.
Your book predated the release of those tapes, I believe. I'm sure that
Rodriguez would have told you everything that is in those tapes for inclusion
in your book had you shown any interest, by the way.
As for the
Robert Kennedy matter, I think your quarrel is with Jim DiEugenio, who is the
cited source of Alex Jones's fabrication charge. However, I will gladly
add a note referencing your rebuttal, with your link. I still stand
completely behind everything that I have written about your work on the Foster
case, and, of course, I would have to remind my readers of that.
Consider yourself reminded, dear reader. A review of my articles
on Moldea's appalling work on the matter of the Vince Foster death, referenced
above, would be timely at this point.
My reply elicited no response from Moldea. After a few days, I
decided to take Moldea up on his offer and read what he has had to say on the
Palfrey matter on his web site. That examination prompted me to email
Moldea again on May 31 as follows:
Mr. Moldea,
I am, indeed, interested in everything you
have to say about the Palfrey case, so I have duly checked out your Palfrey
page. I have a question related to the interview you gave on May 10 on
national television, specifically this passage:
MOLDEA:
"I received information from a very reliable source in this matter.
And I gave this information to the police yesterday morning--That Jeane had
tried to kill herself prior to this after her conviction. She had gone to
Orlando shortly after she returned to Florida. She had taken an
intentional overdose, and it failed. In the wake of the failure of her
overdose to end her life, she went back to Tarpon Springs, and she hung
herself."
Is there any good reason why that "very
reliable source" needs to remain anonymous? After all, he or she is
only reinforcing the official suicide conclusion, so there should be no fear of
recriminations here. What makes you think the source is
reliable? Did you get any more details from that source?
Overdose of what? Why did it fail? Usually in such cases, the
person is discovered unconscious, they are rushed to the hospital, the stomach
is pumped out, and other life-saving measures are taken. Did any of that
occur in this instance? If so, could you give them to me so I can check
out the record for myself? If not, why not? Did you ask any of
these questions to your source? If so, how did the source respond?
If you didn't ask such questions, why not?
And please don't give me anything about your complete credulousness in
the face of such a "reliable source." It would be unworthy of a
serious investigative reporter. But speaking of such unworthiness, I am
all too aware of how you characterized Joseph Goulden in your book when he told
researcher Hugh Sprunt that it was his personal opinion that Vince Foster
committed suicide: "...a respected award-winning journalist and the
former Washington bureau chief of the Philadelphia Inquirer, was also
the bestselling author of sixteen books."
That is what is known as argument by authority (No. 7 in the 17
techniques for truth suppression http://www.dcdave.com/article3/991228.html).
At least your "authoritative source" in this case was not
anonymous. But left unsaid by you were Goulden's manifest connections to
the spook community, which I reveal at http://www.dcdave.com/article1/980623.htm in the
passage directly after the quote from your book. Goulden's spook
connections are certainly germane, because lying and deception is what such
people are all about.
In addition, don't you think that it was
rather unprofessional of CNN's Rick Sanchez to let you make such a totally
unsupported allegation before a vast public without asking any to the basic
questions that I am asking you now? Doesn't this failure make Sanchez
come across more as a propagandist than a serious journalist?
I'm
sorry, but to me this new allegation of yours, until some hard verification is
forthcoming, is all too reminiscent of Drew Pearson's completely bogus claim
that former Secretary of Defense James Forrestal had attempted to commit
suicide on four separate occasions before he purportedly came up with the failsafe
method of hanging himself out of a 16th floor window.
By the way,
it seems that you and I have more in common than a mutual interest in the
Foster and Palfrey cases. I have also been banished from Free Republic,
as has our mutual acquaintance, Hugh Turley, and, if memory serves, your
Foster-case antagonist, Mike Rivero. (Rivero, in a later email exchange,
confirmed that he has been banned from Free Republic. The tendency of
Free Republic makes me want to paraphrase an old Eastern European joke about
"republics" and "people's republics." What's the
difference between a republic and Free Republic? The same as the
difference between a jacket and a strait jacket.)
David
Martin
p.s. The past tense of "hang," in the
instance of hanging by the neck, is "hanged," not "hung."
That got Moldea's attention, and he responded on the same day as
follows:
After the "reliable source" gave me the information about
Jeane's previous attempt to end her own life, I passed it along to the
police--with the permission of the source. The police immediately
interviewed the source, who repeated what he/she had told me. I'm going
to let police officials vouch for the source's veracity when they release the
details of their investigation.
If you want to attack me for this,
feel free. As usual, you'll be wrong. To date, no one from the
police or Jeane's family have challenged anything I said during that very brief
interview on CNN.
Moldea's failure to answer any of what I consider to be quite reasonable
questions prompted me to respond immediately as follows:
Can you at least be a bit more specific about those "police
officials?" Why do I think we'll be waiting a long time for them to
go public with this revelation? Why don't you just tell us your
source? What's the big secret?
And that was the last word between us. May I remind the readers
that it is really not up to the "police," whichever those police
might be or Palfrey's family to "challenge" Moldea on his
assertion. Now that the public claim has been made that Palfrey had
previously attempted suicide, it is up to the press to confirm it or disprove
it. But with all of their vast resources for getting to the bottom of the
question, they have remained silent. Their silence speaks volumes.
Now I ask you, if Deborah Jeane Palfrey really did commit suicide, why
was it felt necessary for such an incredible, unsupported story of a previous
suicide attempt to be trotted out?
David Martin, June 10, 2008
Home Page Column
Column 5 Archive Contact