Comments on: Strip Club Hires Kidnapped and Assaulted 14-Year-Old Girl, Then Sues Her

By: Tati Tuesdays: Week of June 23 – June 29 « A Lesbian and a Scholar

Tati Tuesdays: Week of June 23 – June 29 « A Lesbian and a Scholar — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:59:11 +0000

[...] has the scoop on a case of a strip club suing a 14-year-old girl who was allegedly kidnapped and assaulted before being forced to perform at the [...]

By: Renee

Renee — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:42:06 +0000

When I read this I went into shock. They have some nerve charging a kidnapping victim. Clearly whatever action she took was against her will. They are simply not will to acknowledge the fact that they hired her. I further don’t believe that a 14 year old girl could pass for a 22 year old woman. Shame on the club owners and I hope the judge throws the book at them.

By: Butterflywings

Butterflywings — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:11:47 +0000

You see, ‘she looked older’ wouldn’t fly as an excuse if she had been sold alcohol.
My local shops have signs saying ‘Think 25′ and warning sternly not to even think about buying alcohol, and that you WILL be ID-ed if you look under 25.

So yeah. They have to actually BE old enough. That means ID, and not obviously fake ID either.

Of course, this would be assuming proprieters of strip clubs actually cared about their workers, which they don’t.

By: karak

karak — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:26:33 +0000

I’m filling out forms for McDonalds with that kind of info. One would hope strip clubs would be just as thorough as Mickey Ds.

By: preying mantis

preying mantis — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:03:21 +0000

“I gotta wonder how the fuck the hiring practices work in Texas.”

It’s a strip club. I don’t think the run-of-the-mill ones tend to care about the last ten years of your working life. If the club in question was using the same sleazy practices some of the clubs around here do (dancers aren’t employees, they’re “independent contractors”–with all the minimum employee rights that arrangement entails), the whole of the hiring process might have been judging her looks, checking her (fake) ID, making a copy of her (fake) ID for their files, and asking her to sign a contract.

By: karak

karak — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:10:00 +0000

I’m currently filling out job apps right now, and so far, I have to tell them my social security number, date of birth, three people to be my references, the last ten years of my working life, my address, my phone number (home and cell) and the address, number, and relation of an emergency contact.

I gotta wonder how the fuck the hiring practices work in Texas.

By: Claire

Claire — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:21:53 +0000

The US’ human trafficking legislation (TVPA) clearly defines severe forms of trafficking in persons as: 1) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion 2) sex trafficking in which the person induced to perform a commercial sex act has not attained 18 years of age, or 3) 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 subjugation to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.

The above case seems to fit the definition of human trafficking, and under the newest version of the law passed, traffickers are held accountable if the victim is under age 18 and the perpetrator could reasonably attain that information. So to the club’s point that they couldn’t have known her age because she “looked mature” would not hold up under a trafficking case.

By: SunlessNick

SunlessNick — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:54:45 +0000

The club and their lawyers, of course, are claiming that the girl looked “very mature” and so the club couldn’t possibly have known.

As you say, it’s their responsibility to know.

By: jovan byars

jovan byars — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:25:29 +0000

That is why clubs check ID at the door. There is no excuse for why Cheetah Club didn’t check their workers and attendees for ID.

By: preying mantis

preying mantis — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:43:31 +0000

It seems to me like you’d have to be really committed to being a weapons-grade asshole to attempt to demonstrate more than a) her identification appeared perfectly legitimate, b) the identification appeared to be hers, and c) her appearance was not such that failing to investigate either a or b more fully constituted negligence. And that would be in response to the presumed state investigation of you hiring a fucking fourteen-year-old as a stripper.