Posted by 
Former Abercrombie & Fitch CEO Mike Jeffries and his partner Matthew Smith were arrested this week on federal charges of sex trafficking and interstate prostitution. Along with their associate James Jacobsen, the pair stands accused of recruiting and exploiting men for sex parties. These allegations were first revealed last year in a bombshell BBC News investigation and a subsequent civil lawsuit by a former Abercrombie & Fitch model. The alleged victims say they were under the impression that they would receive modeling opportunities for participating in these events. Both Jeffries’s and Smith’s legal teams have declined to comment on the charges, telling the New York Times that they’ll plan to respond later on in court.
These disturbing charges add another seedy layer to Abercrombie & Fitch’s problematic legacy under Jeffries’s leadership, just as the company has begun to align itself with a more wholesome image.
This latest development also fits into a larger, more impactful narrative playing out in pop culture and society right now: In the fallout of Jeffrey Epstein’s 2019 case and R. Kelly’s 2021 conviction, high-profile sex trafficking cases seem to be rising dramatically. According to a former prosecutor, we should probably expect to see more of them.
Before the charges against Jeffries, the news cycle had already been consumed by the mountain of legal troubles surrounding hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs. In September, Combs was indicted in New York City, where he remains in custody without bail, on charges of sex trafficking, racketeering, and transportation for prostitution-related to his alleged “freak-off” parties. Combs’s lawyer has called these claims “an unjust prosecution” and says Combs “looks forward to clearing his name in court.”
Kanye West’s ex-assistant Lauren Pisciotta has also accused the rapper of trafficking women in an amended civil lawsuit in which she also accuses him of sexual assault. (West’s lawyer responded to the lawsuit this summer accusing Pisciotta of “blackmail and extortion.”) Back in January, Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein and AMC Networks chair James Dolan were accused of sex trafficking in a complaint by a former massage therapist, although the judge dismissed the trafficking claims.
Whispers of trafficking rings within Hollywood and other affluent spaces tend to run amok online, often lending to conspiracy theories and misinformation — as we’ve seen in the case of Diddy. However, we’re witnessing a legitimate movement happening around the way sexual abuse is dealt with. Victims are more willing to come forward and prosecutors more eager to pursue these cases of coerced sex, according to Neama Rahmani, a former prosecutor who’s worked on human trafficking cases for the Department of Justice and a co-founder of West Coast Trial Lawyers. Vox spoke to Rahmani about why all of these bombshell sex trafficking cases are being brought now, and the ripple effect they could have in the years to come.
How much of this do you consider to be a conscious trend happening in federal courts?
It’s absolutely a trend. There’s no question that prosecutors are being a lot more aggressive in these types of cases. There’s the NXIVM case that was run out of that same office, the Eastern District of New York, where Jeffries is being prosecuted. R. Kelly was also prosecuted in the neighboring Southern District of New York. So you’re seeing more of these types of prosecutions because they’re more and more successful.
This is also obviously a result of #MeToo. Jeffrey Epstein got away with it for so many years, and now the tables have turned. Victims are coming forward. They’re empowered. They have a voice — because without the victims, you don’t really have a case. So it’s absolutely a trend in numbers, and we’re seeing more and more of it, and we are going to see more of it because there’s a lot more attention being paid.
New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which temporarily waived the statute of limitations for civil sex abuse cases, has been credited with some of the lawsuits leading up to Diddy’s federal investigation. The allegations against Jeffries also came to light after a civil case was filed. How big of a role are these laws playing in what we’re seeing?
We’re definitely seeing the statutes being reopened — not on the criminal side. But we know that a civil lawsuit can prompt an investigation that can lead to a criminal case. It goes back to the Catholic Church and the sex abuse scandal there. It was litigated very aggressively and all the way up to state Supreme Courts. They ruled that you can open up the statute of limitations for civil [cases] but not criminal. By reopening the criminal statute limitations, it’s a retroactive prosecution and violates the ex post facto clause of the Constitution. But you’re seeing more and more civil statutes of limitations that are open.
New York State and New York City did it. California’s have been open multiple times for civil lawsuits.
Why does it typically take so long to catch on to these cases?
Prosecutors are very conservative when it comes to rape cases, especially when we’re dealing with adults. Rape is one of the most underreported crimes, and a very small percentage of perpetrators are brought to justice because they’re hard cases. They happen behind closed doors. It’s an issue of consent and “he said, she said.”
Prosecutors don’t like to lose, and they don’t like to take cases unless it’s a sure thing. So oftentimes you need multiple victims to come forward before you can get a conviction. Prosecutors don’t want to move forward with just one victim. The cases can hang. We’ve seen it happen with Bill Cosby, Danny Masterson, Harvey Weinstein. You have to get 12 out of 12 jurors unanimously. It’s not easy.
So oftentimes, they need more victims. And victims don’t want to come forward and relive that trauma. You have to tell your story in a very public way. That’s the big-picture reason why we haven’t, at least during my lifetime, seen many of these prosecutions historically.
In the case of Jeffrey Epstein and now Diddy, a lot of people are curious about the networks of people involved in these sex trafficking cases. Do you think Diddy’s or Jeffries’s trials will lead to the exposure of a lot of people?
US Attorney Damian Williams says the Diddy investigation is ongoing. But in my experience following him, he’s not one of those prosecutors who takes a kitchen-sink approach. He’s not someone to charge everyone. Kristina Khorram — [Diddy’s] right-hand woman who allegedly provided the drugs, secured a lot of the victims, and recruited them — she hasn’t been charged. I would be surprised if any additional celebrities are charged, based on what I’ve seen so far.
Again, prosecutors are conservative. They’re not going to name a celebrity unless they’re absolutely sure they could get a conviction. The standard is much higher in a criminal case. You need that unanimous jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
I do expect celebrities to be sued. You look at the lawsuit against Diddy from this week. There’s a celebrity A and B, who allegedly participated [in the alleged rape]. The reason they haven’t been named is because there’s significant value in celebrities keeping their names secret and entering into a confidential settlement and paying to make this go away. I would expect to see individuals outed in those types of cases before they’re named in an indictment.
Do you see these cases continuing to have a ripple effect in the culture?
I mean, it’s happening now because there’s a willingness. Look at the Menendez brothers, right? They may be released because they were the victims of sexual abuse at the hands of their father. This is 35 years after they shot and killed their parents. There’s a very different awareness and culture around sexual assault and sexual abuse now and believing victims. I really do think the tide has turned, and the days of rich and powerful men being able to take advantage of young men and young women because of the disparities in their wealth and power are numbered.
