8th Circuit affirms five convictions for sex-trafficking

Listen to this article

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the convictions of five defendants found guilty of conspiracy in a massive sex-trafficking operation with major involvement in Minnesota. No reversible error was found in any of the five appellants’ cases.

This case arose from a practice that does not get much coverage, yet is extremely commonplace: sex trafficking. The Minnesota Department of Transportation found in 2015 that Minnesota has the third-highest number of human trafficking cases in the United States each year. Sex trafficking is a subset of human trafficking, involving the forced labor of a person to perform sexual activity.

According to the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, sex trafficking is a major problem in the state. A six-month study conducted by prosecutors discovered more than 34,000 advertisements posted online for sex in the Twin Cities alone.

RELATED: Minnesota’s Safe Harbor program aids trafficking victims

In this case, according to the court record, defendants were involved in a conspiracy that moved hundreds of women from Thailand to the United States for the purpose of engaging in sex work. Women were given visas in exchange for a “bondage debt” — typically between $40,000 and $60,000. They owed this money to a “ma-tac,” or owner. The amount was so high that women were precluded from leaving the United States and repaying the debt through lawful work. Even if they chose to leave, passports were often confiscated or the victim’s family was threatened with violence, preventing escape.

Consequently, the women engaged in sex work. Women in this scheme were having sex with up to 10 men per day, seven days a week, until the debts were paid off. This scheme spread far beyond Minneapolis into urban areas across the United States, including Houston, Los Angeles, and Seattle. An international investigation found 39 people were involved in selling hundreds of women from Thailand for sex. Two of the 39 were Minnesotans — former customers who then became “runners” for the organization.

Three of the defendants were allegedly former victims of the organization, brought over from Thailand and eventually becoming ma-tacs. Two of the former victims argued that their convictions should be reversed due to the previous involvement as victims. Pawinee Unpradit was from Thailand and moved to America for the purpose of sex trafficking; eventually she moved up in the organization, coordinating the arrival of women from Thailand to the United States. Saowapha Thinram was also brought over from Thailand and sent to Austin, Texas, to perform sex work. Eventually, one of her customers paid off her debt and she became a house boss in Austin.

According to the government, the conspiracy occurred from January 2009 to May 2017. Defendants Thinram and Unpradit asserted that—since they were victims of sex trafficking before joining the conspiracy to engage in sex trafficking of others—they could not be guilty in something that they were once victimized by. Citing the case Pinkerton v. United States (1946), defendants alleged that it was impossible for them to join the conspiracy. Under Pinkerton, a conspirator is liable for substantive offenses committed by other conspirators to further the conspiracy. Essentially, Thinram and Unpradit could not engage in trafficking themselves, they argued, meaning there were two separate conspiracies.

The court wrote, “The implication seems to be that each time any woman moved from the status of victim to member of the conspiracy, the existing conspiracy necessarily ended and a new conspiracy began.” Ultimately, the court rejected the argument. “[T]he jury’s conclusion that [defendants] joined the charged conspiracy does not render them liable for acts committed before they joined while they were victims of the conspiracy.”

The other defendants also appealed their convictions on different grounds. Michael Morris ran several houses in California and argued that venue was improper in Minnesota as a result. The court ruled that, even if Morris adequately preserved this question of venue for appellate review, there was sufficient evidence to show Morris participated in a venture that facilitated sex trafficking in both California and Minnesota. “We conclude that the offense of benefiting from participation in a venture to ‘maintain’ a victim of sex trafficking is a continuing offense that may occur in more than one district,” the court wrote.

Thoucharin Ruttanmongkongul, a house boss in Chicago, challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her conviction. She alleged the evidence did not show that she knew that illegal purpose of the agreement, or that she used fraud or force to cause women to perform sex acts commercially. The court determined that there was sufficient evidence—including emails with escort-style photos from women who worked in the home and advertisements posted on websites offering sexual activity with the women in the home—to show Ruttanmonkongul knowingly engaged in sex trafficking.

Waralee Wanless, a house boss and ma-tac in Dallas and Chicago, appealed on numerous grounds, including an allegation that the government withheld exculpatory information. Wanless argued that investigators searched her home in 2017 and provided a ledger detailing the sexual escapades, but they had previously seized boxes of evidence in 2013. She claimed that another Thai woman she lived with could have made the ledger entries. However, the court determined that the government did timely disclose that the contents from the 2017 search were found in the 2013 search and she was thus allowed sufficient time to prepare a defense.

Unpradit and Thinram were convicted of conspiracy to engage in money laundering, conspiracy to commit sex trafficking, conspiracy to commit transportation to engage in prostitution, and conspiracy to use a communication facility to promote prostitution.