Yes, he was guilty. Johnson regularly consorted with prostitutes, traveled across state lines with prostitutes, pimped them out of his Chicago restaurant, loaned one the money to set up her own whorehouse and married at least one of them. He was exactly the kind of person the Mann Act was targeting.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Does anybody believe that Jack Johnson....
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Kid McCoy View PostYes, he was guilty. Johnson regularly consorted with prostitutes, traveled across state lines with prostitutes, pimped them out of his Chicago restaurant, loaned one the money to set up her own whorehouse and married at least one of them. He was exactly the kind of person the Mann Act was targeting.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Timothy Horton View Post^^^ none of this stuff was actually illegal though, aside from the pimping. and there is no proof that he was a pimp in all that i have read.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Timothy Horton View Post^^^ none of this stuff was actually illegal though, aside from the pimping. and there is no proof that he was a pimp in all that i have read.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kid McCoy View PostJohnson's restaurant in Chicago doubled up as a whorehouse. If there's a law designed to stop the interstate trafficking of women for immoral purposes and you have a man who's traveling around the country with prostitutes, and also owns and operates a whorehouse, then he's guilty of violating the Mann Act. You can argue about whether such a law was justified in the first place, but by the letter of that law, he was guilty.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kid McCoy View PostJohnson's restaurant in Chicago doubled up as a whorehouse. What with that and all his other behaviour, he was a pimp by most definitions. If there's a law designed to stop the interstate trafficking of women for immoral purposes and you have a man who's traveling around the country with prostitutes, and also owns and operates a whorehouse, then he's guilty of violating the Mann Act. You can argue about whether such a law was justified in the first place, but by the letter of that law, he was guilty.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mannie Phresh View Postwatched unforgivable blackness on netflix they never said hewas a pimp but he ran ran establishments that had prostitution.
If you get the chance read Randy Roberts book as well. Papa Jack.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kid McCoy View PostJohnson's restaurant in Chicago doubled up as a whorehouse. What with that and all his other behaviour, he was a pimp by most definitions. If there's a law designed to stop the interstate trafficking of women for immoral purposes and you have a man who's traveling around the country with prostitutes, and also owns and operates a whorehouse, then he's guilty of violating the Mann Act. You can argue about whether such a law was justified in the first place, but by the letter of that law, he was guilty.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Timothy Horton View PostThe Champion's cafe was not a whorehouse. Not from my understanding anyway....
Originally posted by Mannie Phresh View Posti think that they just want the loud mouth black champ gone
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kid McCoy View PostIt was. The second floor was a whorehouse. If he was running prostitutes out of his own establishment, I don't really see how he wasn't profiting from it. And you didn't have to profit financially in order to be violate the act, it just concerns the transportation of women for "immoral purposes". The first two men charged under the act had done nothing more than take their girlfriends away for a holiday.
I'm sure they did, but Johnson's behaviour made it a lot easier for them.
Johnson having a motel upstairs is not the same as being a pimp or madam.
Comment
Comment