Transcript of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, Assistant Attorney General Wan Kim, and Senior Department Officials at Pen
and Pad Roundtable on Human Trafficking10:00 A.M. EST
(Video Presentation.)
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Good morning. Well, you've just seen the video which gives you some idea about the commitment of the Department, my commitment, but most importantly from the President, to address the problem of human trafficking in our country. It remains and is a serious problem here in the United States.
I think too many of our citizens believe this is something that's only occurring on foreign shores, but it's something that's occurring here in America. And Wan Kim is with me, head of the Civil Rights Division, and he's going to talk about specifically what we're doing.
But I can say that prosecutions on human trafficking cases are up 600 percent since President Bush took office. There are 42 anti-trafficking task forces that are operating around the country, and we are now seeing the creation of a human trafficking prosecution unit. It will be the first time within the Civil Rights Division's history that we have a dedicated infrastructure, dedicated team of lawyers, focused solely on working on human trafficking cases. And so that's a further indication of the commitment of this Administration to facing this -- deal with this terrible problem, and also the acknowledgement of the reality that it's a serious problem in this country and that we need to focus on it.
So, I'm glad you're here today. This is important for me personally. It is, I've said before, it is a form of modern day slavery, and there is nothing more traditional for the Civil Rights Division than to focus on slavery kinds of issues, and that's what we're doing here.
So, with that, I'm going to leave it for Wan Kim to get into specific questions you may have about this initiative, the scope of the problem, but I'm happy to take some questions. Before I do, let me just say that I'm going to be gone next week. I'm traveling to South America, beginning first in El Salvador, meet with my counterparts there to talk about gangs, about crime in particular, then going to Argentina where we'll be focusing on some issues of security, meeting with my counterparts there, and then finally we're going to Brazil and focusing on similar kinds of issues as well as intellectual property. So I'll be gone next week in case you're wondering where I'll be, I won't be around, that's where I'll be.
So, before I left, I wanted to have the opportunity to sit down with you and answer some questions.
QUESTION: Could you identify the cities or areas of the country that you think are the big hubs where there would be activity more pronounced?
MR. KIM: With respect to human trafficking issues?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. KIM: Well, I think the truthful answer to that question is it's all around. Certainly major cities have more people. And so the problem can be accentuated in major cities, large urban centers. But we have 42 task forces across the country, as the Attorney General mentioned.
They are located in big cities; they're located in smaller communities. And each of them has credible investigations and successful prosecutions of many offenses. And I think our experience has shown us that where you look for these offenses, you will find violations.
And so, again, to answer your question, you look at big cities, of course you are likely to find problems in big cities just because of the number of people in those cities, the number of possible people to victimize victims. But even in smaller communities across the country, we have found these cases. We found one in a small town in Kansas. We found one in New Hampshire. You know, we found them in big cities across the country that you can think of. But this is a nationwide problem, and so our approach has to be nationwide in scope.
QUESTION: Mr. Attorney General, you said prosecutions were up 600 percent. How much of that do you think reflects a commitment by Justice to go after these cases more aggressively, and to what extent is there a growth in human trafficking? And if it's a recent growth, why? I mean, prostitution has been with us forever.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Well, let me begin by saying that I think it reflects two things. One, it reflects a commitment by the Administration to focus on this, and we -- for us, I mean, if you think about the victims here, these are defenseless individuals and they're victimized in the most horrific ways. And we feel a strong obligation to protect these victims and to prosecute those who take advantage of these individuals.
And the reason that we're doing the prosecution is, it is an acknowledgement that it is a growing problem. And we've got to look at additional ways that we can deter this kind of activity.
QUESTION: Mr. Attorney General, when you talk about how this is important for you personally, you just said, why is that? I mean, what is it about this issue that just gets you riled up personally?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Well, you know, many of these individuals are people from foreign lands and people with different kinds of backgrounds, different cultures, and they're often people that are poor. People that are voiceless. And, you know, I can appreciate that. I understand that.
And I think that especially those of us in government, and I think the Civil Rights Division, that's its core mission is to ensure that people's rights are protected, and so it's important.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: You have questions?
QUESTION: I had a couple of off-topic questions --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Okay. Yeah.
QUESTION: -- since you're leaving, and we won't have any other opportunities.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Okay.
QUESTION: As I'm sure you know, there have been a couple of different calls from the Hill from senators to release the FISA Court orders regarding -- relating to TSP. I'm just wondering where you are on that now.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: We are prepared to provide access to the documents to those individuals who have been in the briefed in the Terrorist Surveillance Program previously.
In addition to that, we are prepared to provide access to the documentation to both Chairman Leahy and Senator Spector. Again, it's never been the case where we've said we would never provide access. We've been working hard and having discussions to reach an appropriate accommodation as to how that access should be provided.
So, my understanding is -- we're working through the final details, but my understanding, I believe the documents will be made available, access will be made available starting today.
QUESTION: But not publicly, correct? These would be for --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Well, again, we're talking about highly classified documents relating to highly classified activities of the United States government, so we obviously would be concerned about the public disclosure that may jeopardize the national security of our country, but we're looking forward to meet with the Congress to provide the information that it needs.
QUESTION: Will they get an in-person briefing from anyone at Justice?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: They will receive briefings, those who've been designated to receive the briefings, and this is generally the people who have been previously cleared in the Terrorist Surveillance Program before.
Plus in addition to Chairman Leahy and Senator Spector, and, you know, we -- from the announcement, when I first announced that the program, TSP will now be covering the FISA order, I announced then that we would provide briefings. We have provided some briefings. Some members have declined briefings until they get this issue of the documents worked out.
So I anticipate that those briefings will continue. And, you know, we will continue to provide briefings to members as they need them. It's important for us that they understand what we're doing, and if that requires multiple briefings, we'll provide multiple briefings. All they have to do is ask.
QUESTION: And it's saying here that you were also asked to provide an updated briefing on the anthrax investigation to some members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Has that happened, or do you know what the status is of that?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: I'm not aware that that has happened. That offer still remains on the table.
QUESTION: So how many all told will be getting access to documents on the Hill would you say?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: I don't know the exact details, but we've had a number of discussions with committee staff, and so, I think the final details are being worked now.
QUESTION: You said they will have access to the FISA Court orders, to all the orders, is that --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: My understanding is that they will have access to the court orders, the application, perhaps some additional documentation. Again, that's being worked out now. But we were also of course concerned about certain information that is especially sensitive, and so we're working out the details about how to deal with that piece -- those pieces of information.
QUESTION: Does "have access" mean that they come down here and look at it? Or will it --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: No, that's not necessarily. Look, I'm not going -- until we get the final details worked out, I don't want to get into that. But it wouldn't necessarily mean they would have to come down here.
Again, we want to look at what's been done historically with respect to similar kinds of documents and see what, you know, what would be appropriate with respect to the situation.
QUESTION: And when you say --
MODERATOR: Due to the schedule, we've got time for one or two more.
QUESTION: Just to clarify something, when you said clear, that the orders would be available to people who have been cleared under TSP before in addition to Leahy and Spector, when you say cleared under TSP, do you mean the Intelligence Committees? Is that what you're talking about?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: I'm talking about the full -- my understanding is it would be the full Intel committees, and I believe certain members of the committee staff. Again, those kind of details are being worked out. You know, we want to be as accommodating as we can, given the unique circumstances.
Obviously, this is an issue that enjoys extraordinary interest, and we understand that. But we also, we have a responsibility to ensure the confidentiality of this information, and we're going to do that.
QUESTION: -- arrests in --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Pardon me?
QUESTION: That were arrested in England --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Yes. Right.
QUESTION: So is there any connection to the U.S. investigatively or --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: At this time I'm not aware of any kind of connection to any kind of U.S. threat, but it's still fairly early and we're still gathering information. I'll be having discussions later today with U.K officials, and hopefully I can get additional information. But I'm not aware of any ties to the United States.
QUESTION: Is there anything you can say about the arrest warrants in Germany about, I think 13 arrest warrants were issued by German authorities? They say that these would be targeting people who they claim are CIA operatives in connection to the --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: The Almasri case?
QUESTION: Yeah. Exactly.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: You know, I need to see what has happened in Germany before I comment on it. And I don't know whether I'm going to have a comment on it, but let me see what's happened.
QUESTION: So we don't know yet whether any U.S. citizens are among those --
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Again, let me see what's going on before I comment on it, okay?
QUESTION: Thank you.
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Okay. Great. Thanks.
(The Attorney General leaves the room.)
MODERATOR: Wan, we'll turn it back over to you. Before Wan begins, I just want to interject on the record brief is going to be Wan Kim, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights, and any other background official, we have background officials here from both ICE and the FBI, and they will be on background as Senior Department Officials if they respond to questions.
MR. KIM: Well, thank you all for coming today.
MR. KIM: As you heard from the Attorney General, the work that we do on the trafficking front is some of the most difficult and yet some of the most rewarding work that we do in the Department of Justice and certainly in the Civil Rights Division. It is work that has been personally important to him and to the President.
And because of that leadership, we have been able to make great strides in prosecuting offenses, investigating offenses, and in doing, in sum, what is most important to us in these cases; that is, one, rescuing victims, and two, prosecuting offenders so they don't commit these crimes again.
The key tool that we use to prosecute these offenses is the Trafficking Victim Protection Act, passed in 2000 by the Congress, and which in the main prohibits crimes of this type of victimization that are based upon force, fraud or coercion.
One of the important things to recognize about the Trafficking Victim Protection Act is that it protects all victims, whether they be imported from outside the United States or whether they be U.S. citizens. And in fact, we have brought cases where the victims are American citizens or U.S. nationals, as well as many, many cases involving people who have been trafficked into the United States for sex or labor trafficking victimization.
Because of the level of interest that this has drawn by both the President and the Attorney General, it has been an initiative of the Department of Justice for the past six years. And based upon that, we have done an extraordinary amount of work cooperatively with state and local officials, at the FBI, at ICE, and many other federal investigative agencies to go after these crimes.
And I think it's important to remember also that these are by and large hidden crimes. If traffickers do their jobs well, the victims are never uncovered. If they do their jobs well, the victims are terrified, they fear law enforcement, and they provide -- this is important to the traffickers -- a continuing source of income.
Unlike drugs, unlike arms, unlike other illicit activity where you're dealing contraband once, a victim of a trafficking offense remains a continuous source of income. That is quite lucrative, and that is one of the reasons why this crime is not only worldwide in application and scope, but also one that is extremely alluring for criminals. It is one that can provide an incredible profit source for those who choose to engage in it.
At the end of the day, that presents a huge law enforcement challenge. The challenge is finding victims and finding the crimes, because the crimes are not evident. In many of the communities where we have found trafficking networks and operations in place, it has been found only by the dedicated efforts of law enforcement officials who stumble upon something, who see something that seems to be out of place, and by doing so, uncover a large trafficking operation.
You saw the trafficking DVD that we circulated and recently produced. It captures some case examples. Sometimes a victim is able to flee and report to authorities, or report to people who then report to authorities. The subsequent investigation uncovers a large network, as we did in Brooklyn involving a sex trafficking operation, that uncovered dozens of victims and numerous defendants, all based upon a single, solitary account that we uncovered.
That is not an unusual model. And in fact, that's one of the reasons why it takes so many law enforcement resources across the table to bring these cases successfully.
One of the experiences we have also found in six years of working hard on this issue is that because these crimes are hidden -- because these crimes are very labor-intensive to investigate and prosecute -- the model that works is a collaborative model. It's a task force model. It's a model that requires training first responders, the local law enforcement officials who may first uncover an incident, which they believe might be just a simple prostitution incident.
And I don't mean to say prostitution is a simple incident, but an incident that is not nearly as wide in scope as a trafficking network, which we sometimes uncover, based upon reports of first responders who find victims, who are terrified, who seem to not trust authorities, who seem to lack documentation, who seem to have injuries.
These are tips. These are clues for trained first responders that they need to investigate further, that something else may be going on. And I think that is one of the real challenges of these cases: training everyone to be alert as to how to find these cases in the first instance.
But it is absolutely critical to bring these cases successfully, that we do train state and local officials as to what to look for in the first instance, that there may be a trafficking problem that they've stumbled upon. And, again, that is something that you saw in the video with respect to some of the law enforcement officials in Texas, who found evidence of a trafficking operation.
It is absolutely essential also that these cases be investigated thoroughly. I'm lucky that we have today some of our law enforcement partners from FBI and ICE who play a huge role in helping us bring these cases. We could not do it without their help.
This takes a large investment in law enforcement resources. It takes a large investment in law enforcement resources because these networks are complex. They can be large, and they often involve an international nexus. That means that there have to be trips abroad to uncover additional victims, to conduct witness interviews, to uncover evidence, to coordinate with governments, foreign governments, for evidence and for sometimes defendants.
And at the end of the day, that is a lot of work for the law enforcement agencies that assist us. And so, obviously, without the partnership that we have with the federal law enforcement agencies and the state and local law enforcement agencies, this kind of successful prosecution could not take place.
Another important thing to remember about these cases that's different from many other kinds of cases that we prosecute in the Department of Justice is that the victims are scared. That's why we've adopted something we call the victim-centered approach in these cases.
These victims are trained by the traffickers to distrust authorities, to be told that if authorities find you, they will deport you, they will prosecute you, they will punish you; that the traffickers, as bad as they are, are their only salvation in the United States of America.
And so the victims, whenever they encounter law enforcement, are scared. And their initial reaction is to be distrustful. In many instances in the countries they come from, they don't trust the law enforcement officials there. So they don't think that it would be any different in the United States of America.
And so these victims need to be worked with. They need to be provided with services, they need to be shown we do care. That is an essential component of getting them to come on board and help us prosecute the offenders so they don't continue the cycle of victimization and abuse. It's also the right thing to do. I mean, it's the right thing to treat these victims as victims and not as offenders.
And so, one of the approaches we've taken is to spend and calculate a tremendous amount of time with the victims to gain their trust, to earn their trust, and to show them that in the United States of America, if you have been victimized, regardless of your status, you will be treated as just that, a victim. And those are the kinds of things we've put together to make a successful prosecution.
We have made an extraordinary commitment, as I said before, to this issue in the past six years, resulting in some of the statistics that the Attorney General has mentioned. And we provided you with handouts. We have increased the number of cases filed by 600 percent, increased the number of investigations by 400 percent, and tripled the number of defendants convicted with many more in the pipeline.
Last year we reached a record number of defendants convicted in a year, and we expect that progress to continue. Now someone raised a question a little bit earlier and I'll answer it now: Why have we done so much in the past year? How did that come about? Well, it came about through a lot of hard work, a lot of hard work by the dedicated prosecutors in the room, law enforcement agents in the room and throughout the country. But it also came about with the realization that this was a problem, and a burgeoning problem.
That realization came about through a number of channels, one of which was Congress in passing the TVPA. Congress has shown great leadership in this issue by passing a comprehensive set of tools that allows us to tackle the problem comprehensively.
It is fair to say that this has been a problem for a long time. It is fair to say that we also have a lot of work to do ahead of us. By every estimate, the scope of this problem is much greater than the number of defendants we have convicted. And so our work continues, and that is one of the reasons why the Attorney General has directed the formation of a dedicated group of prosecutors from the Criminal Section, the Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit, to handle and to spearhead these types of issues across the country.
That prosecution unit is headed by the Chief of the Criminal Section, Mark Kappelhoff, to my left. The Director of this new unit is Robert Moossy to my right. The Chief Counsel is Lou de Baca, who is seated underneath the pictures of all my predecessors. And two Special Litigation Counsels, Andy Kline and Hilary Axam.
Now these prosecutors are going to be dedicating 100 percent of their time to spearheading these types of investigations and prosecutions across the country, and certainly within the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division.
Now they draw on the resources of not only all the other prosecutors in the Criminal Section, which number more than fifty, but assisted by U.S. attorneys across the country as we prosecute these cases collaboratively with the U.S. attorneys offices and the task forces.
Also critical to the efforts and the success we've had in the past six years is my Senior Special Counsel for Trafficking Matters, March Bell, who has been working on these matters since he came to the Department of Justice a few years ago in his second iteration with DOJ.
With that overview, I'd be happy to take any questions you might have.
QUESTION: Mr. Kim, a couple of questions if I may. The little factsheet here says that to date, 1,123 trafficking victims have been assisted by the Civil Rights Division, but it also says that the Department sought and Homeland Security has granted continue presence to a much smaller number, 798 victims. What accounts for the difference?
MR. KIM: Well, continued presence is a category of relief that victims can get under the TVPA. They're tied to a bundle of other services as well. We provide services to as many victims as we can under the TVPA. Some of those people are also entitled to continued presence visas, but not all of them. And so the bottom line is, you can get services, it's a broad bundle of services --
QUESTION: I see.
MR. KIM: -- under the Trafficking Victim Protection Act. The only measure of service is not the continued presence visa. And so if you get a continued presence visa, you're getting one of the bundle of services, but you may get others and not get that.
QUESTION: But is there a provision in the law -- what is the legal basis on which you seek to have DHS permit continued presence? Is there sort of a -- is it humanitarian exception?
MR. KIM: Well, at the end of the day -- let me just start with a general principle, and then I'll turn it over to Robert to actually drill down and go over the details that the law requires.
Our commitment is to help the victims in any way we can. I mean, I think the only way to make these cases and to do the right thing as the law requires, is to try to let the victims know that regardless of what their status might be, if they've been victimized on U.S. soil, typically by U.S. citizens -- not typically, but often by U.S. citizens -- they have a right to protections, and they have a right to be treated humanely in our system of justice.
And so whatever services we can provide, we will provide. And in some instances, that is continued presence visas. Now the reason why the continued presence visas are important as a prosecutorial matter --
QUESTION: Well, why wouldn't it be that if you're trying to get the message out, if what you're saying is that the folks who do these crimes intimidate their victims by saying, you know, boy, if you go to the authorities, you're out of here, are you saying the opposite? That if -- anyone who comes forward or anyone who is found to be victimized will not be deported?
MR. KIM: No.
QUESTION: Why not say that?
MR. KIM: They will be treated as victims first and foremost. And in many instances, that means that they may be eligible for continued presence visas. Now one of the reasons behind the continued presence visa is to allow for successful prosecution. And it is critical, by the way, that successful prosecutions take place.
Because one of the problems that we have found in our experience is that the reason why these cases did not proceed very far is because defendants were prosecuted for perhaps local prostitution charges. The victims were deported. Guess what? Local prostitution charges don't carry much of a sentence: they're back on the streets doing it again.
It is critical to taking down these networks and ending the cycle of abuse and victimization that we prosecute them and send them to prison for the long periods of time prescribed by Congress under the TVPA.
So it's essential for all of this to work to end the cycle of victimization and that these people go to jail for the sentences that they deserve.
Now as part of that, you need victims to testify against them. So it's absolutely an essential component of continued presence visas, one of the reasons why we have it, is that we can get witnesses to testify against them. But that is not the sole component. You know, they may be eligible for extended stay, and some of them have been eligible for even longer stays and permanent visa status. And if you want, Robert can tell you more about the details of how that breaks out.
QUESTION: Well, I'm just -- and I thank you for that. I'm just wondering if there's a somewhat contradictory message here to the victims, which is come forward because we want you to help prosecute these guys, but you may get deported anyway.
MR. KIM: There is always the risk that someone who is in the country unlawfully will be subject to our immigration laws. There's always that risk. But victims should know if they come forward, they will be treated humanely, and they have a right to a basket of services, and in many instances, they will receive continued presence visas. And by the way, that is a better road map and a target toward extended stay and possibly permanent stay than the current situation, or, you know, the situation for many people illegally in the country.
You know, the TVPA is not an escape hatch from the immigration laws. But it is a road towards rescuing victims, punishing offenders, and ending victimization.
QUESTION: What are the penalties under TVPA?
MR. KIM: The penalties can be very high. I mean, at the end of the day, they're determined by the facts of each case. I can tell you what the maximum penalties are, if that's helpful.
But at the end of the day, we get sentences from 50 years or more, as you saw with the Carreto Brothers, you know, 30, 25 years. Those sentences are not unusual. And they are much higher under the TVPA than typically the state offenses that might apply to the same kind of conduct such as, you know, prostitution, with false documentation, et cetera.
QUESTION: And these are post-Booker sentences?
MR. KIM: These are statutory sentences. So these are not an application of sentencing guidelines of statutory -- I mean, Booker obviously deals with the applicability of the sentencing guidelines as a mandatory matter. These are statutory sentences, maximum sentences, and, you know, obviously post-Booker, judges still engage in sentencing guidelines analyses to determine what a reasonable sentence might be. With the application of the sentencing guidelines under the TVPA prescribed statutory guidelines, which I think result in quite fair sentences.
QUESTION: I'd like to ask the FBI representative, since these cases are so hard to find what investigative tools do you use once you've -- a ring. Do you use undercover operations? What are the tools you use to try to uncover and make arrests in these kinds of cases?
SENIOR DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. The host of tools that are available to us to include undercover operations, traditional surveillance techniques, cooperation of witnesses and victims, anything that's available to us, we'll work together with our partners at ICE and our state and local officials, whatever tools are available, like in most cases, we'll utilize.
QUESTION: Anything new, any novel approaches?
SENIOR DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think the most novel approach is comprehensive methodology by which we deal with the victims. That's the key to these cases is having the cooperation of the victims. And as Mr. Kim and others have said, spending a great deal of time with them over numerous interviews is the key to success in these cases if you do not have the victims. And I guess from a novel approach is, I don't know how novel it is, but that is the key to these successful cases is the victims.
MR. KIM: That's actually very fair -- what he says is just the bottom line. Because within the same operation, you may have people who are victims, people who are not victims. And so, trying to talk to them and interview them and go through the process of how they came into the operation, you learn the difference -- you know, there may be a category of victims within, for example, a sex brothel. That may be redundant, by the way. A brothel, that are victims, and people who are not victims as defined by the TVPA with respect to force, fraud or coercion.
And so really knowing that you will be spending a great deal of time talking to victims and trying to get information that establishes how they got there, how they're being held there, and what has happened to them, that's a large part of the law enforcement effort, is making sure that you're right about how this person got there and what's happened to them.
QUESTION: Does that mean two agents sitting down with a 302 in front of them is not always the right approach to get someone who might really be scared?
SENIOR DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, I mean, that's very true. I mean, you need to sit down with these victims for hours, days, sometimes over a period of a month. And it's just not law enforcement. Sometimes you employ victim advocacy groups to assist. Sometimes you use the prosecutors to assist in this process to gain the trust and the cooperation of these victims.
But another aspect to this matter is the sharing of information and the work with our state and local and other federal agencies by coming together with a comprehensive approach to train those people, those first responders to recognize the victimization for what it is, and then call the appropriate ICE authorities or FBI authorities so that we can engage these cases appropriately. That's the key. An information sharing partnership that exists amongst all law enforcement and our prosecutors.
MR. KIM: And these also raise other issues as well. Because, again, we have -- this is one of those areas where a victim witness coordinator helps. The lawyer needs to be more sensitive to understanding victims. Other help is essential towards helping us talk to them -- bilingual interpreters especially -- for helping us get the evidence we need.
In one major operation the FBI assisted us on, we had to fly Korean language interpreters in from all over the country to get to the locations so we had sufficient numbers on hand to help interview people and victims of the operation.
And so that is another law enforcement challenge: getting a sufficient number of interpreters on board at the appropriate time, at the appropriate place to get the information that we need and to help work with these victims because having me sit down with some of these victims is not going to do a whole lot of good if they can't talk to me, if they can't relate with me, if they view me as an obstacle and not as someone who's trying to help rescue them and help resolve the situation.
QUESTION: Speaking of the fact that all victims are not equal, what percentage roughly would you say are adults and what percentage are minors? I would think that's one important distinction. Another is, what percentage of victims know before they ever leave their home countries exactly what it is they're getting into and are willing to take the risk just in order to get here? Do you have any figures like that or can you give us some examples of somewhat typical cases?
MR. KIM: Yes I can. I mean, I can't give you exact figures. Maybe we can get back to you with exact figures on the number of cases that we prosecuted. But I will tell you that with respect to your latter question, the answer is they don't sign up for -- and we have not seen a case, I have not seen a case -- where they sign up for the type of abuse they get.
Now, I mentioned, for example, a minute ago, that in some brothels, you find people that are victims and you find people that are not victims. The distinction obviously is a legal distinction. Some are there because they're forced by coercion. Some have enlisted to do exactly what they're doing in the place of operation.
Many have not. Those are the people who are victims, those are the offenders we prosecute, people who lure them into doing that. And the Carreto Brothers example that you saw in the DVD is a prime example.
Most of the victims -- and we're talking victims now, under the TVPA -- are held and forced to conduct services, either labor or sex, by force, fraud or coercion. They have been lured to the United States by false promises; false promises of a better job, of a better life, a better education, of a road to citizenship, of husbands, of wives.
These are the promises with which they've been lured to come to America. And then once they come to America, obviously, they see a very different scenario.
With respect to ages, we have seen them across the board from minors to adults in both labor and sex trafficking operations. In many instances, you know, the stories are heartbreaking. You have some girls as young as nine, eleven, who are brought over to engage in sex trafficking or labor trafficking. You have men, boys, who are forced to come over and engage in typically labor trafficking, okay.
We had an example of a case that we prosecuted involving young Mexican boys who were deaf who handed out little cards in New York City saying that they were deaf and asking you to contribute a dollar. That was part of a labor trafficking operation, and if they did not collect $100 a day, they would be beaten. That was an operation that we recently prosecuted in New York.
We have a case where a young girl is sold by her parents into a labor trafficking operation and forced to become a household servant for some people in the U.S. That is unfortunately not atypical. We have other scenarios where citizens, usually quite well off citizens, at least middle class, we prosecute a lot of, you know, doctors.
I mean, I'm not trying to single out an industry, but we have prosecuted people with as good incomes as doctors, for calling back to their home country, saying that they want to bring somebody over to help them get a good education and status in the United States, and then forcing them to work for years in their home as an unpaid servant.
So these are the kinds of cases that we see over and over again. And, you know, we can certainly try to get you breakdowns of all the cases we prosecuted from the allegations and the age of the victims, but we see them across the board, and we see them, you know, usually involving false hopes.
And I think one of the reasons -- and, I mean, I've talked about it with Attorney General, and he cares about this issue so much is because the Attorney General is fond, as you know, of talking about the American Dream.
Well, this is not the American Dream. This is a perversion of the American Dream. It's using the American Dream as a lure for victimization. And for many people across the world, America remains a shining opportunity; it's the golden opportunity. And the traffickers know that.
And they often use that as a lure to get unsuspecting people into their clutches, usually unsophisticated, often young, certainly not conversant with how America works, the English language, law enforcement, rules, et cetera, and use all those things to keep them in victimization.
QUESTION: How many of the cases that you've seen involve sex trafficking versus labor trafficking?
MR. KIM: With respect to prosecutions that we've brought, they're possibly 75 percent on the sex trafficking side and 25 percent on the labor trafficking side.
QUESTION: That's prosecutions?
MR. KIM: Yes.
QUESTION: Okay. How about convictions? Do you have any?
MR. KIM: We can get you the exact figures. We don't have it. I mean, I will -- because we've been extraordinarily successful in these, I would imagine the ratio would be about the same.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. KIM: Our record of success in bringing these cases has been extraordinarily good. That is because of the efforts that we've made along the way, because the FBI and ICE help us put together great cases. But, you know, we have been extremely successful in bringing these cases. I don't believe we had an acquittal in any of these cases.
SENIOR DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We have had some acquittals --
MR. KIM: of individuals --
SENIOR DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: of some individuals in a case --
QUESTION: You alluded earlier to the scope of the problem. Can you be a little bit more specific as to what you think the population of victims is out there?
MR. KIM: Sure. Sure. I mean, you know, again, I will preface it with a healthy dose of caveats, because this is an underground economy. This is an underground enterprise. We can only surmise what the real scope of this enterprise is. It's just like trying to figure out, well, how much cocaine is smuggled into the U.S. every year? You basically extrapolate based upon what you know and to what you think might happen.
By some estimates, it's extraordinarily high. But, you know, some estimates by I think the CIA, possibly approximately 15,000 people are trafficked into the United States each year. And other estimates say that several hundred thousand people are trafficked internationally across all borders of all countries across the globe.
There are further estimates, and, again, you know, I can't corroborate these. These are just based upon other independent estimates by other officials. There are some estimates that globally, human trafficking problems, violations across the globe, will surpass drug sales and arms sales as the leading source of illicit revenue.
And again, based upon the theory that these victims provide a continuing stream of income. And our cases establish that a victim of sex trafficking can provide thousands of dollars for the trafficker in a day. As you saw in the DVD, I hate to keep referring to it, but you saw the operation.
It's basically slapdash, filthy conditions, mattresses on the floor, each occupied by a woman. They may service dozens of men a day. And that is an income stream, and it's not an insignificant income stream, and that's the profit motive that keeps these operations going, unfortunately.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on that question, what is your sense of how much this has grown over the years? I mean, if you were this aggressive at prosecuting 20 years ago, would you be finding the same number of cases? What is your sense of what's happened?
MR. KIM: It's impossible to say. I think it is fair to say that based upon all the law enforcement evidence that we've had, it is very, very fair to say, and I think everyone in the law enforcement community would agree, this has been a problem that's been out there for a while, okay. We have been tackling it aggressively the past six years, but it did not mushroom and, you know, come out of nowhere six years ago. This has been a problem that's been there for a while.
The difficulty has been in recognizing the problem and responding to it appropriately. To that end, we have trained thousands, thousands, of local law enforcement officials, state law enforcement officials, NGOs, and people in the community to be on the lookout for these types of problems.
Because if you had had a situation ten, fifteen years ago, where a police officer comes on the scene – a small town in Texas or one of the border states – finds a brothel, finds out the prostitutes are all illegal immigrants, you put the defendant in jail for prostitution violation, deport the prostitutes, problem solved.
That's not problem solved, because the misdemeanor penalties attached to that crime mean that the traffickers will just be up and operating in a different location.
So, again, that would never have gone on the books as a trafficking case. Now it is our job to try to educate those people who have done that, and are continuing to do that, to recognize the violations for what they are and to uncover the operations that exist. And as we've indicated, that's not an easy proposition. It's not necessarily what you see at first blush that really exists.
I mean, you know, we had law enforcement operations where we've had reason to believe there was a trafficking operation. It turns out there was no force, fraud or coercion involved in that operation. We filed other charges as appropriate.
We've found some operations where we come on a little bit late because the locals find evidence of force, fraud or coercion. We come on and we corroborate that. So what appears at first blush is not necessarily what really exists, and I think the only, generally speaking, invaluable attribute is the victims are scared, and the victims are always going to tell you the first time around that everything's okay, that, you know, they're here voluntarily, you know, and they're scared. And they don't want -- they think that you're the enemy and that you're worse than the trafficker.
QUESTION: Have you found any resistance among the states and locals to contact federal authorities when one of these things are uncovered to say come in and maybe this is one of the cases that you all will want to be interested in versus just bringing state charges?
MR. KIM: Yeah. We've had great cooperation with state and local authorities, great cooperation. I mean, I think they're very interested like we are in taking out operations that exist within their jurisdiction. They have been an integral part of why we have been successful on this front. We continue to use them as partners.
Many of the states -- and this has been a remarkable development -- many of the states within the past five years have passed anti-trafficking state laws, which help us bring our cases in addition to providing another vehicle and another avenue for resolving these cases.
The Attorney General wants all the states to pass anti-trafficking laws. I think we're at about three dozen right now, and I believe that most of those have been within the past five years. And I know the Attorney General sent out a letter about two years ago to all the states that hadn't passed it asking them to continue to work on passing them, and many have.
We can give you specific breakdowns of those. But it really is an impressive commitment, spearheaded by the Attorney General, towards getting these states to recognize the problems not only by working with us but by passing state laws that are modeled upon the federal law.
QUESTION: So the real challenge is then when state and local authorities stumble on one of these operations, recognizing it for what it is?
MR. KIM: Absolutely. The real challenge is in reaching out to victims to let them know that in the United States, law enforcement officials are to be trusted, they're there to help. There are laws on the books preventing this. And the people on the street, especially the first responders, who often stumble upon these things, to recognize that they may be a bigger problem than they see. In fact, there's a little card that we have published for police officers, firemen, NGOs, business organizations to put in their wallets to ask questions, certain types of questions that are sort of guarded that help you develop situations.
We helped pass that, distribute that, and we'll get you copies of it. It's a great little card that kind of helps law enforcement remember what kind of questions might be pertinent to developing this type of case along the way.
And another important thing that we haven't talked about that much but I mentioned earlier, NGO communities are essential for helping us identify these cases, and here's why. Because in many instances, because the victims have been so well trained to distrust law enforcement, they're not going to do what you or I would do if we were victimized.
They won't go and call the FBI or local police or ICE. They will go to people who speak their language, provide other services in the community, you know, the only people that they may feel they can relate with. And those people are often an invaluable source for us as to what, you know, I've heard that in X area there are Y people and they're being treated in this manner.
And so working with local NGOs has been a real integral tool in what we do to uncover these organizations and to help victims.
QUESTION: Can you speak a little bit more about this new unit, how it will operate, how big will it be? And how will it compare, do you have any idea what proportion of the Civil Rights Division cases in human trafficking is expected to rise within the unit?
MR. KIM: Well, you know, at the end of the day, you know, all the human trafficking cases that we find and uncover, we staff appropriately. The Attorney General, the President, Congress has given us the resources so we can do that with the support of U.S. attorney's offices. So, there are many more AUSA’s assigned to this in addition to the resources that we have in the division.
The Human Trafficking Unit, the dedicated unit, will be staffed by the people that I mentioned around the room. Now these are prosecutors that are working 100 percent of the time on these cases, and they provide an infrastructure, an infrastructure that did not exist until we created it recently.
Now without that infrastructure, you saw the success. That's because everyone essentially is focused on those problems. Now, everyone essentially also focused on the other problems that we have, other laws to enforce. For example, law enforcement misconduct cases, excessive force cases. That is all part and parcel of what the Civil Rights Division Criminal Section does, okay.
We now have dedicated officials to deal with this problem. They draw upon the resources of everyone else in the Criminal Section. So we have 50-plus prosecutors in the Criminal Section. We now have four that are completely dedicated to the mission of enforcing the TVPA and the trafficking laws. But in terms of what they can reach out for, what the scope of their resources are, that hasn't changed. And as they need more resources, I'm confident they'll get them.
I mean, the real urgent problem that we have ahead of us is education, communication, pursuing the task force model to its completion, generating a consistent supply of cases to meet the demand that we know is out there. I mean, when I say demand that we know is out there, we know there are a lot more trafficking cases out there than we have been able to prosecute, and so going forward there should be even more. Because the numbers, as impressive as they are, will, I submit, you know, only be a beginning.
QUESTION: That kind of gets to the criticism last year that I think you responded to at the time, but the point was that former members of the division who are no longer here were complaining that the emphasis on human trafficking was an example of where this Administration had sort of dropped the traditional emphasis on discrimination against African Americans and so forth. And I trust you would flatly deny that, but how do you decide on this resource allocation?
MR. KIM: Well, first of all, I mean, first of all, the vast majority of the victims, a disproportionate majority of victims in human trafficking cases are women or minorities. And the whole premise of the trafficking laws is based upon the 13th Amendment right to be free from slavery. I would quarrel with anyone who says that we are not enforcing civil rights issues.
Secondly, the Criminal Section, specifically in its mission, primary mission prior to the TVPA, the bulk of their work has always been law enforcement misconduct cases, cases where law enforcement officers use excessive force or engage in misconduct. With respect to that category, which has always been the bulk of the Criminal Section's work, we have increased convictions by 50%. So we have not fallen short in our traditional assignments, and we have expanded the section to meet the needs of the current environment that we live in. We have done so pursuant to authority given by Congress in the TVPA, and also generous resources given to us by the Attorney General to prosecute these offenses.
It's fair to say the Criminal Section has grown over the past six years to meet the new challenges, and we invite this new challenge, because it is so important. Every prosecutor and law enforcement official will tell you, this is some of the most rewarding work they've ever done. Some of the most challenging, some of the most difficult, but some of the most rewarding.
At the end of the day, I don't -- I quarrel with anyone who says that prosecuting human trafficking offenders and liberating victims is not a civil rights mission.
QUESTION: Mr. Kim, the factsheet says, talking about the victims, that they've come from 72 countries. Are there some countries, though, that are at the top of the list from whom lots have come?
MR. KIM: I will say that there are some that we see more victims from. I'll tell you about it afterwards, and we can actually give you a sheet of all the countries and the victims we found.
I will also say that we have received extraordinary support from many of the countries in terms of cooperation, in terms of providing us access to witnesses, to getting tips from their embassies, like the Embassy of Mexico has been extraordinarily helpful in helping us prosecute offenders, giving us access to victims, getting information for the offenders.
You know, Korea is another area where we've seen a number of victims. They're a Tier I country on the State Department's list, and so they have made extraordinary efforts on that. Just because we see a lot of victims from certain countries does not mean the countries are not sensitive and responsive to the concerns. It just so happens that a lot of victims come from those countries.
QUESTION: One other question about --
MODERATOR: Last question.
QUESTION: Okay. One other question about the victims. In almost all the cases, I assume the victims know that they're being brought into the U.S. illegally?
MR. KIM: Again, I think the answer to that is generally yes. I think they ultimately know what their destination is. In some instances, the victims are given false promises of what -- of how they will get advancements in America. You know, they don't necessarily know. In some instances the victims are told, listen, we're sending you to the U.S. because you're going to get husbands, you can get jobs, and then we'll get you permanent resident status.
So it's not always the case that they believe, okay, I am illegally entering the United States of America and then I will -- you know, I can't say that never happens, in fact, it does happen. But there is also the countervailing case of people who leave under lawful circumstances.
Thank you very much.
END 11:01 A.M.
# # #