Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Kimmy

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

July 6, 2018

United States of America, Plaintiff,
Gregory Allen Kimmy, a/k/a Fat P, Defendant.



         This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendant Gregory Allen Kimmy's (“Defendant”) motion for modification of his detention order, (Doc. No. 796), which was entered by this Court on September 26, 2017. (Doc. No. 386.) The Government opposes Defendant's motion for modification of his detention order. (Doc. No. 816.)


         On May 30, 2017, the Government filed a Motion for Emergency Stay and for Review and Revocation of Release Order. (Doc. No. 58.) On May 30, 2017, this Court filed an Order granting the Government's motion for emergency stay pending the Court's ruling on the Government's motion. (Doc. No. 59.) On June 1, 2017, the Court filed an Order and Memorandum ordering Defendant detained pending further order of this Court. (Doc. No. 72.)

         On September 19, 2017, a detention hearing was held before the undersigned. As noted above, on September 26, 2017, this Court entered an Order and Memorandum (“September 26, 2017 Order”) denying Defendant's motion for pretrial release.


         As the parties are aware, the Second Superseding Indictment before the Court charges Defendant with Conspiracy to Commit Sex Trafficking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1594 (Count 1); Conspiracy to Commit Transportation to Engage in Prostitution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Count 3); Conspiracy to Engage in Money Laundering, 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (Count 4); and Conspiracy to Use a Communication Facility to Promote Prostitution, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Count 5). (Doc. No. 314 (“Indictment”).)

         The United States Probation Department in the Western District of Texas prepared a bond report in advance of the detention hearing. Because of the defendant's connections to Austin, Texas, employment, and medical issues, the probation officer recommended detention based upon both the defendant's risk of nonappearance and risk of danger to the community. At that time, the recommendation of the probation officer was based upon (1) the nature of the offense charged; (2) the defendant's ties to a foreign country; (3) the defendant's possession of a valid U.S. passport; (4) the defendant's travel to Thailand in 2014; (5) the defendant's ownership of a firearm; (6) the charge involved a sex offense-abuse; and (7) safety concerns for the community.

         Admittedly, at the time of the motion hearing, on September 19, 2017, the Court examined allegations that were detailed in an affidavit, which included information from law enforcement interviews of at least three victims of the sex trafficking organization who worked at the house of prostitution in Austin, Texas, identified as the house of the defendant and his wife and co-defendant Saowapha Thinran. At that time, the Court found, and continues to find, based upon the record before the Court, that the defendant was the lessor of the house of prostitution, he was observed at the house of prostitution, and a phone number associated with him was used to schedule sex buyers. Further, the Court noted that witnesses would testify to the defendant's role as a house boss, including his connection to other members of the conspiracy. The record before this Court establishes that so-called house bosses run the day-to-day operations, including advertising victims for commercial sex acts, procuring and maintaining the houses of prostitution, scheduling sex buyers, and ensuring that a portion of the cash was routed back to pay down the victim's bondage debts. (Indictment ¶ 5.b.) In exchange, the house bosses would then retain a significant portion of the cash that the victims received, typically forty percent.

         The Court incorporates into this Order its findings and conclusions set forth in its September 26, 2017 Order. (Doc. No. 386.) What has been established since the Court's Order is that each of the victims referenced in the Court's original Order were trafficking victims who were under a bondage debt up to $60, 000 to the sex trafficking organization which the defendant was a member of or participated in. This Court has taken numerous pleas in this case since September of 2017 where this bondage debt has been acknowledged and admitted to by numerous co-defendants.

         Moreover, since the Court's Order, two additional victims have been identified, as observed by the Government, namely, C.N. (known as Sai) and S.M. (known as Amy), who worked for the defendant and Thinran while they were still under the bondage debt that many of the women, who this Court has referred to as victims, have acknowledged and were under, as many co-defendants have admitted to.

         It is true that the defendant has consistently asserted that the allegations against him constitute, if anything, misdemeanor prostitution in the state of Texas, and he has steadfastly denied that he has any connection to an international sex trafficking conspiracy. However, scrutiny of the search warrants that the Court has before it, set out the specifics about the defendant's alleged role and knowledge of the criminal conspiracy, as this Court observed in its September 26, 2017 Order. There is some sad irony in all of the facts being asserted before this Court, to the extent that the defendant himself purchased his wife's freedom from her bondage debt from the organization and then, after that, went on to run the house of prostitution with her for a number of years, even after the initial indictment in United States v. Intarathong, 16-CR-257. Moreover, even setting aside that the defendant, at a minimum, offered to pay off his wife's bondage debt that remained in the amount of $18, 000, to presumably extricate her from the sex trafficking organization, the Government has identified five victims who worked at the defendant's and Thinran's house of prostitution and there are connections to multiple other house bosses and money launderers in different locations throughout the United States--all alleged to be part of the sex trafficking conspiracy before this Court.

         With respect to the defendant's medical condition, the parties have described a quite different set of circumstances to this Court. At this time, the Government asserts that the defendant's medical issues have been addressed. The Court will continue to review that situation depending on the status of the case and how it progresses. Until there is further evidence before the Court, there is ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.