Friday 11 Jul
 
 

 

OKG Newsletter


Home · Articles · News · CFN · ReBates on charges?
CFN
 

ReBates on charges?


Gazette staff February 2nd, 2006

It sorta seems like the pimping charges against Video Vigilante Brian Bates are over. Or are they?   Readers of CFN remember Bates, who runs around South OKC, catching on v...

cfn2805_rebate-copy

It sorta seems like the pimping charges against Video Vigilante Brian Bates are over. Or are they?

 

Readers of CFN remember Bates, who runs around South OKC, catching on video the plethora of prostitutes in the act in public places, then shaming everyone involved by exposing them on the Web. He says he does it to stop prostitution. Sure, sure, some say, snickering. Others laud his efforts.

 

Oklahoma County District Attorney Wes Lane was one who used to praise Bates' work "¦ that is, until Bates happened to catch the OKC police beating the peewad stuffings out of Donald Pete, a black guy whom the officers claim was resisting arrest when Bates and cops caught him with a prostitute. Afterward, Bates said officials soured on him. Lane denies this.

 

Finally, Lane filed charges almost a year ago against Bates for pandering, meaning that Bates was in effect being a pimp by paying some of the women to perform where he could get a good shot with his camera. (We thought the money went to the pimp from the prostitutes, but hey, it's not like we're experts on this.)

 

Last month, however, efforts by Lane fell before a motion by Bates' attorney Scott Adams asking that the charges be dismissed on grounds, as Adams put it in an interview, that they were a "ball of shit."

 

Judge Ray Elliott, whose wife Sandra Elliott works for Lane, seems to have agreed, sustaining Adams' motion when the prosecutors failed to file a response after two extensions.

 

Faced with a great, big, "D'oh!" moment, prosecutors hurriedly filed standard potboiler paperwork called a "motion to reconsider," but the judge threw it out because they didn't address anything new. Then, we hear, the prosecutors told Adams they were going to appeal it to a higher court, at which point he informed them they'd missed that deadline, too.

Lane's office issued a statement suggesting Adams pulled a double-secret fast one by filing this motion to dismiss that took his prosecutors completely by surprise.

 

We gotta wonder on that one, considering that the noble institution that prints CFN ran a story about Adams' motion to dismiss about a month before that hearing. The story even gave the deadline for when everything was due. Honest, this publication's reporter apparently did everything possible to remind the prosecutors, even calling their office for quotes. And they still missed it. Hmmm.

 

But wait! Word trickles down that Lane's office may be considering the possibility of refiling the same charges.

 

Really? Let's see. Charge Bates with being a pimp, and claim he paid a hooker $40-$60 for her time on camera servicing a client. The star witness is a self-admitted prostitute who has racked up charges of prostituting, trespassing, drug possession and weapons possession.

 

For us here at CFN, this is a gift that keeps on giving.

 

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close