Sting arrestee calls Seattle ‘john’ busts sexist, wants break Man swept up in a sex sting contests the city's approach to cracking down on 'johns'

Seattle city attorney Pete Holmes, center, listens as defense attorney for Kareem Jalil, Robert Goldsmith, makes his arguments in court in the case of Seattle v. Jalil, Sept. 27, 2018. Judge Sean O'Donnell ruled in the city's favor and will allow the King County Superior Court to review a lower court's decision mandating that the city consider a diversion for a man accused of sexual exploitation, which challenges the city's new policy focused on prosecuting johns. less Seattle city attorney Pete Holmes, center, listens as defense attorney for Kareem Jalil, Robert Goldsmith, makes his arguments in court in the case of Seattle v. Jalil, Sept. 27, 2018. Judge Sean O'Donnell ... more Photo: GENNA MARTIN, SEATTLEPI Photo: GENNA MARTIN, SEATTLEPI Image 1 of / 14 Caption Close Sting arrestee calls Seattle ‘john’ busts sexist, wants break 1 / 14 Back to Gallery

The Seattle City Attorney's Office won a minor victory Wednesday in its effort to uphold a new policy of cracking down on people caught paying for sex.

King County Superior Court Judge Sean O'Donnell ruled in favor of the city in a dispute challenging how Seattle's prostitution-related laws are enforced. But the city's fight isn't over.

City prosecutors made a point in the last five years of charging johns and focusing less on rounding up prostitutes, declaring that sex workers are mostly victims of violence, drug addiction, poverty or circumstance. But one man arrested last year is challenging that policy, claiming, among other things, that it is sexist.

A municipal court judge ruled in favor of his challenge this summer, but O'Donnell ruled Wednesday that the a higher court -- his court -- can review the earlier decision.

The dispute stems from an undercover sting by Seattle police in July 2016, in which 204 men were arrested at a fake massage parlor set up in the University District. The establishment was advertised on Backpage.com and offered a slate of sexual services, according to Seattle police reports.

RELATED: Charge: Seattle pimp forced woman to prostitute at gunpoint

Kareem Jalil, 28, was one of those men swept up in the operation. Seattle police reports say he ordered sex for $200 and paid an undercover detective before being arrested. He was charged in February 2017 with sexual exploitation, a misdemeanor previously known as patronizing a prostitute.

Before 2011, the city's approach to enforcing prostitution laws appeared to target the sex workers themselves. About 60 percent of prostitution-related cases in city court were brought against purported sex workers, while the other 40 percent were against johns and pimps, according to City Attorney Pete Holmes.

But Holmes came to see sex workers as victims, not criminals. He said in 2012 that his office would shift its focus to cracking down on johns, or the "demand" side of the business. That approach is known as the "Nordic Model."

In 2015, the City Council also voted unanimously to change the name of the sex buying offense from "patronizing a prostitute" to "sexual exploitation."

Before 2016, Seattle allowed accused sex buyers to enter into a "diversion" agreement on a first-time violation without pleading guilty, which kept the public airing of the offense to a minimum and their records clean. But Holmes determined that this tactic did little to deter johns or curtail demand, so he decided in early 2016 to draw up a new policy: offer a 12-month deferred jail sentence, but only if a defendant enters a guilty plea. And that's only if a defendant is a first-time offender.

Holmes claims that this policy is a general rule, but doesn't eliminate prosecutorial discretion that allows prosecutors to review each case individually and consider mitigating factors in charging the case.

But it's this detail that triggered an unfavorable decision for the city by the municipal court.

RELATED: Charge: Pimp recruited at-risk girls to strip at Seattle clubs

Jalil filed a motion for diversion in July, decrying that diversions are no longer available for what his attorney, Robert Goldsmith, calls a "petty misdemeanor."

Goldsmith largely argued in the motion that the law is discriminatory against men, while lenient on women.

"In the City Attorney's office public policy statements, there is no doubt that it wants to punish men and not the women involved in prostitution," he wrote in the motion. "Simultaneously, it wants to rehabilitate and decriminalize the stigma for female prostitutes and increase it for men.

"This type of gender inequality is at the heart of the ongoing sting operations, especially in light of the police and/or prosecutor engendered media attention accorded it," he added.

But at the heart of the matter was whether the city exercises enough flexibility in prosecuting is sexual exploitation cases.

Ignoring the gender discrimination argument, Seattle Municipal Court Judge Karen Donohue issued an order Aug. 9 mandating that the city consider diversion for Jalil, arguing that the city has abandoned flexibility in charging these cases.

The new Nordic Model policy "removes individualized consideration of each case, thus taking away prosecutorial discretion, which is not consistent with principles of due process," she wrote.

The City Attorney's Office derided the decision as judicial overreach in controlling how prosecutors handle their cases. They filed a motion for the judge to reconsider her decision, but that was denied.

The next step: applying for a writ of review to the King County Superior Court, which led to Wednesday's hearing. Pete Holmes sat alongside attorneys James Corning and Jeffrey Coopersmith, who represent the city.

RELATED: Police say prostitution ring may have served Seattle leaders

Coopersmith argued that Donohue was mistaken in thinking the city maintains an immovable policy on prosecuting sexual exploitation cases and that it is willing to hear from defendants on mitigating circumstances that might persuade them to change course.

"She reached out and found a due process violation based on what she considered to be a mandated policy," Coopersmith said.

But Jalil's only mitigating piece of information he offered was his heretofore clean criminal record, he claimed. And that's a common trait of accused johns that doesn't make Jalil uniquely qualified for a break in policy, he said.

Goldsmith argued that a senior attorney in the city prosecutor's office was unwilling to negotiate the case. And all that Donohue ordered was that the city consider diversion, not mandate it, he pointed out.

O'Donnell's ruling in favor of the city did not make any determinations on the merits of their case, but allows for an additional hearing that will consider the legality of Donohue's order that the city consider diversion for Jalil. If O'Donnell had denied the city's request, Donohue's ruling would have stood and Jalil's case would have proceeded.

That hearing will occur November 27. Meanwhile, Jalil's case remains on hold.