United States v. Abraham

498 F.Supp.3d 175

UNITED STATES of America,

v.Reginald ABRAHAM, Defendant.

CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 17-10269-WGY

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Filed November 2, 2020

Leah B. Foley, United States Attorney's Office, Miranda Hooker, Pepper Hamilton LLP, Stephen W. Hassink, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA, for United States of America.

Kevin L. Barron, Attorney at Law, Zachary Lown, Lown Law Firm, Boston, MA, for Defendant.

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

YOUNG, D.J.

Of the myriad responsibilities of a United States District Judge, the two most important are presiding over trials¹ and sentencing offenders. Although most other judicial functions can be delegated subject to review, these two are central to the judicial role and only the trial judge acting alone appropriately can meet their unique demands.

On March 3, 2020, Reginald Abraham stood before the Court, convicted by a jury after a full and fair trial of four counts of sex trafficking by force, threats, fraud, or coercion.

His conduct was accurately limned by Assistant United States Attorney Leah Foley:

Reginald Abraham's behavior is that of a sociopath. Like other predators he could care less about the destruction and devastation that he caused, because somehow he feels entitled to take away the dignity and self-worth of others. This is a man who cannot be rehabilitated. At his age, to be doing what he was doing, is an absolute sign of an irredeemable soul. There is no one he would not take advantage of. And what's worse, he knows who he is, which is why he focused his viciousness on the most vulnerable victims. He preyed on these victims because he knew he couldn't live without the sick pleasures he gained from destroying them.

We use words to describe the actions that people do in their lives, the ones that all apply here, "prey," "beat," "assault," "rape," "manipulate," "coerce," "force," these words do not do justice for what this defendant inflicted on countless victims over a considerable span of years. We use adjectives to embellish descriptions of people and stories. In this case there is no embellishment, he is evil, he is inhumane, and he is dark.

He inflicted unimaginable torture on his victims both psychologically and physically. He made T.B. wear a dog collar and eat out of a bowl because she had the gall to disobey him. He beat her so badly, pistol-whipping her as she urinated on herself, and then was forced to sleep in that pool of urine to teach her a lesson. He told her she was not worth shooting, because he would then have to get rid of her body. Heaven forbid he ever do anything, he always had others do it for him.

J.N. She saw the defendant beating K.B. so badly that her hair had turned bright [b]right red, then he beat [the] crap out of her because she had the humanity to check on her. As a parting gift, he subjected her to a weekend of being gang raped. He locked her there so that the other girls would see what happens when you try to leave him. He then put a cigarette out on her face.

E.S. You might recall that she was so terrified to come here and face the man who had beaten and raped and tortured her that she had to be physically escorted into the courtroom and onto the witness bench. And if that weren't bad enough, to relive the beatings, the sexual assaults, and watching others being beaten, watching K.B. being walked around like a dog, there were things she couldn't even answer on the stand because it was so humiliating.

K.G. talked about being choked so severely and punched that she had to seek medical attention. She talked about the fact that she would rather be beaten than listen to other people be beaten.

He had a complete psychological hold on his victims. He made them introduce ... him to their families, so that if they ever revealed who he actually was, no one would believe them.

He pointed guns at them. He led them to believe that he had killed another prostitute and would do the same thing to them if they broke his rules. He separated them from their family. He threatened to hurt their family if they ever attempted to leave him. He kept their personal belongings, when they left him, as if he hadn't already taken enough.

He set the quotas.... [Y]ou heard at trial, in the text messages that were introduced at trial, [which] proved that this part of the victim's testimony was absolutely true, they couldn't go home until they reached the quotas. Most times they had to earn between $500 and $1,000 a night. The texts showed that they would often not hit these quotes until the early-morning hours, but they could not go home without earning the money that this man then took from them.

They had to get permission to put gas in their car, to buy food. They had to get permission to live.

He left a trail of destruction that's far and wide. The victims who encountered him are traumatized for life. They can't imagine that they will ever get a random friend request on Facebook or social media and [not] immediately ask themselves, "What is this?" and think back to the day that they fell for this man's deceit in that very same way. Any time a stranger approaches them and simply smiles, they will remember that that is what the defendant did to them. Anyone tells them they are worthy and loved, they will question if it's just a ploy to break them down and take them over.

Tr. Sentencing Hr'g 31-34, ECF No. 222.

What sentence ought he receive?²

The government recommended a sentence of thirty years imprisonment. Abraham's counsel argued for the minimum mandatory fifteen years.

Judges are advised to begin a sentencing analysis by referring to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (calling the sentencing guidelines a "starting point" and "initial benchmark"); see generally United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 245, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Here, the Court's probation office, after consulting with the government and (properly) disallowing most of Abraham's objections, calculated a guideline sentencing range of 360 months to life. See Presentence Investigation Report ("PSR") 28.

I. The "Bottoms"

The PSR captures the evidence at trial with substantial accuracy.

Abraham began his operation of sex trafficking in approximately January of 2012 and continued through at least August of 2016. Id. ¶ 8. One of Abraham's main recruitment tools was to contact targets over Facebook, promising them drugs and a free place to stay, and often expressing interest in dating these women. Id. ¶ 9. Abraham tended to choose vulnerable women, many --- though not all -- already addicted to drugs. Id.

Once women came to his house, Abraham would use violence, threats and the supplying or withholding of drugs to induce and coerce them into engaging in prostitution. Id. ¶¶ 8-9. He would advertise on Backpage.com, choose where the women worked, and give them nightly quotas. Id. ¶ 10. If the women met their quota, he would often reward them with extra drugs, but would beat them and withhold drugs if they failed. Id. ¶¶ 10-11. Abraham also forced the women to follow his rules, which included staying in his house during the day, turning over all money they made, and not speaking to other men, and would beat them or withhold drugs if they disobeyed him. Id. ¶ 11. He also made others watch the beatings when he was displeased with one of the women. Id.

The jury found beyond reasonable doubt that Abraham had victimized four women through his criminal sex trafficking: J.N., K.G., T.B., and E.S.

Abraham first reached out to J.N. by promising her that she could dance at a strip club he owned, and she eventually agreed to join him at his home, believing she would be his girlfriend. Id. ¶ 13. Instead, Abraham raped her and forced her to engage in prostitution. Id. ¶¶ 13-14. Abraham would regularly beat, choke, and slap J.N. and would threaten her with his pit bull, and, at one point, J.N. witnessed Abraham beat a woman so badly that her hair was stained red with blood. Id. ¶ 14.

When J.N. told Abraham that she was planning to leave the house, he invited over three friends³ who took turns beating and raping her. This assault ended with Abraham putting out a lit cigarette on J.N.’s face, for which she eventually required medical treatment. Id. Abraham then got J.N. high and left her at a hotel, after which she made her way back to her home in Maine. Id. This gang-rape formed the basis for the jury's determination that Abraham was a "leader or organizer" of at least three others in conducting his crimes of sex trafficking. Tr. Sentencing Hr'g 10.

As he did with J.N., Abraham first reached out to K.G. over Facebook and posed as a potential suitor before bringing her into his operation as a prostitute. PSR ¶ 17. While at Abraham's home, K.G. often saw or overheard his attacks on other women, once witnessing a beating so severe that the victim was choking and coughing up blood. Id. ¶ 18. Abraham also beat K.G. so badly that she had to seek medical care for a bruised rib, and when she attempted to return to the house to collect her belongings he threatened to shoot her. Id. K.G. was not only a prostitute, but also a "bottom" in the trafficking operation, supervising the other women, preparing them for "dates," and telling Abraham when they broke his rules. Id. ¶ 19.

Abraham first met the third victim, T.B., in Maine, invited her to his house, and pressured her to engage in prostitution when she arrived. Id. ¶ 21. Like, K.G., T.B. worked as one of Abraham's "bottoms" during her time there. Id. ¶ 26. T.B. was a frequent victim of Abraham's abuse. He regularly hit her and threatened her with a firearm, and engaged in severe emotional abuse, once forcing her to wear a dog collar and eat out of a dog bowl when she was "disobedient." Id. ¶¶ 23-24. On another occasion, upon finding a text from another man on her phone, he beat her so severely that she urinated on herself, and he forced her to sleep in the...