The author(s) shown below used Federal funding provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice to prepare the following resource: 

Document Title: An Empirical Analysis of the Intersection of 

Organized Crime and Human Trafficking In 

the United States 

Author(s): Vanessa Bouché, Ph.D. 

Document Number: 250955

Date Received: July 2017 

Award Number: 2013-R2-CX-0049

This resource has not been published by the U.S. Department of 

Justice. This resource is being made publically available through the 

Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference 

Service. 

Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and 

do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. 

Department of Justice. 
AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE INTERSECTION 

OF ORGANIZED CRIME AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING 

IN THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 28, 2017

AWARD NUMBER: 2013-R2-CX-0049

VANESSA BOUCHÉ, PH.D.

TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

BOX 297021

FORT WORTH, TX 76129

VANESSA.BOUCHE@TCU.EDU

(817) 297-4218

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this research is threefold: 

1) to examine the extent to which human trafficking in the United States is perpetrated 

by organized criminal groups; 

2) to better understand the groups, individuals, and operations of the organized crime 

groups engaged in human trafficking; and 

3) to make available the full corpus of federally prosecuted human trafficking cases in a 

dynamic, open-source, searchable online database at HumanTraffickingData.org.

BACKGROUND & RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Since at least 2000, when the United Nations adopted the Palermo protocols, scholars have 

espoused the idea that transnational organized crime is behind global trafficking in 

persons. However, a lack of empirical testing led to criticism of the claim that human 

trafficking is an organized crime issue. The aim of this research is to fill that empirical gap 

by answering the following questions: 

1) To what extent is human trafficking in the United States perpetrated by organized 

crime groups? 

2) What types of organized crime groups are engaged in human trafficking in the 

United States? 

3) Who are the individuals that comprise the organized crime groups engaged in 

human trafficking in the United States? 

4) Where do these organized crime groups operate? 

5) How do these organized crime groups operate? 

METHODS

This study answers these questions using a mixed-methods approach. The quantitative 

methods includes collecting a comprehensive dataset of federally-prosecuted human 

trafficking cases, coding the cases, and using a variety of methodological approaches, 

including geospatial analysis, to analyze the data. 

The qualitative approach includes semi-structured interviews with 11 offenders in these 

cases. The interview transcripts were analyzed using grounded theory to understand 

models for how the groups are structured and operate, as well as motivations for engaging 

in the criminal enterprise. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
ii

FINDINGS

To what extent is human trafficking in the United States perpetrated by 

organized crime groups? 

 Searches of federally-prosecuted human trafficking cases in the United States 

yielded a total of 862 cases between 2000 and 2015 with a total of 2,096 

defendants. 

o 58% (1227) of all defendants in human trafficking cases operated as part of 

an organized criminal group. 

 The type of human trafficking in which organized crime groups engaged 

varied. 

o 34% engaged in both adult and minor sex trafficking 

o 24% engaged only in minor sex trafficking 

o 18% engaged in labor trafficking not involving any trafficking for commercial 

sex 

o 17% engaged only in adult sex trafficking 

 Victims in the organized crime cases vary by type of human trafficking. 

o In cases involving only adult sex trafficking, 55% of the victims are foreign 

nationals 

o In cases involving only minor sex trafficking, just 92% of victims were U.S. 

nationals. 

o 93% of victims in labor trafficking cases are foreign nationals. 

What types of organized crime groups are engaged in human trafficking 

in the United States? 

 This research develops the 5-S typology of organized crime, which is named for 

five different characteristics of organized crime groups: size, scope, structure, 

sophistication, and self-identification. 

 The five characteristics combine to generate five types of organized crime groups. 

As applied to human trafficking cases in the United States, the groups break down as 

follows:

o Mom & Pop (35% of organized crime cases) 

 A combined 71% of Mom & Pop groups engage only in sex trafficking 

(either minor only, adult only, or both minor & adult). The sex 

trafficking venues for Mom & Pop groups are varied, but the plurality 

is brothels/massage parlors (33%) and Internet prostitution (25%). 

 21% percent of Mom & Pop groups engage only in labor trafficking, 

with no sex trafficking in their operations. The plurality of Mom & 

Pop labor trafficking is in domestic servitude (41%), with another 

24% of cases in agriculture. 

 The average number of victims exploited by a Mom & Pop group is 

17.6, and the average number of defendants per case is 5.30. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
iii

o Crime Ring (33% of organized crime cases) 

 Ninety-five percent of the trafficking among Crime Rings has no labor 

trafficking at all and is only for the purpose of commercial sex. Almost 

half (47%) of all the sex trafficking cases by Crime Rings are Internet 

prostitution cases. 

 The average number of victims exploited by a Crime Ring is 7, and the 

average number of defendants per case is 5.30. 

o Gang (6% of organized crime cases) 

 100% of the Gang cases involved trafficking for commercial sexual 

exploitation. Gang cases involve only street prostitution and Internet 

prostitution, and the vast majority of victims in these cases are 

minors. 

 The average number of victims exploited in a Gang case is 8.8, and 

there are 14.5 defendants on average per case. 

o Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate (0%) 

 Although Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates are not represented at all among 

the federally prosecuted human trafficking cases involving organized 

crime, there is evidence that they are involved in facilitating the 

human trafficking operations of other types of organized criminals 

(facilitating transportation, providing false documentation, etc.). 

 Moreover, there are ten cases that trace back to Tenancingo, Mexico, a 

city known for sex trafficking, pimping, and prostitution. While they 

have been classified as Mom & Pop in this report, an argument can be 

made that these ten cases represent Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate activity. 

o Illegal Enterprise (26% of organized crime cases) 

 Illegal enterprises are the only organized crime type that has cases 

across every combination of human trafficking. 

 The plurality (36%) of the Illegal Enterprise cases is for labor 

trafficking only. 52% of the Illegal Enterprise labor cases are in the 

hotel & hospitality sector. 

 Illegal Enterprises have the most adult sex trafficking cases of any 

other type. 50% of Illegal Enterprise sex trafficking cases are in 

brothels/massage parlors, with another 19% in strip clubs. 

 The average number of victims in cases involving Illegal Enterprises is 

65.7 and the average number of defendants per case is 7.02. 

Who are the individuals that comprise the organized crime groups 

engaged in human trafficking? 

 Data on age at arrest was collected for 86% of defendants. 

o The average age at arrest across all defendants in organized crime cases, 

regardless of type of organized crime group or type of trafficking, is 33 years 

old. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
iv

o Those prosecuted for minor sex trafficking are significantly younger than 

those prosecuted for other forms of trafficking. 

o Defendants in Gang cases are significantly younger than those in other 

organized crime types, with an average age of 25. 

o Those involved in Illegal Enterprises have an average age of 38, which is 

significantly older than defendants in other typologies. 

 Defendant gender data was collected for 99% of defendants in human 

trafficking cases involving organized crime. 

o Overall, defendants are 69% male and 31% female. 

o Minor sex trafficking cases and cases that involve both minor and adult sex 

trafficking are most disproportionately male at roughly 73%. 

o Women are more likely to engage in labor trafficking than sex trafficking as 

compared to men. 

o There is a statistically significant difference in the gender makeup of Gangs 

(80% male) vis-à-vis all other organized crime group types. 

 Country of origin data was collected for 84% of defendants.

o Defendants who trafficked minors for commercial sex come from 13 different 

countries of origin. The vast majority is from United States. 

o Those engaged in adult sex trafficking come from 15 different countries, and 

the vast majority is from the United States. 

o Defendants in labor trafficking cases come from a more geographically 

diverse set of countries, and the number of defendants per nation is more 

evenly distributed than is the case for minor and adult sex trafficking. The 

top countries include the United States (56), Mexico (55), and Honduras (23). 

o Mom & Pops are evenly divided with defendants from the United States and 

Mexico. Crime Rings defendants are predominantly American. Those in 

Illegal Enterprises are more evenly divided across countries, but the top 

three are the United States, Mexico, and Honduras. 

 Human trafficking offenders are motivated by various push and pull factors.

o Primary push factors involve socio-environmental variables over which the 

individual has very little control. These include: childhood abuse and/or 

neglect, lack of education, and a destructive social network. These primary 

factors, as discrete or overlapping experiences, can lead to any or all of the 

secondary push factors and serve to disempower the individual. 

o Secondary push factors are symptoms of the primary push factors. They 

include criminal history, drug and/or substance abuse, and financial stress. 

These lead to feeling a lack of control over one’s life.

o The pull factors for engaging in human trafficking include power, control, and 

esteem. Those that engage in human trafficking reclaim power and control in 

their lives by exerting power and control over others. 

Where do the organized crime groups engaged in human trafficking 

operate? 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
v

 Based on federal prosecution records, the counties in the United States with the most 

bases of operations of organized crime groups engaging human trafficking include: 

Harris County, Houston, TX; Fulton County, Atlanta, GA; and Queens County, Queens, 

NY.

 There are confirmed human trafficking crimes in all 50 U.S. states, as well as two 

territories, Guam and American Samoa. The states with the most verified human 

trafficking crimes are: California, Texas, New York, and Georgia.

 Of the sex trafficking crime locations revealed in federal prosecution records, the 

plurality is in brothels/massage parlors (325 crime locations), then street prostitution (201 

crime locations), internet prostitution (175 crime locations), escort services (48 crime 

locations), and strip clubs (30 crime locations).

 Federally-prosecuted labor trafficking crime locations reveal the following trend: 

hotel/hospitality has 103 crime locations, agriculture has 47 crime locations, and 

domestic servitude has 19 different crime locations. 

How do organized crime groups engaged in sex trafficking operate? 

 Recruitment 

o Recruitment of victims takes place through a “lover boy” story and through 

exploitation of poverty and drug abuse. 

o Drivers are usually recruited through family/friend networks and tend to be 

individuals looking to make extra money. Drivers sometimes branch out and 

start their own operation. 

o In some international network models, security guards, who may be former 

military, are recruited from overseas because they can be paid less and they 

can quickly leave the country if necessary. 

 Operational security 

o Organized crime groups running sex trafficking operations can be very 

sophisticated in their operational security to evade law enforcement 

detection and to avoid dangerous buyers. 

o Techniques to evade law enforcement detection include setting up Illegal 

Enterprises, bribing law enforcement officers, posting and following 

“bewares” on websites, and using aliases, burn phones, and code words. 

o In order to ensure safety with buyers, the groups run background checks, 

check IP addresses and run WhoIs searches, conduct property value 

assessments on their homes, and maintain lists of those that are potentially 

dangerous.

 Organizational structure 

o This research identifies four different organizational structures for organized 

crime groups engaged in sex trafficking: the hybrid model, the international 

network model, the Gang model, and the Tenancingo, Mexico model. 

 Advertising 

o Most of the advertising is online and by word of mouth. 

o In the Tenancingo, Mexico model, the most common form of advertisement is 

handing out cards on the street. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
vi

 Pricing structure & payment 

o Pricing varies by model and location. 

o This research estimated that in one mid-size Midwestern city, the annual 

gross revenues of one segment of the hybrid model alone is just under $115 

million per year. 

o Some international network models can make up to $20,000 per week per 

victim between stripping and commercial sex acts. They have roughly 25 

victims at any given time. This amounts to $500,000 per week. For the 

Eastern European victims with blonde hair and blue eyes, the rate is up to 

$1000 for a 15-minute sex act. 

o The minimum annual gross revenue from the Tenancingo network in Queens, 

NY is roughly $36.5 million per year, but it could be as high at $100 million. 

 Managing money

o Money laundering appears to be common, especially through modeling 

agencies, barber shops, and tanning salons. 

o In the Tenancingo, Mexico model, the money is sent back to Mexico through 

couriers. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Policymakers should establish a clear definition of “organized crime” and the 

broader anti-human trafficking community should agree on a set typology that can 

assist law enforcement and prosecutors as they investigate and prosecute these 

types of cases.

2. The law enforcement community should critically examine the reasons behind the 

lack of organized crime prosecutions to discern whether it is a function of the true 

reality of human trafficking crimes, or a function of the politics and incentive 

structures around arrests and prosecutions.

3. The counter-human trafficking community should continue to educate the law 

enforcement community and the general public on the various organizational and 

operational capacities of the different types of organized crime groups engaged in 

human trafficking to better prevent, disrupt, and prosecute the networks.

4. The criminal justice community should intensify its focus on Illegal Enterprises. 

Targeting this type of organized crime group through increased investigation, 

prosecution, and public awareness campaigns may provide a greater return on 

resources invested.

5. The public should be made aware that, per federal prosecutions data, there are 

verified human trafficking crime locations in all 50 states, as well as two U.S. 

territories. Local communities should be made aware of the specific types of human 

trafficking that are most prevalent around them. 

6. The anti-trafficking community and policy makers should examine early 

intervention efforts targeted at potential victimizers. 

7. More research should be conducted on the involvement of 

cartels/mafias/syndicates in facilitating human trafficking operations.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project was awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 

U.S. Department of Justice (supported by 2013-R2-CX-0049). The opinions, findings, 

conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this document are those of the author and 

do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Justice, Texas Christian 

University, its trustees, or its funders. 

The author thanks a number of individuals for their support and assistance with this 

research. In particular, the author is grateful for the support and assistance of John 

Picarelli, former grant manager at the National Institute of Justice. 

Global Centurion and the Human Trafficking Pro Bono Law Project assisted with 

identifying federally prosecuted human trafficking cases. The TCU Computer Science 

Senior Design Team and Weston Platter provided critical support in developing 

HumanTraffickingData.org. Dr. Jody Klein-Saffran, as well as other staff at a variety of 

federal prison facilities, facilitated access to the federal prisons to conduct inmate 

interviews. The author would also like to thank Dr. Sean Crotty for his guidance with 

geospatial analysis. 

This work could not have been accomplished without the large team of undergraduate 

research assistants at Texas Christian University, many of whom dedicated themselves to 

see this work to completion over the course of several years. The author is grateful to 

Maddie Bailey, Shannon Brewer, Madelyn Carter, Jeff Cross, Ryan DeTamble, Alexis Fehler, 

Dakota Foster, Ayesha Hassan, Allegra Hernandez, Ethan Murray, Dana Nottingham, 

Stephen Paul, Lalo Ramon, Maddie Reddick, and Scott Snodgrass. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I

BACKGROUND & RESEARCH QUESTIONS I

METHODS I

FINDINGS II

RECOMMENDATIONS VI

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS VIII

TABLE OF FIGURES XI

TABLE OF TABLES XII

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1

DEFINING ORGANIZED CRIME 1

HUMAN TRAFFICKING AS ORGANIZED CRIME 2

HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENDERS: GROUP-LEVEL CHARACTERISTICS 3

HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENDERS: INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL CHARACTERISTICS 4

MODELS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING NETWORKS AND OPERATIONS 5

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY 7

PHASE I 8

5-S TYPOLOGY OF ORGANIZED CRIME 8

CASE COLLECTION 11

CASE CODING 13

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS 16

PHASE II 16

INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 16

SAMPLING 16

CONDUCT INTERVIEWS 16

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS 17

CHAPTER 3: TO WHAT EXTENT IS HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN THE UNITED STATES 

PERPETRATED BY ORGANIZED CRIMINAL GROUPS? 18

NUMBER OF ORGANIZED CRIME CASES VS. NUMBER OF ORGANIZED CRIME DEFENDANTS 18

TYPES OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING COMMITTED BY ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS 19

CHAPTER 4: WHAT TYPES OF ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS ARE ENGAGED IN HUMAN 

TRAFFICKING IN THE UNITED STATES? 23

OVERVIEW 23

MOM & POP 24

CRIME RING 27

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
ix

GANG 29

CARTEL/MAFIA/SYNDICATE 29

ILLEGAL ENTERPRISE 30

CHAPTER 5: WHO ARE THE INDIVIDUALS THAT COMPRISE THE ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS 

ENGAGED IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING? 34

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF DEFENDANTS 34

PREDICTING TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING BY INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP-BASED CHARACTERISTICS 41

PUSH & PULL FACTORS MOTIVATING HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENSES 44

PRIMARY PUSH FACTORS 45

SECONDARY PUSH FACTORS 47

PULL FACTORS 49

CHAPTER 6: WHERE DO THE ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS OPERATE? 51

BASES OF OPERATION & OVERALL CRIME LOCATIONS 51

SEX TRAFFICKING CRIME LOCATIONS 52

STRIP CLUBS 53

STREET PROSTITUTION 53

ESCORT SERVICES 55

BROTHELS & MASSAGE PARLORS 55

INTERNET PROSTITUTION 56

LABOR TRAFFICKING CRIME LOCATIONS 57

HOTEL & HOSPITALITY 57

AGRICULTURE 59

DOMESTIC SERVITUDE 59

CHAPTER 7: HOW DO THE ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS OPERATE? 61

RECRUITMENT 61

OPERATIONAL SECURITY 62

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 63

MODEL 1: HYBRID MODEL 63

MODEL 2: GANG MODEL 64

MODEL 3: INTERNATIONAL NETWORK MODEL 65

MODEL 4: TENANCINGO, MEXICO MODEL 66

ADVERTISING 68

PRICING & PAYMENT 69

MANAGING MONEY 70

MANAGING RELATIONSHIPS 70

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 72

REFERENCES 74

APPENDIX A: CASE SEARCH PROTOCOL 80

APPENDIX B: CASE CODING PROTOCOL 92

APPENDIX C: LETTER TO INMATES 103

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
x

APPENDIX D: INFORMED CONSENT 105

APPENDIX E: INMATE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 108

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
xi

TABLE OF FIGURES

FIGURE 3.1. NUMBER OF CASES PROSECUTED BY NUMBER OF CO-DEFENDANTS ...................................................................................18

FIGURE 3.2. TYPES OF TRAFFICKING IN WHICH ORGANIZED HUMAN TRAFFICKING GROUPS ARE ENGAGED ......................................20

FIGURE 3.3. LABOR TRAFFICKING INDUSTRIES AMONG ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS..............................................................................21

FIGURE 3.4. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES AMONG ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS ..........................................................................................22

FIGURE 4.1. ORGANIZED HUMAN TRAFFICKING GROUPS BY 5-S TYPOLOGY............................................................................................23

FIGURE 4.2. TYPE OF TRAFFICKING BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY .....................................................................................................24

FIGURE 4.3. AVERAGE NUMBER OF VICTIMS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY ......................................................................................25

FIGURE 4.4. LABOR TRAFFICKING INDUSTRIES BY MOM & POP GROUPS................................................................................................. 25

FIGURE 4.5. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY MOM & POP GROUPS..............................................................................................................26

FIGURE 4.6. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY CRIME RINGS...........................................................................................................................27

FIGURE 4.7. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY GANGS ......................................................................................................................................29

FIGURE 4.8. LABOR TRAFFICKING INDUSTRIES BY ILLEGAL ENTERPRISES..............................................................................................31

FIGURE 4.9. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY ILLEGAL ENTERPRISES ..........................................................................................................31

FIGURE 5.1. AVERAGE AGE OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING ....................................................................................34

FIGURE 5.2. AVERAGE AGE OF DEFENDANTS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY .....................................................................................35

FIGURE 5.3. RACE OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING....................................................................................................36

FIGURE 5.4. RACE OF DEFENDANTS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY.....................................................................................................36

FIGURE 5.5. GENDER COMPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING.....................................................................37

FIGURE 5.6. GENDER COMPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY......................................................................38

FIGURE 5.7. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING.........................................................................38

FIGURE 5.8. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS ORGANIZED AS MOM & POPS.................................................................................39

FIGURE 5.9. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS ORGANIZED AS CRIME RINGS .................................................................................40

FIGURE 5.10. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS ORGANIZED AS ILLEGAL ENTERPRISES ..............................................................41

FIGURE 5.11. PUSH/PULL FACTORS MOTIVATING HUMAN TRAFFICKING CRIMES ..............................................................................45

FIGURE 6.1. TOTAL VERIFIED HUMAN TRAFFICKING BASES OF OPERATION FOR ORGANIZED CRIMD GROUPS BY COUNTY..............51

FIGURE 6.2. TOTAL CONFIRMED HUMAN TRAFFICKING CRIMES COMMITTED BY ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS PER COUNTY............52

FIGURE 6.3. VERIFIED STRIP CLUB CRIME LOCATIONS ................................................................................................................................53

FIGURE 6.4. VERIFIED STREET PROSTITUTION CRIME LOCATIONS............................................................................................................53

FIGURE 6.5. U.S. V. PITTMAN, ET AL. .............................................................................................................................................................54

FIGURE 6.6. VERIFIED ESCORT SERVICE CRIME LOCATIONS .......................................................................................................................55

FIGURE 6.7. VERIFIED BROTHEL & MASSAGE PARLOR CRIME LOCATIONS...............................................................................................56

FIGURE 6.8. VERIFIED INTERNET PROSTITUTION CRIME LOCATIONS.......................................................................................................56

FIGURE 6.9. TOTAL VERIFIED LABOR TRAFFICKING CRIME LOCATIONS ...................................................................................................57

FIGURE 6.10. VERIFIED HOTEL & HOSPITALITY CRIME LOCATIONS .........................................................................................................58

FIGURE 6.11. U.S. V. MOLINA, ET AL. ............................................................................................................................................................58

FIGURE 6.12. VERIFIED AGRICULTURE CRIME LOCATIONS.........................................................................................................................59

FIGURE 6.13. VERIFIED DOMESTIC SERVITUDE CRIME LOCATIONS. ..........................................................................................................60

FIGURE 7.1. HYBRID MODEL............................................................................................................................................................................63

FIGURE 7.2. GANG MODEL................................................................................................................................................................................65

FIGURE 7.3. INTERNATIONAL NETWORK MODEL .........................................................................................................................................66

FIGURE 7.4. TENANCINGO, MEXICO MODEL.................................................................................................................................................67

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
xii

TABLE OF TABLES

TABLE 2.1. 5-S TYPOLOGY OF ORGANIZED CRIME......................................................................................................................................12

TABLE 2.2. DATA COLLECTED AT CASE- AND DEFENDANT-LEVELS ..........................................................................................................14

TABLE 4.1. SCOPE, SOPHISTICATION, AND STRUCTURE OF MOM & POP GROUPS .................................................................................27

TABLE 4.2. SCOPE, SOPHISTICATION, AND STRUCTURE OF CRIME RINGS...............................................................................................28

TABLE 4.3. SIZE, SCOPE, AND STRUCTURE OF ILLEGAL ENTERPRISES.....................................................................................................32

TABLE 5.1. LOGISTIC REGRESSION RESULTS PREDICTING TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING BY INDIVIDUAL- AND GROUP-BASED 

CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................................................................................................................................42

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
1

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

DEFINING ORGANIZED CRIME

A clear definition of organized crime has proven elusive—so much so that The Organized 

Crime Control Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922) itself did not define it. Among the 

first functional definitions of organized crime was that put forth by the United Nations 

Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime (2000), which defined “an organised 

criminal group” in Article 2(a) as “a structured group of three or more persons, existing for 

a period of time and acting in concert with the aim of committing one or more serious 

crimes or offences established in accordance with the Convention, in order to obtain, 

directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit.” Among the most important 

things to note from this definition is the idea that organized criminal groups may very 

widely in terms of their size, being comprised of as few as three people. 

Beyond merely defining organized crime, a difficult task unto itself, scholars have 

developed schemas to understand various attributes of organized crime.1 For example, 

Finckenauer (2005: 65) combines dimensions of organized crime proposed by Hagan 

(1983) and Maltz (1985, 1994) to derive eight “dimensions and characteristics” of 

organized crime groups. These eight dimensions are: ideology, structure/organized 

hierarchy, continuity, violence/use force or the threat of force, restricted 

membership/bonding, illegal enterprises, penetration of legitimate businesses, and 

corruption. 

Abadinsky (2010: 3) also sets forth eight attributes of organized crime groups: no political 

goals, hierarchical, limited or exclusive membership, unique subculture, perpetuates itself, 

willingness to use illegal violence, monopolistic, and explicit rules and regulations. These 

characteristics intersect with the Finckenhauer (2005) attributes to produce a relatively 

comprehensive descriptive understanding of the factors that separate organized crime 

groups from other types of criminals.

The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (Public Law 90–351) defined 

organized crime in large part based on the types of crimes in which these groups engage. It 

states:

Organized crime means the unlawful activities of the members of a highly organized, disciplined 

association engaged in supplying illegal goods and services, including but not limited to gambling, 

prostitution, loan sharking, narcotics, labor racketeering, and other unlawful activities of members of 

organizations. 

 

1 See Finckenhauer (2005) for an excellent review of definitions of organized crime, and the distinction 

between organized crime, criminal organizations, and crime that is organized. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
2

In short, scholars, governmental bodies, and international organizations have had a difficult 

time nailing down a definition of organized crime which has led to a variety of definitions 

that are based on various attributes or specific types of crimes these criminal groups tend 

to commit.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING AS ORGANIZED CRIME

In 2000, the United Nations set forth the “Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish 

Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children.” There are several aspects to this 

protocol that served to frame the issue of human trafficking for the international 

community. Perhaps most notably, the Protocol took a distinctively crime-centered 

approach, and more specifically couched human trafficking in terms of transnational 

organized crime. The Protocol was signed as part of the UN Convention on Transnational 

Organized Crime in Palermo, Sicily, “the epicenter of the old Italian Mafia, the most fabled 

and notorious criminal syndicate in the world” (DeStefano 2008: 28). This seminal 

international document, which defines human trafficking for the first time in an 

international context, places the issue squarely in the context of organized crime. 

When the Trafficking Victims Protection Act 

(TVPA) was passed in 2000, it explicitly 

stated that human trafficking involves 

transnational organized crime: “Trafficking 

in persons is increasingly perpetrated by 

organized, sophisticated criminal enterprises. 

Such trafficking is the fastest growing source 

of profits for organized criminal enterprises 

worldwide. Profits from the trafficking 

industry contribute to the expansion of 

organized crime in the United States and 

worldwide.” (TVPA Sec 102(b)(8)).

Thus, in the immediate years after the Palermo Protocol and TVPA (2000), government 

bodies, international organizations, and scholars all espoused the idea that transnational 

organized crime was behind global trafficking in persons (e.g., Bruggeman 2002; Bruinsma 

and Meershoek 1997; Estes and Weiner 2001; Richard 1999; Schloenhardt 1999; Williams 

2002), and a body of scholarship developed around this framing in the following years (e.g., 

Bruckert and Parent 2004; Hodge and Lietz 2007; Picarelli 2009; Risley 2010; Shelley 2010; 

Smith 2011; Torg 2006; Väyrynen 2005). 

However, this assumption has never been empirically tested, which has led to criticism 

against the claim that human trafficking is an organized crime issue: “This transnational 

organized crime framework has prevailed despite a lack of clear evidence of its 

applicability to the trafficking context or systematic analysis of criminal justice data on the 

this research aims to 

begin to fill this 

empirical gap to examine 

the extent to which 

human trafficking in the 

United States is 

perpetrated by 

organized crime.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
3

profile of trafficking offenders” (Lee 2011: 84). This research aims to begin to fill this 

empirical gap. 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENDERS: GROUP-LEVEL CHARACTERISTICS

Using the organized crime problem frame, scholars began to decipher between different 

types of organized crime groups engaging in human trafficking, but with an understanding 

that defining human trafficking as “organized crime” can mean different things. “Traffickers 

may be individual entrepreneurs, small ‘mom and pop’ operations, or sophisticated, 

organized rings. There is little consensus among those who have studied the problem as to 

the proportions of each of those types; nor with respect to their level of organization and 

sophistication” (Finckenauer and Schrock 2001: 2). 

Shelley (2003) set forth a typology that includes different models for groups engaging in 

trafficking in persons: the natural resource model, trade and development, supermarket, 

violent entrepreneurs, and traditional slavery/modern technology. Williams (2008) 

offered a typology of human trafficking groups that is slightly different. Rather than 

focusing on the different types of business models, he focuses on the different types of 

groups, which include opportunistic amateurs, transnational criminal organizations with 

broad portfolios of activity, traditional criminal organizations, ethnically-based trafficking 

organizations, and criminal controlled businesses. A third typology was offered by Picarelli 

(2009). He argues there are three broadly defined types of groups engaging in human 

trafficking:

 

The first are small trafficking groups comprised mainly of a handful of entrepreneurial individuals. 

Second are cooperatives comprised of individuals, small groups and even criminal organisations that 

combine specialised skills to form larger trafficking syndicates. Last are situations where one large 

criminal organisation controls all aspects of a trafficking network. (p. 116) 

Finally, Albanese (2011: 54) frames 

a typology around what he calls a 

“criminal enterprise approach.” His 

typology includes recruiters, 

transporters, and exploiters who 

may be organized differently and 

who all have different goals (pp. 55-

56). 

Although these typologies of human trafficking groups are useful starting points, they are 

less helpful as empirical tools to classify organized crime groups engaged in human 

trafficking in the United States. This study builds on these extant typological frameworks, 

and proposes the “5-S” typology, which is an empirical tool to classify the group-based 

characteristics of organized crime groups engaged in human trafficking. 

the “5-S” typology is an 

empirical tool to classify the 

group-based characteristics 

of organized crime groups 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
4

The 5-S typology is then employed to examine the group-based characteristics of human 

trafficking organizations. There is minimal research to date that examines the various 

types of groups that are engaged in 

human trafficking and whether or not 

there are patterns regarding the 

organizational composition of these 

groups and how group-level 

characteristics may predict the type of 

trafficking in which the groups engage. 

This research uses the 5-S typology to 

answer questions about how human 

trafficking groups vary in their size, 

scope, structure, sophistication, and selfidentification. 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENDERS:INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL CHARACTERISTICS

Beyond a lack of understanding regarding the groups that engage in human trafficking, 

there is also very little knowledge about the individual perpetrators. There has been a 

significant amount of research on the supply side (victims) and the demand side (buyers), 

especially in the context of commercial 

sexual exploitation. However, very few 

studies have sought to understand the 

distributors (the traffickers): who they are 

and why they engage in this criminal 

activity. This research fills an important gap 

by examining the demographic 

characteristics of the individuals that 

comprise the organized groups engaged in 

human trafficking in the United States. The study examines defendants in these cases by 

age, race, gender, and country of origin and analyzes patterns that emerge. 

The scholarship on preventing human trafficking in the United States has focused primarily 

on understanding the push and pull factors that lead to vulnerabilities of being trafficked 

for commercial sex in order to prevent people from becoming victims (e.g., Dalla 2003; 

Hopper and Hidalgo 2006; Roe-Sepowitz 2012; Wilson and Widom 2010). A smaller body 

of work has examined sex buyers in order to better understand how to effectively prevent 

people from purchasing sex in the future (e.g., Durchslag and Goswami 2008; Janson 2013; 

Shively et al. 2012). With one major exception (Owens, et al. 2014), very little work has 

been done on prevention in the context of labor trafficking in the United States from the 

supply or demand perspective, and there has been scant effort to understand prevention in 

the context of the distributors of sex and labor trafficking. Beyond the knowledge that they 

are driven by profit and a low risk, high reward calculation (Dank, et al. 2014), there is 

limited understanding about the traffickers themselves, and in particular those that 

operate in organized criminal groups. This research is applies a push/pull framework to 

This research uses the 5-S 

typology to answer 

questions about the how 

human trafficking groups 

vary in their size, scope, 

structure, sophistication, 

and self-identification.

The study analyzes

defendants in these cases 

by age, race, gender, and 

country of origin

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
5

understand the motivations of the traffickers 

as a means of developing prevention schemes 

for early intervention that would reduce the 

likelihood of viewing human trafficking as a 

viable option in the future. 

MODELS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING NETWORKS 

AND OPERATIONS 

In addition to a general dearth of data on the group- and individual-level characteristics of 

traffickers in the United States, with a few exceptions there is also a lack of research 

examining organizational models of human trafficking business operations. 

Dank, et al. (2014) study different models and venues of sex trafficking that exist in the 

United States, such as brothels, erotic massage parlors, Internet prostitution, and street 

prostitution. Across the eight cities that they examine, they find that some of the models 

are more or less prevalent in certain geographical contexts. They also provide a thorough 

description of the business model of the underground sex economy, including recruiting 

employees, managing work relationships, developing business networks, advertising, 

pricing structures, and managing money. However, they were unable to delve into the 

networks and models involving organized crime, stating: “As reported above, the networks 

of those operating massage parlors, escort services, and beach clubs are thought to be 

transnational, involving Chinese and Eastern European organized crime, respectively. 

However, these networks have proven more difficult to uncover due to resource 

constraints. As a result, less is known about their network characteristics” (p. 62). 

Owens, et al. (2014) provide the most thorough examination of the models of labor 

trafficking in the United States. Like the Dank, et al. (2014) study on sex trafficking, this 

research examines models of labor trafficking based on different venues of exploitation, 

including agriculture, domestic work, hospitality, restaurants, and construction. However, 

this study does not specifically address those models in which various types of organized 

crime groups are engaged. 

The present research therefore builds off previous work to construct models of human 

trafficking, both sex and labor, that are uniquely situated in an organized crime context. 

Using a mixed-methods approach—including geospatial analysis, qualitative analysis of 

interview transcripts, and case studies—this report identifies various models of human 

trafficking in the United States and the manner and means by which they operate. 

In what follows, I discuss the research design and methodology, and walk through the 

findings, which are organized around the project’s central research questions: 

1) To what extent is human trafficking in the United States perpetrated by organized 

crime groups? 

this research applies a

push/pull framework to 

understand the 

motivations of the 

traffickers.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
6

2) What types of organized crime groups are engaged in human trafficking in the 

United States? 

3) Who are the individuals that comprise the organized crime groups engaged in 

human trafficking in the United States? 

4) Where do these organized crime groups operate? 

5) How do these organized crime groups operate? 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
7

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY

The research design for this study had two phases. The first phase was quantitative while 

the second was qualitative. Phase I involved creating an organized crime typology, 

collecting human trafficking cases, coding each case, and conducting various quantitative 

analyses to answer the research questions about the groups and individuals engaged in 

human trafficking. 

Phase II of the project was qualitative, and involved interviewing a sample of inmates 

convicted in human trafficking cases at various Bureau of Prison facilities. This phase 

involved designing the interview protocol, selecting the sample of inmates, conducting the 

interviews, and using grounded theory to analyze the interview data. 

Prior to starting any of the work, however, it was 

imperative first to define organized crime in order to 

separate those human trafficking cases that involve 

organized crime from those that do not. Based on the 

review of the extant literature, it was determined that 

human trafficking cases with three or more 

defendants are considered organized crime. 

It is important to note that cases with one or two 

defendants may also be “organized crime.” Indeed, 

the named defendants in a case reflect only the way the case was prosecuted. It may reflect 

only those individuals for whom evidence was strong enough to indict, or a prosecutor’s 

decision to charge in separate cases. The number of defendants, therefore, is not 

necessarily reflective of the full extent of the human trafficking operations. In other words, 

although there may be only one or two defendants in a case, those individuals could have 

been working or cooperating with others not named in the case. However, determining 

whether or not these cases are “organized crime” is difficult and requires some degree of 

extrapolation beyond the case itself. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the key 

criterion for case inclusion was three or more defendants, but this is not to suggest that 

those with less than three defendants may not also be operating as part of an organized 

criminal group. It is simply to state that, based on the limited information provided in the 

court documents, it was too difficult to make that determination for cases with less than 

three defendants.2 

 

2 Future research should dig more deeply into these cases to determine which of the one and two defendant 

cases may actually constitute “organized crime.”

human 

trafficking cases 

with three or 

more defendants 

are considered 

organized crime

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
8

PHASE I 

5-S Typology of Organized Crime 

The first part of Phase I was developing a typology of organized crime that could be used as 

an empirical tool to classify the human trafficking cases with three or more defendants. 

The 5-S typology is named for five attributes (all starting with the letter “S”) of organized 

crime groups: size, scope, sophistication, structure, and self-identification. Each of these 

attributes has been discussed in one form or another in existing literature on organized 

crime. Therefore, these attributes are not new; rather, the 5-S typology organizes them in a 

way that is parsimonious, easily digestible, and useful for empirical analysis. 

The first “S” is size. This refers to the total number of people that are “members” of the 

organized crime group. Implicit in the UN definition of organized crime is that size can vary 

dramatically. It states that an organized criminal group may be comprised of “three or 

more persons”. This definition suggests that organized crime groups can range from very 

small to very large. Thus, size is an ordinal variable that is coded as small (S), medium (M),

or large (L). An organized crime group is considered small if it has less than 10 people. A 

group is coded medium if it has between 10 and 30 people, and a large group has more 

than 30 people coordinating and conspiring with one another. The determination of the 

size of the group is based on the total number of members of the overall group. The size of 

the group is also based on whether or not the group will cease to exist with the prosecution 

of the individuals in the case. Coding for size of the group, therefore, takes into account the 

likelihood that the group will continue to operate by other agents of the group even after 

group members have been prosecuted. 

The second “S” is scope. This refers to the territorial range in which the group operates.

Much of the literature on organized crime groups has had a distinctive transnational focus. 

This may be the result of globalization and the factors that have made it easier to move 

goods and people illicitly around the globe. Indeed, “organized crime group” was defined in 

the UN Convention on Transnational Organized Crime. However, to be considered an 

organized crime group, operating transnationally is neither a necessary nor a sufficient 

condition. Organized crime groups can operate locally, defined here as operating within 

one particular state or in and around the metro-area of a few states (e.g., Kansas City, MO). 

They can also operate nationally, which means they operate across two or more different 

states that are not necessarily contiguous or encompassing the same metro-area. Last, they 

can operate transnationally, which means that part of their operation takes place in at least 

one country outside the United States. Thus, scope is a nominal variable that is coded: 

local (L), national (N), or transnational (T). 

Sophistication is the third “S” in the 5-S typology. Sophistication is defined as the 

complexity of the group’s organized criminal activities and the extent to which its portfolio is 

diversified. It has long been noted that different organized crime groups range on a 

continuum from least to most sophisticated (Hagan 2006). If a group’s criminal portfolio is 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
9

heterogeneous, either as a means of carrying out its main activity or because the group is 

engaged in crimes beyond one main activity, then sophistication is coded as high. On the 

other hand, if the group’s criminal portfolio is homogeneous and its operating procedures 

are relatively simple, then sophistication is coded as low. If it is somewhere in the middle, 

then the group has medium sophistication. Therefore, sophistication is an ordinal variable 

coded low (L), medium (M), or high (H). 

The fourth “S” is structure. Structure refers to the extent to which the group is structured 

hierarchically or is decentralized. Many definitions of organized crime groups refer in some 

way to the organizational structure of the group, and specifically to the hierarchical nature 

of the groups (e.g., Abadinsky 2010; Hagan 1983; Maltz 1985, 1994; Finckenhauer 2005). 

For example, Abadinsky (2010: 3) states, “An organized crime group has a vertical power 

structure with at least three permanent ranks—not just a leader and followers—each with 

authority over the level beneath.” However, other definitions do not view hierarchy has a 

necessary condition for an organized criminal group. For example, Lyman and Potter 

(2011) describe organized criminal networks that are horizontally structured that lack 

clear leadership. To account for this variability, structure is coded as an ordinal variable 

that ranges from very decentralized (VD), somewhat decentralized (SD), somewhat 

hierarchical (SH), to very hierarchical (VH). 

The last “S” in the 5-S typology is self-identification. Self-identification has three subcategories: 1) strength of identification; 2) type of identification; and 3) name. The strength 

of self-identification refers to how strongly members of the group identify as being a group 

member. If the group has certain initiation practices, symbols, colors, norms, or language, 

then the strength of self-identification with the group is likely to be high. If, on the other 

hand, the group is a loosely structured network without strong social/emotional bonds, 

then strength of self-identification will be low. Another way to discern strength of selfidentification is based on whether the individuals are committing the crime on behalf or as 

agents of a particular group, or whether they are doing it for themselves. Strength of 

identification is an ordinal variable coded as: weak (W), moderate (M), or strong (S). 

Type of self-identification refers to the identity around which the group is formed. For 

example, ethnicity has been a major identity around which government agencies and 

scholars have understood organized crime groups; however, ethnicity is not the only 

identity around which organized crime groups form. Albanese (2011: 5) refers to this as 

the “ethnicity trap” and argues that “the use of ethnicity as a descriptor of criminal activity 

is extremely limited.” Another type of self-identification can be biological family, friends, or 

accomplice. The key here is not the specific type of self-identification, but whether or not 

the group is organized around a common identifying characteristic beyond banding 

together to commit a criminal act. Thus, type of self-identification is a nominal variable 

with the following categories: family (FA), friend (FR), family/friend (FF), race/ethnicity 

(R), and accomplices (A).3 

 

3 There may be some overlap between strength and type of identification for some groups whereby strength 

determines type or vice versa. For example, if the type is “accomplice”, then the strength will always be 

“weak.” 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
10

Name is the last component of self-identification, and is defined as whether or not the group 

has a proper name. This can be the name of a Gang, such as Bloods, or the name of a 

business. The important thing is that the name is self-determined by the group and not a 

name generated by law enforcement to refer to the group. Name is a nominal category 

coded simply as yes (Y) or no (N). 

Variance across the 5-S typology generates five different types of organized crime groups: 

1) Mom & Pop; 2) Crime Ring; 3) Gang; 4) Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate; 5) Illegal Enterprise.4

The first type is Mom & Pop. This type of group is defined by size and self-identification. 

The size of a Mom & Pop group is either small or medium, but cannot be large. In other 

words, it must be 30 people or less. In addition to size, Mom & Pop groups are also defined 

by self-identification based on type, strength, and name. Type of self-identification must be 

family or family/friends. The strength of self-identification with the group must be either 

medium or strong. Finally, the group cannot have a proper name. Because Mom & Pop 

groups can vary significantly in terms of sophistication, scope, and structure, these 

characteristics of organized crime groups cannot be used to determine whether a group is 

Mom & Pop. 

The second type of group is Crime Ring. A Crime Ring is also defined by size and selfidentification. Like Mom & Pop groups, Crime Rings can be either small or medium, but not 

large, and they do not have a proper name. However, Crime Rings differ from Mom & Pop 

in terms of type and strength of self-identification. Type of self-identification must be 

something other than family or family/friend, and strength of self-identification is medium 

or weak. Similar to Mom & Pop groups, Crime Rings cannot be differentiated from other 

types of organized crime groups based on sophistication, scope, or structure because Crime 

Rings may vary along these dimensions.

Gang is the third type of group generated by the 5-S typology, and Gangs are defined based 

on scope and self-identification. In order to be classified as a Gang, the group must operate 

either locally or nationally, but not transnationally.5 Gangs are also distinct in terms of the 

strength and name of their self-identification. Specifically, the strength of their selfidentification as a group is strong, and the name of the group is proper and distinct. Gangs 

cannot be classified as such based on size, structure, or sophistication because these can be 

variable for these types of groups. 

 

4 The 5-S typology highlights variance across the five different types of organized crime groups that it 

generates. However, there is also variance within each different type. The main purpose of this study is to 

examine variance across the five typologies. Future work can extend this by examining variance within each 

typology. 

5 It is important to note that this typology is not suggesting that all gangs are organized crime groups, only 

that one type of organized crime group is called “gang.” There is a large body of literature on gangs and 

different typologies of gangs (e.g., Klein and Maxson 1996) that is beyond the scope of this report. Given this 

definition, some groups that are stereotypically considered “gangs” may be classified differently here. For 

example, MS-13 and Barrio 18 would be classified not as gangs, but rather as Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
11

The fourth type is Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate. These three words are used interchangeably 

because they can all be classified based on the same set of criteria. First, these groups must 

be large, likely comprised of hundreds of people. Second, Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates must 

have a transnational scope of operations; they cannot operate only locally or only in the 

United States. Third, these types of groups are highly sophisticated and have a 

heterogeneous portfolio of criminal activities in which they engage. In terms of structure, 

Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates must be very or somewhat hierarchical with clear bosses, 

kingpins, and/or chains of command. Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates can vary, however, in 

their self-identification across strength, type, and name; thus, self-identification cannot 

necessarily be used as a condition for classification.6

The final type is Illegal Enterprise. The defining characteristics of Illegal Enterprises are 

sophistication and self-identification. Sophistication of Illegal Enterprises must be medium 

or high; they engage in a variety of complex criminal activities. Illegal Enterprises also 

must self-identify with a proper name. In other words, the Illegal Enterprise itself must 

have a business name. However, Illegal Enterprises vary on all other classification 

dimensions, including size, scope, structure, and strength and type of self-identification. 

Overall, the 5-S typology is a parsimonious framework to understand different types of 

organized crime groups. Applied to human trafficking, classifying groups in this manner 

reveals the diversity of actors engaged in human trafficking in the United States and the 

dimensions on which they vary. 

Case Collection 

The next stage of Phase I was to search for federally prosecuted criminal human trafficking 

cases in the United States between 2000 and 2015. These cases serve as the data source to 

empirically examine the extent of organized crime involvement in human trafficking in the 

United States. It is important to note that data on federal prosecutions provides a limited, 

non-generalizable snapshot of the true connection between organized crime and human 

trafficking in the United States. It is not a measure of actual involvement or even of 

incidents of human trafficking in the United States, and as such is a flawed sample. 

However, because it is among the most valid and reliable sources of data that exists, it 

serves as a starting point to examine this relationship. 

To find this universe of cases, the principal investigator, in collaboration with Global 

Centurion, developed search protocols (see Appendix A) using Lexis Nexis, WestLaw, and 

Bloomberg Law. The protocols were developed such that they would yield human 

trafficking cases that may not have been prosecuted under the Peonage, Slavery, and 

 

6 Type of self-identification for Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates is often either race/ethnicity or family; however, it 

does not necessarily have to be in order to be classified as such. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
12

Table 2.1. 5-S Typology of Organized Crime 

SIZE SCOPE SOPHISTICATION STRUCTURE SELF-IDENTIFICATION

S=Small

M=Medium

L=Large

L=Local

N=National

T=Transnational

L=Low

M=Medium

H=High

VH=Very hierarchical

SH=Somewhat hierarchical

SD=Somewhat decentralized

VD=Very decentralized

STRENGTH TYPE NAME

W=Weak

M=Moderate

S=Strong

FA=Family

FR=Friends

FF=Family/Friend

R=Race/ethnicity

A=Accomplice

Y=Yes

N=No

MOM & POP S/M M/S FA/FF N

CRIME RING S/M M/W FR/A N

GANG L/N S Y

CARTEL/MAFIA/SYNDICATE L T H VH/SH

ILLEGAL ENTERPRISE M/H Y

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
13

Trafficking in Persons criminal code (18 U.S.C. Chapter 77). This was important for a 

number of reasons. 

First, the crime of human trafficking often involves elements of other criminal acts. Some 

of these include: drug trafficking, falsified documentation, conspiracy, gangs, corruption, 

kidnapping, the Mann Act, harboring for prostitution, wire fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud, 

money laundering, currency structuring, identity fraud, visa fraud, as well as criminal and 

civil labor violations (Farrell, McDevitt, and Fahy 2008). Therefore, it may be possible for 

defendants in a case that involves human trafficking never to have been charged for human 

trafficking under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 77.

Second, the human trafficking statutes under Chapter 77 are relatively new to prosecutors. 

If it is possible for prosecutors to charge under statutes with which they have had prior 

experience and success, carry the same or steeper sentences, and/or are easier to 

prosecute given evidentiary constraints, they will most likely charge for those crimes 

(Farrell, et al. 2012). For these reasons, relatively few cases were prosecuted under the 

TVPA since its initial passage in 2000 (Farrell, et al. 2012). However, this does not mean 

that there were not human trafficking cases being prosecuted; some cases with the crime of 

human trafficking were instead being prosecuted under different criminal statutes. Thus, 

in order to explore the connection between organized crime and human trafficking using 

prosecuted case data, it is necessary to examine prosecutions in the United States that have 

taken place not only under the TVPA, but also under other statutes common to prosecuting 

organized crime. 

The list of human trafficking cases yielded from these case search protocols were then 

cross-referenced with the UNODC Human Trafficking Case Law Database, the University of 

Michigan Law School’s Human Trafficking Law Project Database, and the Human 

Trafficking Pro Bono Legal Center. 

Case Coding 

After the universe of federally-prosecuted cases was compiled, the third step of Phase I 

involved downloading the dockets and indictments from PACER, and collecting relevant 

news articles and government press releases from Access World News.7 The research team 

then coded for a variety of variables at both the case-level and the defendant-level. A 

detailed coding protocol was developed and every case and defendant was coded according 

to this protocol (see Appendix B). Table 2.2 provides a description of the variables coded 

at both levels. 

It is important to note that the level of detail in the dockets and indictments varied 

significantly from case to case. For example, some case records provided detailed 

information on the number of victims, the countries of origin of the victims, and/or the 

gender and age distribution of all the victims. Additionally, some cases provided the exact 

addresses of multiple crime locations or detailed information on the specific types of visas, 

 

7 Cases for which indictments were not available on PACER required ordering the records from the respective 

federal courts. The research team also downloaded complaints from PACER when they were available. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
14

while others provided only cursory explanations. In general, when conspiracy was charged 

and the manner and means of the conspiracy is discussed, the level of detail in the case was 

usually much greater. 

Table 2.2. Data collected at case- and defendant-levels

Case-Level Data Defendant-Level Data

Case details: name, number, state, 

start/end date, Federal circuit and district

Defendant details: Name, alias, 

gender, race, country of origin, birth 

year

Judge: Name, race, gender, year 

appointed, political party of appointing 

president

Arrest & Detention: date, age at 

arrest, detained, bail type, bail amount

Type of trafficking: minor sex, adult 

sex, labor

Charge info: date, number felonies 

charged, and specific statutes charged

Type of labor: domestic servitude, 

agriculture, health & beauty, hotel &

hospitality, construction, other, 

unknown

Sentencing info: date sentenced, total 

months sentenced, number of felonies 

sentenced, supervised release, 

probation, restitution, asset forfeiture, 

number counts and which statutes 

sentenced under

Type of sex: strip club, street 

prostitution, brothel/massage parlor, 

escort services, internet prostitution, 

other, unknown

Appeal

Victims: Number of victims total, 

minor victims, foreign victims, female 

victims, male victims, victims’ countries 

of origin

Recruitment method: face-to-face, 

family, online, newspaper, radio, 

telephone, kidnap, other, unknown

Geospatial information: entry port & 

method, base locations, crime locations

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
15

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
16

Quantitative analysis 

The compiled data can be analyzed at multiple levels (defendants nested in cases, cases 

nested in federal districts, federal districts nested in states, and states nested in federal 

circuits). For the purpose of this analysis, the data is analyzed at the case-level (including 

information on group-based characteristics) and the individual defendant-level. 

Quantitative analysis of the data includes descriptive statistics, geospatial analysis, oneway ANOVAs, and logistic regression. 

PHASE II

Interview Protocol 

In addition to the quantitative design and analysis conducted in Phase I, Phase II of the 

study involved qualitative research that would provide more textured information on 

human trafficking offenders and operations through semi-structured interviews. 

 

The first step in this phase of the research was to develop the interview protocol. Many of 

the questions in the protocol were replicated from Dank, et al. (2014). In general, the 

questions were designed to understand organized criminal business structures and 

operations, as well as understand the social and psychological motivations behind engaging 

in human trafficking (see Appendix E for interview protocol). 

Sampling 

The sample of interviewees was determined using cluster sampling. After coding the 

sentencing details for every defendant, a list of all the individuals still in Bureau of Prisons 

custody was made, and the Bureau of Prisons’ Inmate Locator was used to determine the 

prison facility in which each inmate was located. Facilities were targeted based on the 

number of individuals located in each facility, such that those with the largest cluster of 

inmates were highest priority. 

After the facilities were selected, letters were sent to each of the inmates (see Appendix C) 

letting them know the researchers would be at their facility on a specified date and that 

they are interested in interviewing them. 

Conduct Interviews 

Upon arriving at the prison facility, inmates were individually provided with an informed 

consent document that would either be read aloud by the researcher or read independently 

by the inmate (see Appendix D). Inmates then decided whether or not they wanted to 

voluntarily participate in the interview, upon which they signed the informed consent 

document. The interviews were semi-structured and generally followed the flow of the 

interview protocol. Some of the Bureau of Prison facilities allowed laptops to take notes 

while others did not. For those that did not allow laptops, notes were taken on paper and 

then transcribed. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
17

Overall, interviews were conducted in six 

prison facilities. In-person contact was made 

with 22 inmates that had engaged in 

organized human trafficking activities, and of 

these 11 signed the informed consent 

document and agreed to voluntarily 

participate in the interview. The other 11 

refused to voluntarily participate. Thus, the 

participation rate was 50%. 

The sample is comprised of seven males and 

four females, including seven Americans and 

four foreign nationals. Two of the eleven 

interviewees were involved in a labor 

trafficking case, while the remaining interviewees were involved in sex trafficking. 

Qualitative analysis 

Because so little research has been conducted on human trafficking offenders, the 

researcher used grounded theory to analyze the interview data and develop a push/pull 

theory to understand the motivations behind human trafficking behavior. Chapter 5 

provides the qualitative analysis of the push/pull factors for human trafficking offenders. 

Interview data was also analyzed to better understand the business models behind 

different types of human trafficking. Unfortunately, the sample lacked breadth in terms of 

labor trafficking models; however, interviews with those convicted in sex trafficking cases 

provided significant insight into the diversity of illicit models used to carry out sex 

trafficking operations. This analysis is provided in Chapter 7. 

Overall, a combination of the quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis 

provide a robust view of the groups and individuals organizing to engage in human 

trafficking in the United States. 

the quantitative and 

qualitative data 

collection and analysis

provide a robust view of 

the groups and 

individuals organizing 

to engage in human 

trafficking in the United 

States.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
18

CHAPTER 3: TO WHAT EXTENT IS HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN THE 

UNITED STATES PERPETRATED BY ORGANIZED CRIMINAL GROUPS? 

NUMBER OF ORGANIZED CRIME CASES VS. NUMBER OF ORGANIZED CRIME DEFENDANTS

The case searches yielded a total of 862 federally-prosecuted human trafficking cases in the 

United States between 2000 and 2015. There has been a steady upward increase in 

prosecutions of human trafficking cases during this time period; however, Figure 3.1 shows 

that the increase in prosecutions is primarily due to prosecutions of cases with less than 

three defendants. Indeed, only 194 of the 862 cases (22%) indicted three or more codefendants in the same case. 

This is not to say that cases with one or two defendants do not constitute organized crime; 

however, determining whether or not they are organized crime requires extrapolating 

beyond the information provided in the case itself. What can be conclusively stated, 

however, is that federal prosecutors are indicting one or two people at a time in the vast 

majority of human trafficking cases. It also speaks to the importance of more closely 

scrutinizing the cases with only one or two defendants to determine the likelihood that 

they are, indeed, operating as part of an organized criminal network regardless of whether 

or not the prosecutorial strategy reflects it. 

FIGURE 3.1. NUMBER OF CASES PROSECUTED BY NUMBER OF CO-DEFENDANTS 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Number of cases prosecuted

Year

Cases with 3+ Defendants Cases with 1-2 Defendants

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
19

On the other hand, the findings show that the 

majority of individuals being prosecuted for human 

trafficking are operating as part of an organized 

criminal group. The 862 cases include a total of 

2,096 defendants of which 58% are part of a case 

with three or more defendants. In other words, 

although the majority of cases are being prosecuted 

with only one or two defendants, the majority of 

people being prosecuted are co-defendants in a case 

with three or more people, and can therefore be 

considered to be operating as part of an organized 

crime group.

TYPES OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING COMMITTED BY ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS

The types of human trafficking in which the organized criminal groups are engaged varies. 

Figure 3.2 reveals that the plurality of these groups (34%) are engaging in both adult and

minor sex trafficking, with another 17% engaging in only adult sex trafficking and 24% in 

only minor sex trafficking. Looking across all the different combinations of trafficking, 

only 18% of the organized crime groups are not sex trafficking at all, and instead are 

trafficking only for the purpose of labor.

An examination of the labor cases reveals that, across all cases involving some type of labor 

trafficking, 93% of the victims are foreign nationals and 73% of the victims are females. 

The percentage of victims that are female decreases to 67% for cases that are only labor 

trafficking with no sex trafficking involved in the case. 

Figure 3.3 represents the industries in which labor trafficking is occurring. The plurality of 

only labor trafficking (and no sex trafficking) is taking place in agriculture. This is 

significant because, contrary to the overall labor trafficking victim demographics, 100% of 

the victims in the agriculture cases are male. 

There are six labor trafficking only cases that are classified as “other”. Two of these cases 

take place in factories. Another two take place in the retail sector. One case is in home 

health care. The final case in the “other” category is forced labor selling pirated movies and 

CDs in order to pay a smuggling debt.8

 

8 The six cases classified as “other” that involve only labor trafficking are: U.S. v. Shurigina, et al. (2006); U.S. v. 

McReynolds, et al. (2011); U.S. v. Pelayo, et al. (2008); U.S. v. Mondragon, et al. (2015); U.S. v. Lee, et al. (2001); 

and U.S. v. Aguilar-Lopez, et al. (2010). For more information on all of these cases, go to 

HumanTraffickingData.org. 

the majority of 

individuals being 

prosecuted for 

human trafficking 

are operating as part 

of an organized 

criminal group.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
20

FIGURE 3.2. TYPES OF TRAFFICKING IN WHICH ORGANIZED HUMAN TRAFFICKING 

GROUPS ARE ENGAGED 

 

The average number of defendants varies given the industry in which the labor trafficking 

takes place. Hotel & hospitality and agriculture have the most defendants on average with 

seven and 4.6 respectively. Many of the cases across both these industries involve massive 

labor contracting schemes that are often complex and relatively sophisticated. One 

example is U.S. v. Baravik, et al. (2009), which involved 10 enterprises and 800 workers 

from Eastern Europe, Asia, and Jamaica. The enterprises engaged in money laundering, 

marriage fraud, and document fraud to further their labor contracting scheme that 

generated 11 million in revenues over the course of eight years. 

Across all cases involving adult sex trafficking, 44% of the victims are foreign nationals. 

However, for those cases that are only adult sex (with no minor sex or labor trafficking), 

55% of the victims are foreign nationals. The trend is much lower and moves in the 

opposite direction for minor sex trafficking. Specifically, for all cases involving minor sex 

trafficking, only 23% of the victims are foreign nationals; however, for cases involving only 

minor sex trafficking the percent of foreign national victims decreases to only 8%. 

Adult Sex

Minor Sex

Labor

Adult Sex & Labor

Minor Sex & Labor

Adult Sex & Minor Sex

Adult Sex & Minor Sex &

Labor

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
21

FIGURE 3.3. LABOR TRAFFICKING INDUSTRIES AMONG ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS 

Figure 3.4 provides a breakdown of the venues for sex trafficking. The vast majority of 

adult sex trafficking only cases are in brothels and massage parlors. This is distinct from 

the minor sex trafficking only cases, of which the majority is Internet prostitution. This 

fact, coupled with the foreign national demographic information for adult versus minor sex 

trafficking victims, paints a relatively clear picture regarding the contrasts between adult 

and minor sex trafficking in the United States, at least according to prosecution data. The 

majority of adult only sex trafficking being prosecuted as organized crime is taking place 

inside Hispanic brothels and/or Asian massage parlors and involves mostly Hispanic and 

Asian victims. On the other hand, the majority of minor only sex trafficking being 

prosecuted as organized crime in the United States is taking place with American minors 

being sold online. 

Given the international nature of the victims and the additional level of sophistication 

involved in running brothels or massage parlors, it is not surprising that the average 

number of defendants per case is largest (7) for this type of sex trafficking venue. On the 

other hand, the lowest average number of defendants (3.4) is for cases involving Internet 

prostitution. This result, coupled with the labor trafficking results, indicate that the more 

defendants in an organized crime human trafficking case, the more likely the case involves 

elaborate and sophisticated international elements. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Number of cases

Labor

Labor & Adult

Sex

Labor &

Minor Sex

Labor & Adult

Sex & Minor

Sex

Domestic 

AgricultureHealth & HospitalityHotel & 

OtherUnknown

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
22

FIGURE 3.4. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES AMONG ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS 

0

5

10

15

20

25

Number of cases

Adult Sex

Minor Sex

Adult Sex &

Minor Sex

Adult Sex &

Labor

Minor Sex &

Labor

Labor & Adults

Sex & Minor Sex

Strip Club

Massage ParlorBrothels/

EscortProstitutionInternet OtherUnknown

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
23

CHAPTER 4: WHAT TYPES OF ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS ARE 

ENGAGED IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN THE UNITED STATES? 

OVERVIEW

Although the term “organized crime” is commonly applied to cartels, mafias or syndicates, 

limiting this term to these types of groups would misrepresent the engagement of 

organized crime in human trafficking in the United States. Figure 4.1 shows that, among 

the federally prosecuted human trafficking cases involving organized crime, 

Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates are not represented at all.9 Rather, small to medium sized Mom 

& Pop (35%) and Crime Ring (33%) groups comprise the majority of organized criminal 

groups being prosecuted for human trafficking. Illegal Enterprises comprise another 26%, 

and Gangs the remaining 6%. 

FIGURE 4.1. ORGANIZED HUMAN TRAFFICKING GROUPS BY 5-S TYPOLOGY 

An examination of the types of organized crime groups based on type of trafficking reveals 

important patterns. Mom & Pop groups are most evenly divided in terms of the types of 

human trafficking in which they engage. A combined 71% of Mom & Pop groups engage 

only in sex trafficking (either minor only, adult only, or both minor & adult) with no labor 

trafficking at all. Twenty-one percent of Mom & Pop groups engage only in labor 

trafficking, with no sex trafficking in their operations. On average, the number of victims 

exploited by Mom & Pop groups is 17.6, and the average number of defendants per case is 

5.30. 

 

9 See caveat on this finding later in this chapter. 

Mom & Pop

Crime Ring

Street Gang

Cartel/Mafia/S

yndicate

Illegal

Enterprise

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
24

FIGURE 4.2. TYPE OF TRAFFICKING BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY

The pattern of human trafficking only for commercial sexual exploitation is more 

pronounced for Crime Rings and Gangs. Ninety-five percent of the trafficking among Crime 

Rings has no labor trafficking at all and is only for the purpose of commercial sex. 

Similarly, 100% of the trafficking by Gangs is for commercial sexual exploitation only, 

either minors, adults, or both. The average number of exploited victims is seven by Crime 

Rings and 8.8 for Gangs. The average number of defendants per case is 5.30 for Crime 

Rings and 14.5 for Gangs.

The most diverse type of organized crime group is Illegal Enterprises. It is the only type 

that has cases across every combination of human trafficking. Also unlike any other type, a 

plurality (36%) of the Illegal Enterprise cases are for labor trafficking only, and over half of 

the cases (52%) involve some form of labor trafficking. Additionally, the Illegal Enterprise 

type has the most adult sex trafficking cases of any other type. The average number of 

victims in cases involving Illegal Enterprises is 65.7 and the average number of defendants 

per case is 7.02. 

MOM & POP

Overall, there were 67 cases classified as Mom & Pop, comprising the largest type of 

organized criminal group being prosecuted for human trafficking. Not only are Mom & Pops 

the most evenly distributed in terms of the types of trafficking (sex/labor) in which they 

engage, but also they are the most evenly distributed in terms of the commercial sex and 

labor industries in which they operate. Figure 4.4 reveals that the plurality of Mom & Pop 

labor trafficking cases are domestic servitude (41%), with another 24% in agriculture. The 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Mom & Pop Crime Ring Street Gang Illegal

Enterprise

Adult Sex & Minor Sex & Labor

Adult Sex & Minor Sex

Minor Sex & Labor

Adult Sex & Labor

Labor

Minor Sex

Adult Sex

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
25

sex trafficking venues for Mom & Pop groups are varied, but the plurality is 

brothels/massage parlors (33%) and Internet prostitution (25%).10

FIGURE 4.3. AVERAGE NUMBER OF VICTIMS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY 

FIGURE 4.4. LABOR TRAFFICKING INDUSTRIES BY MOM & POP GROUPS 

 

10 The “other” category, includes several “sexual slavery” cases whereby the victims were not sold for 

commercial sex but rather were held captive and used as sex slaves (e.g., U.S. v. Bagley, et al. (2010) and U.S. v. 

Soto-Huarto, et al. (2003)). 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Mom & Pop Crime Ring Street Gangs Illegal Enterprise

Average Number of Victims

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Domestic servitude

Agriculture

Health & Beauty

Hotel & Hospitality

Other

Unknown

Number of cases

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
26

Based on the 5-S typology, all Mom & Pop groups must be small to medium in their size, 

and their self-identification must be based on family or friends/family. Mom & Pops can 

vary significantly, however, in terms of scope, sophistication, and structure. Of the Mom & 

Pop groups, a plurality operates transnationally. This comports with the dominance of 

Mom & Pop cases that are domestic servitude (95% of victims are foreign nationals), 

agriculture (91% of victims are foreign nationals), and brothels/massage parlors (84% of 

victims are foreign nationals).

FIGURE 4.5. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY MOM & POP GROUPS

Sophistication for Mom & Pop groups varies, but they generally engage only in human 

trafficking (low sophistication) or in one other type of illicit activity, most likely in the 

furtherance of their human trafficking operation. Some common examples include 

smuggling, document fraud, or alien harboring. Very few of them would be considered high 

sophistication, meaning that they do not engage in multiple types of criminal activity either 

in furtherance of or in addition to their human trafficking operations. 

Finally, there is also variance in the structure of Mom & Pop groups. Although the type of 

self-identification for Mom & Pops is based on family or family/friend connections, the 

plurality of cases still have some type of hierarchical structure in place among the family or 

family/friend operation. The majority, however, are either somewhat or very 

decentralized with no clear boss or chain of command. 

0 5 10 15 20

Strip Club

Street Prostitution

Brothels/Massage Parlor

Escort Services

Internet Prostitution

Other

Unknown

Number of cases

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
27

Table 4.1. Scope, Sophistication, and Structure of Mom & Pop Groups 

Scope Local 17%

National 25%

Transnational 38%

Sophistication Low 39%

Medium 54%

High 7%

Structure Very Hierarchical 9%

Somewhat Hierarchical 39%

Somewhat Decentralized 28%

Very Decentralized 24%

CRIME RING

There were a total of 63 Crime Ring cases, which is the second largest classification to Mom 

& Pop. As previously depicted in Figure 4.2, the vast majority of Crime Ring cases involve 

sex trafficking. Only three of the total Crime Ring cases involved labor trafficking, and 

there is no set pattern of the type of labor these cases involve. On the other hand, there are 

clear patterns for the type of sex trafficking in which Crime Rings engage. Almost half 

(47%) of all the sex trafficking cases by Crime Rings are Internet prostitution cases. Simply 

put, friends get together to sell women and girls online for the purpose of commercial sex. 

FIGURE 4.6. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY CRIME RINGS 

As with Mom & Pops, the defining characteristics are size and self-identification. 

Specifically, Crime Rings are small or medium sized, do not have a proper name associated 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Strip Club

Street Prostitution

Brothels/Massage Parlor

Escort Services

Internet Prostitution

Other

Unknown

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
28

with the group, are affiliated with one another either as friends or accomplices, and have 

moderate to weak identification with the group. However, along the other three 

dimensions of the 5-S typology, Crime Rings may vary. 

Table 4.2 reveals that the plurality of Crime Rings (40%) operates nationally, and another 

36% operate only in one locality. This is in contrast to Mom & Pops, which mostly operate 

nationally and internationally. These findings support the type of trafficking in which Mom 

& Pops and Crime Rings engage, respectively. Where the majority (84%) of victims in the 

brothels/massage parlors run by Mom & Pops are foreign nationals who the Mom & Pop 

groups assisted in transporting to the United States (deeming their operations 

transnational), the majority of victims in Internet prostitution cases are American minors. 

Specifically, in Internet prostitution cases, 81% of the victims are minors and there are zero 

foreign national victims represented in these cases. 

The majority of Crime Ring operations are low sophistication and either somewhat or very 

decentralized in their structure. Not only are Crime Rings less diversified in terms of the 

type of trafficking in which they are engaged, but also they are less sophisticated in their 

overall operations, as well as less disciplined in their organizational structures and loyalty 

to their group members. A good example is the case of U.S. v. Castillo, et al. (2013) in which 

one of the accomplices called in the tip to the FBI that led to the arrest of her accomplices 

because one of the victims ran away to work with a different defendant in the case. Once it 

became clear that the ring did not have the same goals, the defendant felt no loyalty or 

obligation to protect the other members of the crime ring. Additionally, as previously 

addressed, the average number of victims in Crime Ring cases is only seven, as compared to 

significantly more victims in Mom & Pop and Illegal Enterprise cases. For these reasons, 

Crime Rings may constitute the easiest type of organized crime group to disrupt. 

Table 4.2. Scope, Sophistication, and Structure of Crime Rings 

Scope Local 36%

National 40%

International 24%

Sophistication Low 67%

Medium 32%

High 1%

Structure Very Hierarchical 3%

Somewhat Hierarchical 27%

Somewhat Decentralized 41%

Very Decentralized 29%

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
29

GANG

Gangs do not constitute very many of the organized crime human trafficking cases 

prosecuted federally. The searches yielded only 12 Gang cases involving sex trafficking 

from 2000 to 2015 with no labor trafficking cases. Figure 10 reveals that Gangs engage in 

street prostitution and Internet prostitution only. These two types of sex trafficking are 

most likely to traffick minor victims. For street prostitution cases, 70% of the victims are 

minors and in Internet prostitution cases 81% are minors. This compares to only 29% 

minor victims in brothel/massage parlor venues. 

FIGURE 4.7. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY GANGS 

The 5-S typology dictates that the scope of Gang activity is local or national, the group must 

have a name, and group members must strongly identify with the group. On the other 

hand, the size, structure, and sophistication of Gang activities may vary. In this sample of 

cases, over 90% of the Gangs are classified as large organizations; however, only 33% of 

the groups are classified as highly sophisticated. 

CARTEL/MAFIA/SYNDICATE

There are no cases in this sample typed as Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate. However, there are ten 

cases, all of which are classified as Mom & Pop, that trace back to Tenancingo, Mexico, a city 

in the state of Tlaxcala known for sex trafficking, pimping, and prostitution (Kutner 2015; 

Lakhani 2015; Pearson 2012). The Tenancingo groups operate very similarly to one 

another (see Chapter 7 for a detailed description of how they operate). Each of the groups 

is usually comprised of family members operating within nodal structures across cities 

along the East coast, and also in Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, Arizona, and Louisiana. The 

nodes are comprised of a pimp with several victims and drivers that provide the victims to 

brothel owners. The pimps are generally based in one city, and although they maintain 

“ownership” over their own victims, they trade victims with one another across different 

cities. 

The Tenancingo cases are classified as Mom & Pop because each node appears to operate 

like a Mom & Pop given their size and self-identification. However, it is possible that all 

0 2 4 6 8

Strip Club

Street Prostitution

Brothels/Massage Parlor

Escort Services

Internet Prostitution

Other

Unknown

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
30

cases involving Tenancingo are better classified as Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate. The extent to 

which each individual node is networked with other nodes, and whether or not there is a 

“kingpin” based in Tenancingo who is over the majority of these operations remains 

unclear. Nevertheless, this represents the gray area that can exist in classifying some of the 

cases. 

It should also be noted that, while no cases in the dataset are classified as 

Cartel/Mafia/Syndicate, there are several cases that have clear ties to known cartels. One 

example is the case of U.S. v. Tevino-Alvarez, et al. (2008), which prosecuted 19 people, all 

family and/or friends in a sex and labor trafficking scheme. The group is classified as Mom 

& Pop; however, case records indicate that the group coordinated with Las Zetas to use 

their stash houses in Ciudad Ordaz and Reynosa, Mexico en route to smuggle the victims to 

the United States. Four of the victims testified to being threatened and beaten by Las Zetas. 

Additionally, information obtained through interviews revealed the ways in which 

organized criminal groups contract out with known cartels/mafias/syndicates to provide 

certain services. For example, after obtaining tourist visas to Mexico, victims from Eastern 

Europe are picked up at the Mexico City airport by Sinaloa cartel members who then 

transport them to Tijuana at which point they change hands and cross the border. Once in 

the United States, the Armenian mafia in Los Angeles helps to procure fake identification 

documents. Therefore, while there are no cases of cartels/mafias/syndicates operating 

organized human trafficking operations themselves, there is evidence that 

cartels/mafias/syndicates are involved in facilitating the human trafficking operations of 

other types of organized criminals. 

ILLEGAL ENTERPRISE

A total of 50 cases were classified as Illegal Enterprises, and these cases were split evenly 

between sex trafficking and labor trafficking. Of all the labor trafficking cases in the 

dataset, the majority was perpetrated by Illegal Enterprises with the hotel & hospitality 

sector being most prevalent. These cases involve large labor contracting cases for hotel 

cleaning staff, such as U.S. v. Baravik, et al. (2009) and US v. Askarkhodjaev, et al. (2009), as 

well as labor trafficking in restaurants and bars, such as U.S. v. Mireles, et al. (2008) and U.S. 

v. Molina, et al (2002). 

 

The sex trafficking cases for Illegal Enterprises are mostly in brothels/massage parlors. 

Half of these cases involve networks of massage parlors run by Asians. Many of these cases 

involve multiple Illegal Enterprises being used for the purpose of sex trafficking. For 

example, in U.S. v. Yang, et al. (2003), there were eight different businesses being used to 

facilitate the sex trafficking business, including YJY Travel & Tour, which facilitated the 

travel of the victims to the United States on tourist visas, as well as Yang's Taxi Service, 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
31

which transported the Korean victims to and from the six different massage parlors being 

run by the organized crime group.11

FIGURE 4.8. LABOR TRAFFICKING INDUSTRIES BY ILLEGAL ENTERPRISES

FIGURE 4.9. SEX TRAFFICKING VENUES BY ILLEGAL ENTERPRISES 

The other half of the brothels/massage parlor Illegal Enterprise cases include Hispanic-run 

brothels, many of which are connected to bars and restaurants. For example, in U.S. v. 

Garcia-Gonzalez, et al. (2010), the victims were forced to work in the bar, called El Paraeso 

 

11 Other examples of these type of cases include: U.S. v. Grandt, et al. (2006); U.S. v. Tantirojanakitkan, et al.

(2001); U.S. v. Chae, et al. (2013); and U.S. v. Kidgell, et al. (2013). 

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Domestic servitude

Agriculture

Health & Beauty

Hotel & Hospitality

Other

Unknown

0 5 10 15 20

Strip Club

Street Prostitution

Brothels/Massage Parlor

Escort Services

Internet Prostitution

Other

Unknown

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
32

Bar, as well as in prostitution for customers of the bar. The same pattern is seen in U.S. v. 

Salazar, et al. (2005) and U.S. v. Mondragon, et al. (2009), where women were forced to 

work bars and restaurants, as well as respond to the sexual advances of the customers. 

In addition to the brothels/massage parlors, Illegal Enterprises are more responsible for 

trafficking in strip clubs than any other type, mainly because the strip club business itself is 

engaged in the human trafficking. Among these cases is U.S. v. Maksimenko, et al. (2005),

wherein Ukrainian women were being trafficked in Cheetah’s strip club in Detroit. Other 

cases include U.S. v. Graham, et al. (2014), in which a strip club called Passionate Touch in 

Philadelphia was trafficking American women, and U.S. v. Khimani, et al. (2014), in which 

women from India were forced to strip in clubs 12 to 14 hours per day. 

Based on the 5-S typology, Illegal Enterprises must have medium to high sophistication and 

must have an official business name through which the trafficking operations are run. Size, 

scope, and structure may vary, however. Although it is sometimes difficult to determine 

the overall size of the Illegal Enterprise, the majority appears to be small (i.e., less than ten 

people). This determination is based on whether or not the business operations 

completely shut down after the prosecution of the individuals running the business or 

whether there were other employees of the operation that allowed the Illegal Enterprise to 

continue to operate even after the criminal prosecution. 

Table 4.3. Size, Scope, and Structure of Illegal Enterprises 

Size Small 69%

Medium 27%

Large 4%

Scope Local 8%

National 20%

Transnational 72%

Structure Very Hierarchical 20%

Somewhat Hierarchical 55%

Somewhat Decentralized 17%

Very Decentralized 8%

The scope of Illegal Enterprises is predominantly transnational. The majority of the victims 

in the Illegal Enterprise labor trafficking cases are foreign victims. Moreover, the sex 

trafficking venues most common for Illegal Enterprises are those that traffick mostly 

foreign women. Therefore, Illegal Enterprises tend to be more complex in their ability not 

only to recruit and move victims transnationally, but also to coordinate the human 

trafficking outlets and activities once the victims are in the United States. They are also 

able to use their legal business status to obtain visas under various guises, as well as shield 

their illicit trafficking activities. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
33

Given that Illegal Enterprises are businesses, they tend to have organizational structures 

with hierarchies and a chain of command. Indeed 75% of Illegal Enterprises are structured 

either very hierarchically or somewhat hierarchically. In some cases there is one individual 

who oversees multiple businesses, each of which has its own “employees” and operating 

procedures, but which might share the same accounting. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
34

CHAPTER 5: WHO ARE THE INDIVIDUALS THAT COMPRISE THE 

ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS ENGAGED IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING? 

In the foregoing analysis, findings are presented for defendants in human trafficking cases 

classified as organized crime. Any defendant-specific data that could not be found is 

treated as missing data. The dataset is comprised of information on 1,226 defendants 

across 194 cases. Data was collected on defendants’ ages for 86% of defendants, race for 

93%, gender for 99%, and country of origin for 84% of defendants. 

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF DEFENDANTS

Overall, the defendants in the organized crime cases are diverse in terms of age, race, and 

country of origin. The average age at arrest across all defendants, regardless of type of 

organized crime group or type of trafficking, is 33 years old. Figure 5.1 shows that the 

oldest defendants are engaged in labor trafficking and adult sex trafficking, while the 

youngest defendants are engaged in minor sex trafficking. However, one-way ANOVA 

reveals that there is no statistically significant difference in the average age of those who 

engage in adult sex trafficking or labor trafficking and those that do not. On the other hand, 

there is a statistically significant difference in the average age of those who engage in minor 

sex trafficking and those who do not. Those engaged in minor sex trafficking are 

significantly younger than those who are not engaged in minor sex trafficking. 

FIGURE 5.1. AVERAGE AGE OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Adult

(n=182)

Minor

(n=190)

Labor

(n=164)

Adult &

Minor

(n=431)

Adult &

Labor

(n=36)

Labor &

Minor

(n=10)

Adult &

Minor &

Labor

(n=28)

Average Age

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
35

In examining the age of the defendants by organized crime typology, it is apparent that 

defendants in Gangs are much younger than those in any other type of organized crime 

group, with an average age of 25. One-way ANOVAs find the difference in age between 

Gangs and all other types to be statistically significant. Additionally, one-way ANOVAs find 

that defendants in Illegal Enterprise cases are significantly older than those in Mom & Pop 

and Crime Ring group types. There is no statistically significant difference in average age of 

defendants between Mom & Pop and Crime Ring. 

FIGURE 5.2. AVERAGE AGE OF DEFENDANTS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY 

The racial composition of the defendants varies based on the type of trafficking and the 

organized crime typology. Defendants in adult sex trafficking cases are evenly split 

between Asian and Hispanic, comprising a total of 70% of adult sex trafficking offenders. 

The defendants in minor sex trafficking cases are 70% Black. Labor trafficking is most 

evenly split racially, with White and Hispanic defendants constituting the largest 

proportion of offenders at 26% and 32%, respectively. Defendants in cases involving both 

adult and minor sex trafficking are about evenly divided between Hispanic and Black 

offenders who combined make up over 80% of the offenders. The last three categories 

with combinations of different types of trafficking are dominated by Hispanic defendants, 

although Asian defendants are equal to Hispanic defendants in cases involving labor 

trafficking and minor sex trafficking. 

Figure 5.4 breaks down the race of the defendants by organized crime typology to 

determine if there are any racial patterns in the means and manner by which groups 

organize to engage in human trafficking. Mom & Pops are dominated by Hispanic 

defendants, and there are more Hispanic defendants organized in this type than any other 

type. Crime Rings are roughly evenly split between Black (44%) and Hispanic (37%) 

defendants. Gangs look very different from any other type with almost 90% Black 

defendants. As has been seen in other analysis regarding Illegal Enterprises, this typology 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Mom & Pop

(n=297)

Crime Ring

(n=288)

Street Gang

(n=167)

Illegal Enterprise

(n=290)

Average Age

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
36

is relatively evenly distributed across different racial categories. Illegal Enterprise cases 

are roughly 20% White defendants, 15% Black defendants, 29% Hispanic, and 29% Asian. 

FIGURE 5.3. RACE OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING

FIGURE 5.4. RACE OF DEFENDANTS BY ORGANIZED CRIME TYPOLOGY 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Adult

(n=232)

Minor

(n=184)

Labor

(n=183)

Adult &

Minor

(n=457)

Adults &

Labor

(n=41)

Labor &

Minor

(n=10)

Adult &

Minor &

Labor

(n=37)

Other

Asian

Hispanic

Black

White

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Mom & Pop

(n=345)

Crime Ring

(n=299)

Street Gangs

(n=171)

Illegal

Enterprise

(n=330)

Other

Asian

Hispanic

Black

White

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
37

Beyond age and race, defendants in human trafficking cases involving organized crime are 

69% male and 31% female. However, gender composition varies based on type of 

trafficking. Specifically, minor sex trafficking cases and cases that involve both minor and 

adult sex trafficking are most disproportionately male at roughly 73%. Next, adult sex 

trafficking only cases and labor trafficking only cases are comprised of roughly 65% male 

and 35% female. Cases that involve both minor sex trafficking and labor trafficking, as well 

as those that involve both adult sex trafficking and labor trafficking, are comprised of 60% 

male and 40% female. Interestingly, those cases that involve all three types of human 

trafficking are evenly divided between male and female defendants. 

FIGURE 5.5. GENDER COMPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN 

TRAFFICKING 

The gender composition for Mom & Pop and Crime Rings are both roughly at 70% male and 

30% female, while it is a bit more even, though with no statistically significant difference, 

for Illegal Enterprises with 61% male and 39% female. A one-way ANOVA reveals that 

there is a statistically significant difference in the gender makeup of Gangs vis-à-vis all 

other organized crime group types with 80% male. 

Figure 5.7 depicts the number of defendants by country of origin for minor sex trafficking 

only (red), adult sex trafficking only (green), and labor trafficking only (blue). Defendants 

who trafficked minors for commercial come from 13 different countries of origin. However, 

the United States with 411 defendants leads the way with almost 4 times the number 

compared to Mexico (128) in second place. There is a big decrease from there to Somalia 

with 29 defendants (all from one case), and then the Central American triangle states of 

Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala with 17, 15, and 9 defendants, respectively. 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Adult

(n=240)

Minor

(n=210)

Labor

(n=193)

Adult &

Minor

(n=478)

Adults &

Labor

(n=41)

Labor &

Minor

(n=10)

Adult &

Minor &

Labor

(n=37)

Female

Male

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
38

FIGURE 5.6. GENDER COMPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS BY ORGANIZED CRIME 

TYPOLOGY 

FIGURE 5.7. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS BY TYPE OF HUMAN 

TRAFFICKING 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Mom & Pop

(n=357)

Crime Ring

(n=334)

Street Gangs

(n=173)

Illegal

Enterprise

(n=348)

Female

Male

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
39

Those engaged in adult sex trafficking come from 15 different countries. The pattern is only 

slightly different than was the case for minor sex trafficking. While defendants in minor 

sex trafficking only cases are largely confined to the Americas, adult sex trafficking 

defendants touch Asia, Russia and Eastern Europe. The top countries in order are the 

United States (334), Mexico (144), Honduras (16), El Salvador (14), China (13), Guatemala 

(9), Colombia (5), Russia (5), Ukraine (4), and Brazil (3). 

Labor trafficking defendants have a strikingly different distribution. Defendants come from 

30 different countries. The top countries include the United States (56), Mexico (55), 

Honduras (23), El Salvador (10), Uzbekistan (10), Nigeria (5), Ukraine (6), India (5), Jordan 

(5), Philippines (5), and Thailand (5). Defendants in labor trafficking cases come from a 

more geographically diverse set of countries, and the number of defendants per nation is 

more evenly distributed than is the case for minor and adult sex trafficking defendants. 

Figures 5.8 through 5.10 breaks down defendant country of origin by organized crime 

typology, examining the differences between Mom & Pop, Crime Ring, and Illegal 

Enterprises. Although there are 15 total states represented by Mom & Pop groups, Figure 

5.8 shows that Mom & Pop defendants are dominated equally from the United States (130) 

and Mexico (126). The drop from there is dramatic with only six defendants each from 

Guatemala and Nigeria. There is a notable lack of Mom & Pop defendants from Russia, 

Ukraine or other Eastern European states. 

FIGURE 5.8. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS ORGANIZED AS MOM & POPS

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
40

The difference between country of origin for Mom & Pops and Crime Rings differ in that for 

Crime Rings the defendants are significantly more likely to be from the United States more 

than anywhere else in the world. Although twelve countries total are represented on the 

map, the United States has 195 defendants which is almost 10 times more than the next 

state, Mexico, which has only 22 defendants organized as Crime Rings. The next set of 

Crime Ring countries of origin are China (9), Colombia (5), El Salvador (5), and Russia (4). 

Countries of origin for defendants organized as Illegal Enterprises is much more varied 

with 25 different countries represented. Most of defendants are still from the United States 

(86) with the next set of countries being Mexico (42), Honduras (23), and El Salvador (10). 

After that, however, the countries are much more diverse, including Ukraine (9), 

Uzbekistan (8), India (5), Russia (5), Thailand (5). Thus, although the bulk of defendants 

are still from the United States or nearby countries in Central America, much of Eastern 

Europe, Russia, and Asia are connected to human trafficking in the United States through 

Illegal Enterprises. 

FIGURE 5.9. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS ORGANIZED AS CRIME RINGS 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
41

FIGURE 5.10. COUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF DEFENDANTS ORGANIZED AS ILLEGAL 

ENTERPRISES 

PREDICTING TYPE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING BY INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP-BASED 

CHARACTERISTICS

Combined, the organized crime typologies and demographic characteristics of the 

defendants tell us different narratives about human trafficking in the United States. The 

analysis thus far has shown that different types of individuals organize into different types 

of groups to carry out different types of human trafficking. The foregoing analysis provides 

the results of four different logistic regression analyses predicting different types of human 

trafficking in the United States based on both individual- and group-based characteristics. 

It is important to note that these findings represent only what can be discerned from 

federally-prosecuted cases, and therefore may be a better representation of prosecutorial 

biases and patterns rather than the truth about the individuals and groups perpetrating 

different forms of human trafficking. Nevertheless, law enforcement data is among the 

most robust that exists on this crime, and it is a very good starting point to begin to 

understand the individual- and group-based characteristics of those engaged in various 

forms of human trafficking in the United States. 

The dependent variable across all the models is binary and is coded 0/1 as to whether the 

defendant/case involved different types of human trafficking: minor sex only, adult sex 

only, labor only, and both adult and minor sex.12 The unit of analysis is defendants, 

clustered by case. Across each of the models the omitted category for race was Hispanic 

 

12 Cases involving both minor sex and labor, and both adult sex and labor were removed from this analysis 

because the number of cases/defendants was too low. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
42

and the omitted category for the organized crime typology was Illegal Enterprise.13 

Therefore, the results for the race and organized crime typology variables should be 

interpreted vis-à-vis the two respective reference categories. 

Table 5.1. Logistic regression results predicting type of human trafficking by 

individual- and group-based characteristics 

Minor Sex 

Only

Adult Sex Only Labor Only Adult Sex & 

Minor Sex

Arrest age -0.07***

(0.01)

-0.03***

(0.01)

0.08***

(0.01)

-0.01

(0.01)

White -0.89**

(0.43)

-1.74***

(0.39)

0.19

(0.46)

0.46

(0.33)

Black 1.27***

(0.32)

-0.05

(0.29)

-1.92***

(0.35)

0.75***

(0.22)

Asian -0.93

(0.70)

1.26***

(0.38)

0.34

(0.75)

-1.30***

(0.29)

Gender -0.60**

(0.31)

-0.15

(0.25)

0.88***

(0.34)

-0.12

(0.19)

Mom & Pop 0.54*

(0.32)

-0.32

(0.27)

-1.21***

(0.36)

0.42**

(0.22)

Crime Ring 2.90***

(0.42)

1.56***

(0.40)

-3.43***

(0.44)

0.32*

(0.23)

Constant 1.70***

(0.51)

1.51***

(0.44)

1.36***

(0.55)

0.91***

(0.36)

N 364 382 364 677

Pseudo R2 0.37 0.15 0.44 0.10

Coefficients reported; standard errors in parentheses; ***p<=0.01; **p<=0.05; *p<=0.10 

The results for minor sex reveal several significant findings that paint a clear narrative. 

Those that engage in minor sex trafficking are significantly younger than those that engage 

in other forms of human trafficking. The predicted probability of engaging in minor sex 

trafficking at 20 years old is 80.5%, and this drops to 49% at 40 years old (all other 

variables set at their means). Similarly, males are significantly more likely than females to 

engage in minor sex trafficking as opposed to other forms of human trafficking. The 

predicted probability of a male engaging in minor sex trafficking is 65%, and this drops to 

50% for females. White offenders are 59% less likely than Hispanics to engage in minor sex 

trafficking (odds ratio = 0.41), while Black defendants are 3.5 times more likely than 

Hispanic offenders to engage in minor sex trafficking only. Finally, both Mom & Pop and 

 

13 Gang is omitted because it fits the data perfectly for three of the four models. There are no gang cases that 

do not have minor sex trafficking only or adult sex trafficking only, and there are also no gang cases that 

involve labor trafficking. Thus, given the lack of variance in the type of trafficking committed by Gangs, it 

predicts the dependent variables perfectly and therefore cannot be compared to the other crime types in 

these logistic regressions. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
43

Crime Rings are significantly more likely to engage only in minor sex trafficking than are 

Illegal Enterprises. The odds are 1.7 times greater for Mom & Pop and 18.2 times greater 

for a Crime Ring. Overall, the narrative here is that young, black males organized in crime 

rings are significantly more likely than any other group of individuals to be prosecuted for 

minor sex trafficking. 

Adult sex trafficking cases differ in some critical ways from minor sex trafficking cases. The 

same pattern arises for age in adult sex cases as in minor sex cases where the likelihood to 

engage decreases as one gets older. However, the difference in age is not as dramatic for 

adult sex trafficking as it is for minor sex trafficking. The predicted probability of engaging 

in adult sex trafficking at 20 years old is 71%, and this decreases to 56% at 40 years old. 

Regarding gender, there is no significant difference between the likelihood of males and 

females to participate in adult sex trafficking. White defendants are 83% less likely than 

Hispanic defendants to engage in adult sex trafficking (odds ratio = 0.17), Black defendants 

are equally as likely as Hispanics (no statistically significant difference), and the odds are 

3.5 times greater that Asian defendants will engage in adult sex trafficking as compared to 

Hispanic offenders. Additionally, adult sex trafficking is equally likely to take place 

between Illegal Enterprises and Mom & Pops, but the odds are 4.7 times higher for Crime 

Rings to engage in adult sex trafficking than Illegal Enterprises. Although this finding is 

initially perplexing because there are overall more Illegal Enterprises engaged in adult sex 

trafficking than there are Crime Rings, the data reveal that a greater proportion of the 

Crime Rings are engaged in adult sex trafficking as compared to the proportion of Illegal 

Enterprises. Thus, this finding is somewhat nuanced. 

The narrative for labor trafficking offenders in the United States is extremely different than 

that for minor and adult sex trafficking. Those engaged in labor trafficking are significantly 

older than defendants in other types of human trafficking cases. With all variables set at 

the mean, the predicted probability of a 20 year old engaging in labor trafficking is only 

19%; this increases to 58% for 40 year olds. Additionally, women are significantly more 

likely to engage in labor trafficking than other forms of human trafficking as compared to 

men. The predicted probability of a male trafficking for labor versus sex trafficking is 37%, 

while it increases to 59% for female offenders. White and Asian offenders are equally as 

likely as Hispanic defendants to engage in labor trafficking; however, Black defendants are 

86% less likely to engage in labor trafficking compared to Hispanics (odds ratio=0.14). 

Finally, Mom & Pops are 70% less likely and Crime Rings 97% less likely than Illegal 

Enterprises to engage in labor trafficking (odds ratios=0.30 and 0.03, respectively). Thus, 

the narrative around labor trafficking is that it is perpetrated by older males and females of 

diverse racial backgrounds who work together to traffick individuals through Illegal 

Enterprises. 

Finally, for cases involving minor and adult sex trafficking, a fourth picture emerges. Age is 

not statistically significant indicating that there is a wide age range among those that 

traffick both minors and adults for commercial sex. Gender is also insignificant, indicating 

that there is no difference between the likelihood of males and females engaging in this 

type of trafficking as opposed to other types of human trafficking. White offenders are 

equally as likely as Hispanic defendants to commit adult and minor sex trafficking, but the 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
44

odds of black defendants are 2.1 times higher than Hispanics, and Asians are 73% less 

likely (odds ratio = 0.27) to engage in both adult and minor sex trafficking cases. Both Mom 

& Pops and Crime Rings are more likely to engage in adult and minor sex trafficking than 

are Illegal Enterprises. Overall, therefore, adult and minor sex trafficking cases involves a 

nuanced narrative that includes offenders of different ages and genders that are most likely 

to be Hispanic, White or Black operating as Mom & Pop groups or as Crime Rings. 

PUSH & PULL FACTORS MOTIVATING HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENSES

The quantitative analysis conducted based on review and coding legal records and media 

reports of cases involving three or more co-defendants provides insight into the types of 

groups and individuals engaged in various types of human trafficking. However, what this 

type of analysis does not provide is a deeper understanding of the motivations behind the 

individuals engaged in human trafficking in the United States. Case files and media reports 

do not provide information about the lives of the defendants, such as how and with whom 

they were raised, educational attainment, social networks and influences, personal and 

financial stressors, and how they viewed the human trafficking activities in which they 

were engaged. 

In order to delve more deeply into these types of questions, eleven interviews were 

conducted with individuals convicted in organized crime human trafficking cases. The 

sample is comprised of seven males and four females, including seven Americans and four 

foreign nationals. Two of the eleven were involved in a labor trafficking case, while the 

remaining were involved in sex trafficking. Given limited empirical studies of this 

population, grounded theory provided an appropriate methodology for understanding why 

and how these individuals got involved in human trafficking. The analysis identified six 

push factors and three pull factors.14

The six push factors are sub-divided into primary and secondary push factors. Primary 

push factors are root causes that are products of the social/familial environment in which 

an individual was raised and over which an individual has very little control. They include 

childhood abuse and/or neglect, lack of education, and a destructive social network. The 

primary push factors, as discrete or overlapping experiences, can lead to any or all of the 

secondary push factors. As such, the secondary push factors are symptoms of the primary 

push factors and include: criminal history (adding human trafficking to a preexisting list of 

crimes committed), drug and substance abuse, and financial stress. 

The primary push factors disempowered the individual. The secondary push factors lead 

to the feeling of being out of control. In order to reclaim power and reassert control, the 

individual exerts power and control—both pull factors—over others, while simultaneously 

making financial gains that lead to social esteem. The foregoing analysis delves more 

 

14 Similar factors have been examined for other types of offenders, including domestic violence offenders. 

Future research can explore similarities and differences in push/pull factors among traffickers and other 

types of offenders. Nevertheless, through grounded theory, these are the factors that arose for traffickers. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
45

deeply into each of the factors and exemplifies how each factor is represented in the 

interviews conducted with individuals engaged in human trafficking.

FIGURE 5.11. PUSH/PULL FACTORS MOTIVATING HUMAN TRAFFICKING CRIMES 

Primary Push Factors

1) Childhood abuse and neglect 

Childhood abuse and neglect appears to be a common factor underlying the experiences of 

those who engage in human trafficking. Although it was not officially part of the interview 

protocol (see Appendix E), five out of the 11 individuals interviewed mentioned various 

forms of abuse and neglect in their childhood during the course of the interview. 

My dad was a biker who ran coke for the Angels. My mom was a drunk who turned 

into a coke addict. Me and my sisters have sexual abuse in our backgrounds. All of our 

good years were fucked up. I was always a delinquent. (1) 

My mom is a crack head prostitute and my dad is a heroine addict. (2) 

My dad raised me. I never knew my mother. I don’t even have a picture. I was 

rebellious against my father. But my dad was passive. He worked at the airport and 

was gone throughout the night so I would sneak out. (3) 

Primary Push: 

Social

• Childhood abuse/neglect

• Lack of education

• Destructive social network

Secondary Push: 

Personal

• Criminal history

• Drug/substance abuse

• Financial stress

Pull

• Power

• Control

• Esteem

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
46

I never had any rules. My mom was a really hard working person, but my dad was a 

drunk and she had to work to keep the family together. (4) 

I was molested by my step-dad [a minister in the Church of God in Christ Pentecostal 

church] from the time I was 6 all the way to 12 years old. When I was 14 my mom 

signed her parental rights over to a Mexican family, so I was adopted by them when I 

was 14. My step-dad gave me a black eye once, too. My mom was addicted to 

prescription drugs. She would have empty pill bottles all over the house and would be 

passed out, foaming at the mouth, and she would beat us. (5) 

2) Lack of education 

Over half of the interviewees lacked a high school education. Although two of the American 

males received high school diplomas, one completed 9th grade only. All of the American 

females dropped out of high school in 10th grade. Of the foreign national interviewees, two 

had some high school, and the other two never went past 6th grade. Overall, the 

educational levels of the interviewees were low and several (both American and foreign 

national) lacked the ability to read or write. 

3) Social network 

Consistent with previous research that suggests that neighborhood context is important as 

an introduction into pimping and prostitution (Dank et al. 2014), over half of the 

interviewees mentioned their social networks as having a negative influence on their 

exposure to criminal activities more generally. Social networks may include family, friends, 

and neighborhood context. Sustained exposure to these networks not only reduces the 

barriers to entry into illicit activities (Wheaton, Schauer, and Galli 2010), but also 

normalizes attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors around pimping, prostitution, and other 

criminal activity.

Ever since I was a kid I’ve been around prostitution. It’s what goes on in our 

neighborhood. My mom was on welfare and wasn’t home most of time. She was 

probably out prostituting, all her friends were. (1) 

I hung out with people in the streets. I knew the risk. I knew what was going on 

around me. When I was 15 or 16 I met a pimp who introduced me to prostitution. He 

never put his hands on me at that point in time. He would just say, ‘If you love me, 

you’d do this or that.’ So I would sell myself and give him the money. He would dope 

me up on marijuana and ecstasy pills. One day he beat me in a hotel room to the point 

where I couldn’t see out of my left eye. But then prostitution was all I knew so I started 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
47

working as a prostitute as a minor underage. Then I was about 17 or 18 when I 

started driving. (3)15

The Bloods were in my neighborhood. It could have been the Crips. The Big Guy 

started bringing us food. I told him, ‘You don’t need to bring my family food,’ but he 

said, ‘Brotherly love.’ (6) 

A whole entire different life would have prevented me from getting involved. I started 

smoking pot at 10 years old. I would need to grow up in a whole new life. Somewhere 

where it wasn’t ok to do what I was doing. (4) 

I was involved with the white supremacists, the Aryan brotherhood. A lot of my friends 

were the same way I was. I grew up with a lot of violence from the Aryan brotherhood. 

It’s all I’ve ever known. (4) 

Secondary Push Factors 

1) Criminal history 

Previous research has indicated that drug dealing may serve as a gateway into pimping 

(Dank, et al., 2014). Several interviewees noted other types of criminal history beyond 

drugs that perpetrated a criminal lifestyle more generally. They viewed it as simply adding 

human trafficking onto the list of other crimes they already committed. 

I committed crimes since I was 10 years old. Armed robberies, burglaries, grand theft 

autos, arson. (1) 

I’ve been in prison three previous times for drugs and aggravated assault. I was in jail 

every other week, prison every other year. No one would miss me. (4) 

2) Drug/substance abuse 

Four of the interviewees made specific mention of their addiction to drugs and alcohol. A 

few of the interviewees mentioned that drugs and alcohol was a way to escape from the 

pain of life. Others mentioned that it was part of their social fabric; everyone either dealt 

drugs, did drugs, or both. Additionally, drugs were mentioned as being ubiquitous in the 

context of commercial sex venues. Thus, drugs served the purpose of medicating, in some 

cases making money, fitting in, and staying relevant. 

 

15 This quote demonstrates the ways in which trafficking victims may victimize others, blurring the line 

between victim and perpetrator and leading to criminalization of victims of sex trafficking. Although this 

issue is outside the scope of the present report, Dempsey (2014) explains this issue in greater detail. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
48

I was always on pain pills. Life was so miserable so that’s why I got high off the pills all 

the time. I was so unhappy. Everything about the whole situation was hell. (2) 

I love marijuana. If another guy had a nice bud, then I would hang out with him. (6) 

I grew up in the drug business. A lot of people in my family do it so it was easy to get 

ahold of it and start doing it myself. (4) 

I knew one girl who they prostituted and it got bad. It got to the point where she was 

so addicted to drugs that she would do the sex act just for some drugs and would never 

get paid, which would then get her in more trouble because the gang wasn’t getting 

their money. (5) 

3) Financial stress 

Another secondary factor for engaging in human trafficking is financial stress. Although a 

few of the respondents said they were living in poverty, for others it was not necessarily 

poverty but the financial strain of needing more money to raise a family or care for children 

that pushed them into human trafficking. Three of the four of the foreign nationals 

interviewed mentioned coming to the United States with the notion that they would have a 

better life and make a lot of money, but when they failed to achieve the so-called “American 

dream” it created stress and strain on them. 

I was sick and tired of being poor and wondering where our next meal was going to 

come from. My husband does brick and concrete work. He wasn’t making enough 

money and he is a drunk; he was drinking more than he was bringing in. I knew girls 

that were already escorting, so I met their drivers and they told me I could make $20-

$100 per hour just driving. And it was a flexible schedule—at nighttime when the kids 

are asleep and my husband is passed out. (1) 

If it wasn’t so much of a struggle for me to take care of my kids, then I wouldn’t have 

done it. (2) 

People say when you have kids your life changes, but it pushed me to go out there and 

make more money. (3) 

I got into it because I had a female friend who needed a driver and said she’d give me 

$200 for 20 minutes of my time. At the beginning my goal was to make $1000/week 

per girl if possible. But I knew how much I needed to make per week to cover my bills. 

I had to pay child support. (10) 

I lost my job, and I needed to make money. (9) 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
49

Pull Factors 

1) Power 

The primary push factors lead to feelings of disempowerment and powerlessness at the 

hands of others. Individuals may engage in human trafficking in an attempt empower 

themselves and gain influence in society or within their organizational hierarchy. Human 

trafficking provided some of the interviewees with the money to gain social influence, 

while it gave others a place in an organizational hierarchy that they would not normally be 

able to obtain. 

The man is higher up than me, regardless. Not a lot of women get very high. Obviously 

women never climb to highest rank, but to have a rank is something. (1) 

I invested in night clubs, laundry shops, pizzerias. I would give money away without 

being a part owner because I could and everyone wanted to be my friend. (10) 

I was making $20k/month. I stayed in Tyson’s Corner penthouse at Ritz Carlton for 

two weeks. (3) 

The money was ridiculous. I didn’t even know what to do with it. I was buying 

 $100,000 cars for no reason, just because I could. (11) 

2) Control 

The secondary push factors, including drug and substance abuse, as well as financial stress 

and a criminal record makes individuals feel out of control of their lives. One way to 

overcome the feeling of being out of control is to exert control over others. Several of the 

interviewees alluded to the idea that they enjoyed making other people feel lower than 

them, and intimidating them through condescension or violence. 

I treated them like they’re kids and started taking away their privileges. (1) 

I got a rush from kidnapping the people. They did what I told them to do, but I had a 

gun. I intimidated them by beating them up or holding them at gunpoint while the 

other went to do something. (4) 

I was also a “Big Homie” and had my own people under me. I gave a buck fifty and 

paw prints to my cousin.

16 (5) 

3) Esteem 

 

16 A “buck fifty” is making a slit from the ear to the mouth, which requires 150 stitches. “Paw prints” is 

lighting a toothpaste cap on fire and branding the arm four times to look like paw prints. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
50

Both the primary and secondary push factors lead to low self-esteem and feeling useless in 

the eyes of others and society more generally. One way to compensate for this is to seek 

the esteem of others. In the context of sex trafficking, pimps are esteemed for their money, 

celebrity, and possessions. The pimp culture is revered through conferences such as The 

Player’s Ball, which gives out the International Pimp of the Year award (of which two 

defendants in this database were awarded) and through popular music by artists such as 

Snoop Dogg (a regular at the Player’s Ball). The interviewees recognized the popularity 

and esteem that comes along with living a pimp lifestyle and therefore sought to obtain it. 

In some cases, they viewed their exploits as simply capitalizing on a culture that Americans 

already implicitly and explicitly accept. 

I have money, beautiful girls, and power. I have what everyone wants. I’m a celebrity. 

Everyone wants to be my friend. I went to Super Bowl games, I did everything I wanted 

to do. I got VIP treatment from NFL, NBA, at concerts, the theater. (10) 

Greed got him. He wanted more girls and more money. (3) 

I wanted to look nice for the ladies. I had watches, chains, all that. The street is a quick 

way to make money and everyone else doing it so everyone had cash in their pocket.

(6) 

I wanted more money and would blow through it on drugs and clothes. (1) 

In America, the female form has been exploited by corporations and they’re making 

huge profits from it. It’s in the movies, music, commercials. You can’t get away from it. 

(11) 

Thus, while some scholars have espoused the idea that people engage in human trafficking 

primarily for the financial gain, the present research suggests that this is a limited 

understanding of how and why people engage in human trafficking. There are many 

individuals who are financially desperate who do not exploit other human beings in order 

to pull themselves out of it. The push/pull model suggests that the primary and secondary 

push factors generate the pull factors, all of which interact in complex ways to shape 

identity beliefs and values about oneself. Once these identity patterns are established, they 

are acted out through the devaluation and exploitation of others. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
51

CHAPTER 6: WHERE DO THE ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS OPERATE? 

This chapter analyzes where and how organized crime groups engaged in human 

trafficking in the United States operate. This chapter first examines verified bases of 

operation and crime locations across all cases, regardless of type of human trafficking or 

type of organize crime typology. It then examines spatial patterns for sex and labor 

trafficking by specific venues and industries. 

BASES OF OPERATION & OVERALL CRIME LOCATIONS

Figure 6.1 depicts the number of human trafficking criminal organizations with bases of 

operation located in particular counties. Criminal organizations have operational bases in 

126 counties across 40 states and U.S. territories. The counties with the highest number of 

bases include Harris County (Houston, TX) with 16, Fulton County (Atlanta, GA) with 12, 

Queens County (Queens, NY) with 11, San Diego County with 10, and Los Angeles County 

with 10. Interestingly, the spatial data collected from federal human trafficking cases 

classified as organized crime show that Chicago has only three verified bases of operation 

and San Francisco has only two. 

FIGURE 6.1. TOTAL VERIFIED HUMAN TRAFFICKING BASES OF OPERATION FOR 

ORGANIZED CRIMD GROUPS BY COUNTY 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
52

FIGURE 6.2. TOTAL CONFIRMED HUMAN TRAFFICKING CRIMES COMMITTED BY 

ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS PER COUNTY 

All 50 states have confirmed human trafficking crimes committed by organized human 

trafficking groups, as do two of the territories, Guam and American Samoa. The top crime 

states are California (104), Texas (89), New York (66), Georgia (66), Florida (65), 

Massachusetts (42), Pennsylvania (36), Maryland (36), Tennessee (36), and Virginia (32). 

The crimes committed in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Maryland represent spillover 

crime from organizations in New York and Virginia, respectively. 

An examination of verified crime locations at the county level shows some consistent 

patterns with operational bases. Specifically, the top five cities for verified crimes are the 

same as for verified operational bases: Harris County (38), Fulton County (29), Los Angeles 

County (27), San Diego County (26), and Queens County (17). Thus, there appears to be a 

pattern whereby many criminal organizations are engaging in crimes locally first, before 

dispersing more widely geographically. 

SEX TRAFFICKING CRIME LOCATIONS

There were a total of 836 total sex trafficking crime locations across all the cases in the 

database. The following analysis examines these crime locations by sex trafficking venue to 

discern geospatial patterns for different types of sex trafficking. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
53

Strip clubs 

Strip clubs make up just 30 of the 836 verified sex trafficking locations. In most cases, the 

organizations used just one or two locations. U.S. v. Wiggins et al. (2011) is the major 

exception, where court documents identified at least 18 different crime locations. In this 

case, the defendant used several music industry businesses as front companies to recruit 

girls through social media under false pretenses that they could become singers, then 

prostituted them in strip clubs and motels in several states across the country. 

FIGURE 6.3. VERIFIED STRIP CLUB CRIME LOCATIONS 

Street prostitution

Street Prostitution makes up 201 of the 836 verified sex-crime locations. There are major 

differences among organizations as to the spatial dispersion of moving women for street 

prostitution. For example, U.S. v. Pittman, et al. (2013) has 38 different crime locations 

identified whereas U.S. v. Rios, et al. (2013) has only has one location. It is important to 

note, however, that even in the cases with wider spatial spread, there is a clear 

concentration near the base locations. Figure 6.5 illustrates this more clearly in the case of 

U.S. v. Pittman, et al. (2013) in which there is 38 total crimes locations spread across 16 

states. However, 19 of the crimes happened in California, and the next highest crime state 

was Arizona with three. Thus, even when the organizations have a wider spatial footprint, 

they are most active in the areas where they are based. 

FIGURE 6.4. VERIFIED STREET PROSTITUTION CRIME LOCATIONS 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
54

FIGURE 6.5. U.S. V. PITTMAN, ET AL. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
55

Escort services 

Figure 6.6 shows all of the verified escort service crime locations, which comprise just 48 of 

the 836 verified sex trafficking locations. Crime locations for escort services are more 

flexible and mobile than for strip clubs or massage parlors, which are generally immobile. 

U.S. v. Williams, et al. (2005) has the highest number of crime locations for escort services 

with 10, all of which are focused in the Northeast, Washington, D.C., and Dallas. Despite the 

ability to be more mobile, escort services still tend to have their crime locations clustered 

in one or two major areas. 

FIGURE 6.6. VERIFIED ESCORT SERVICE CRIME LOCATIONS 

Brothels & massage parlors 

Brothels and massage parlors comprise 325 of the 836 total sex trafficking locations. Figure 

6.7 reveals that they are found in most major cities in the United States. As noted in 

Chapter 3, the majority of adult only sex trafficking is taking place inside Hispanic brothels 

and/or Asian massage parlors and involves mostly Hispanic and Asian victims. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
56

FIGURE 6.7. VERIFIED BROTHEL & MASSAGE PARLOR CRIME LOCATIONS

Internet Prostitution 

There are 175 verified Internet prostitution crime locations spread across 47 different 

cases. Figure 6.8 shows that the Internet prostitution cases are widely dispersed across 

almost every state in the country. U.S. v. Evans, et al. (2000) and U.S. v. Robinson, et al.

(2014) are the only cases with 10 or more crime locations. 

FIGURE 6.8. VERIFIED INTERNET PROSTITUTION CRIME LOCATIONS 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
57

LABOR TRAFFICKING CRIME LOCATIONS

There are 196 total verified crime locations for labor trafficking in the United States. 

Figure 6.9 shows their spatial dispersion by type of labor trafficking. Specifically, there are 

103 different hotel and hospitality crime locations, 47 agriculture crime locations, 19 

domestic servitude, 15 other, 6 Health and Beauty, and 6 unknown type of labor trafficking 

locations. 

FIGURE 6.9. TOTAL VERIFIED LABOR TRAFFICKING CRIME LOCATIONS 

Hotel & hospitality 

Hotel and hospitality cases include large labor contracting schemes for hotel chains and 

restaurants, as well as smaller labor trafficking operations by Mom & Pop groups within 

bars and cantinas. The crime locations for hotel and hospitality labor trafficking are 

relatively evenly dispersed throughout the country with some larger clusters across the 

Northeast. 

In order to illustrate one case more closely, Figure 6.11 provides a very close look at U.S. v. 

Molina, et al. (2002), which is contained within Fort Worth, TX city limits. The red squares 

represent the locations that housed the victims, which are centrally located between the 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
58

restaurants and cantinas that represent the crime locations where the victims were 

trafficked. 

FIGURE 6.10. VERIFIED HOTEL & HOSPITALITY CRIME LOCATIONS 

FIGURE 6.11. U.S. V. MOLINA, ET AL. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
59

Agriculture 

The spatial spread of the agriculture labor trafficking cases is depicted in Figure 6.12. 

There are 47 total crime locations across 10 cases. U.S. v. Orian, et al. (2010) is the largest 

case in terms of verified crime locations with 21; however, this is an outlier as it had 

operations across 15 different states. No other case had operations in more than two states. 

There appears to be a concentration of crime locations in Florida with seven unique cases 

in the state, and none of these cases operated in more than two states total. 

FIGURE 6.12. VERIFIED AGRICULTURE CRIME LOCATIONS 

Domestic servitude 

The spatial spread of domestic servitude cases is represented in Figure 6.13. There is 

generally only one crime location in these cases as the location is one home. The outlier is 

U.S. v. Soto-Huarto, et al. (2003), a case in which the victims were smuggled into the United 

States and held in debt bondage, forced to do domestic work in stash houses and serve as 

sex slaves until their smuggling debt was paid off. In this case, there were three different 

stash houses in which the victims were kept. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
60

FIGURE 6.13. VERIFIED DOMESTIC SERVITUDE CRIME LOCATIONS. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
61

CHAPTER 7: HOW DO THE ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS OPERATE? 

This chapter sets forth four different organizational models for organized crime sex 

trafficking operations in the United States. The analysis in this chapter is derived primarily 

from the qualitative interview data. This chapter does not set forth different models for 

labor trafficking as the qualitative data around various labor trafficking models was not 

robust. 

RECRUITMENT

Recruitment for sex trafficking business operations takes many forms. Recruitment of 

victims is imperative as this is the “product” for sale, as one interviewee put it. However, 

there are many other operators involved in organized sex trafficking operations, including 

drivers and bodyguards. 

The means of recruitment for American victims was similar across different sex trafficking 

models; it usually involved psychological coercion of vulnerable populations by a male 

pimp. One interviewee said that the American victims were “normal sluts who have shitty 

moms, usually drug addicts.” They would pretend to date the victims, woo them with gifts, 

and get the victims to believe that they were in love. “They would recruit people that are 

easy to persuade. People that I’ve seen, they’re very young, they have family problems, live 

in group homes.”

The model for recruitment was slightly different among the Gangs. They would recruit the 

“known whores in the area. They tell her, ‘You’re doing this for free, why don’t you make 

money for us since you’re going to do it anyway.’” It was also noted that some of the girls 

the Gangs would use for sex trafficking were addicted to drugs and they would take 

advantage of the drug addiction: “I knew one girl who they prostituted and it got bad. It 

got to the point where she was so addicted to drugs that she would do the sex act just for 

some drugs and would never get paid, which would then get her in more trouble because 

the gang wasn’t getting their money.” Additionally, Gangs “rape their female members and 

then make them sell their bodies.” 

Recruitment of international victims of sex trafficking included both psychological 

coercion, as well as exploitation of their poverty. One interviewee noted of victims from 

Eastern Europe: “The girls are plentiful and the sex industry is huge over there. The girls 

have no other options. We recruited with advertisements ‘New strip club in [city]’ and girls 

would just come.”

 

Beyond victims, however, running a sex trafficking operation required the recruitment of 

employees, including drivers and bodyguards. Several interviewees operated as drivers in 

the sex trafficking operation, or started off as drivers. Two of the individuals were initially 

asked to become drivers by friends, learned the trade, and then began running their own 

trafficking operations. They started driving to make extra money, but then realized how 

much more money they could make if they ran their own business. Another individual was 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
62

asked by a friend, who was a pimp, if she would drive for him because she had a driver’s 

license and he did not. She had a friend who worked at a car rental facility who would rent 

her cars at discounted prices to drive the victims up and down the East coast for the pimp. 

After a while, she became an independent and ran her own brothel out of an apartment 

that she rented, which attracted customers by posting advertisements on Backpage.com. 

On the other hand, there were other much larger and more sophisticated operations that 

employed many more drivers. One operation employed six to seven drivers, all hired 

through family friends, who drove the cars owned by the head of the human trafficking 

operation. This same operation also employed between five to seven security guards, all 

former members of the military in an Eastern European country. The security guards were 

paid $1000 per month by the sex trafficking operation. It was noted that the security 

guards were not American in case “they needed to take care of something, they could fly 

them out of the country quickly.”

OPERATIONAL SECURITY

Many of the sex trafficking business operations use operational security not only to evade 

law enforcement detection, but also to vet the buyers. There are several ways that sex 

trafficking businesses worked to evade law enforcement detection. One way is simply to 

feign operating as a legitimate business. One interviewee stated, “The agencies would be in 

the phone book and have a tax stamp. Agencies do appointments for ‘exotic dancing’ and 

they are able to claim ignorance.” 

Another method is to bribe a law enforcement officer for the burn numbers used by the 

vice unit. In one case, an interviewee noted that they would pay a vice officer $500 for the 

list of vice burn numbers on a monthly basis. The vice officer was a “regular.” This allowed 

them to ignore the calls they believed were reverse sting operations. This particular 

operation “kept some paper copies of the DNAs (do not answers), but we mostly kept the 

information on our phones.” 

Additionally, various websites allow buyers and sellers to post “bewares” for each other. 

They will post to the websites when they become aware of new vice numbers, or to warn 

others that a certain “buyer” is actually an undercover vice officer. One driver also noted 

that he would regularly perform surveillance detection in order to ensure no one was 

following him. 

Those involved in the business also had “handles” or aliases in order to cover their real 

identity. They trade out their phones every three days for a new burner, and many of the 

operators used Verizon or Virgin Mobile because the online account can be managed under 

any name and they are able to change the telephone number every 24 hours. They are also 

very careful about texting and emailing. As one interviewee put it: “Don’t leave paper 

trails. We didn’t keep lots of paper copies because of the risk of being busted.” Members of 

a Gang noted that even when they spoke over the phone they would talk in codes or riddles 

and they changed their language all the time knowing that their calls may be tapped by law 

enforcement. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
63

In addition to operational security as a means of evading law enforcement detection, many 

of the interviewees noted security measures that they take to avoid dangerous buyers. “No 

one wanted to take an appointment without ‘a back.’ I was expected to be the enforcer if 

necessary. I always carried a knife or a gun.” 

Some also noted that they would attempt to obtain as much information on the buyers as 

possible, especially if it was a new buyer. First, they try to obtain IP addresses on buyers 

who post on various private websites that are only for buyers and sellers, then they run a 

“WhoIs” on the IP address. They also perform background checks on new buyers. 

Specifically, if the appointment is going to take place in a home, they do public records 

searches on the address, obtain the name of the owner, then perform Google searches on 

the individual. For in-calls, they also perform property assessments on the value of the 

buyers’ homes. The network of others engaged in the underground commercial sex 

economy also allows them to obtain references from other providers vouching that they 

are a “good client.”

 

Last, those managing the operations “try to keep track of what the different tricks were into 

because really big perverts have more violent tendencies.” If a victim reports something 

negative about a client, “I put a note on the phone not to have any of the girls go to this 

client anymore.”

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

The organizational structures and operating procedures varied significantly based on the 

sex trafficking model. Below are five different models depicting different organizational 

structures that involve varying operating procedures. 

Model 1: Hybrid model 

FIGURE 7.1. HYBRID MODEL

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
64

The first model is a hybrid model of sex trafficking. In this model, there are agencies that 

advertise themselves as “exotic dance” in order to claim ignorance if they are arrested. 

These agencies operate with “tax stamps” under legitimate business names. Although 

there are many agencies that advertise under many different business names, they are 

usually all owned and operated by the same individuals. They may have different phone 

numbers associated with them, but all the numbers are routed to one central location. 

These agencies work with “independents,” women in prostitution who are not pimpcontrolled, and also work with pimps who contract out their private girls to the agencies. 

Sometimes the independents find work through an agency, and the agency contracts with 

drivers/vetters. Other times independents skip the agency and contract directly with the 

driver/vetter. In yet another model, one interviewee noted that independents may also 

work as drivers, and transport pimp-controlled women to their appointments. 

Then there are pimps and pimp-controlled women. Those who have been with the pimp 

the longest and have worked their way up to earn the pimp’s trust are called “bottoms” and 

the rest of the pimp-controlled women are called “private girls.” The pimps often date the 

private girls as a way to coerce them, and the private girls often fall in love with the pimps. 

Pimps can have anywhere between 5-10 different private girls working for them at any 

given time. 

 

The drivers/vetters serve a number of different purposes for the agencies, the 

independents, and the pimps. First, they can assist with getting the girls ready for dates, 

including picking out their clothes and making hair appointments. Second, they assist with 

posting online advertisements and managing the online accounts. Third, they can help with 

vetting the buyers, and conduct background research on the buyers. They also drive the 

women to their appointments, and often serve as “the back” by providing security for the 

women in the event of a “bad date.” Appointments can take place “in call,” which is either 

the buyer’s home or hotel room, or “outcall” at an apartment or hotel room rented out by 

either the agency, another middle-man, the pimp, and in some cases the independents 

themselves. 

In one mid-size Midwestern city in the United States, there are two to three agencies (with 

many different names routed to the same people), and 50 to 60 pimps. 

Model 2: Gang model 

Another model that is very different is that of the Gangs. The Gang model is more 

hierarchical in nature and much more insular than the hybrid model. Moreover, 

prostitution is only one part of a larger business structure that makes most of its money 

through trafficking hard drugs such as cocaine and heroin. 

The Godfather is the head of the gang, and has a number of Big Homies under him. The Big 

Homies then manage an army of “foot soldiers.” One interviewee said, “Everyone did 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
65

different things, some people sell this, some sell that.” Some of the foot soldiers sell drugs, 

while others make music or run a prostitution ring. 

All the members of the gang are required to pay dues. For one gang, the dues were $31 to 

$33 per month. About half of the monthly dues goes to the Godfather, while the other half 

goes to the “family kitty” to pay for bail, defense attorney fees, legal fines, etc. 

FIGURE 7.2. GANG MODEL 

Model 3: International network model 

A third sex trafficking organizational model, which is very different from both the hybrid 

and Gang models, involves vast international networks of criminals contracting with each 

other to facilitate the importation of people into the United State for the purpose of 

commercial sexual exploitation. 

The international network model begins in the country of origin of the victims. Although it 

may be possible to exploit the victims in the country of origin, one interviewee noted that 

in these regions, the victims must do “volume” in order to make money (i.e., have sex with 

20 men/night); however, in the United States the pay for these sex acts is much higher so 

volume can be lower. 

In order to move the victims into the United States, it is necessary to obtain visas either 

into the United States or into Mexico to then cross the border. In some cases, these groups 

obtain legal visas to the United States by providing cover stories about the purpose of the 

visit. In other cases, however, corrupt officials in the consulates take bribes and provide 

tourist visas, usually to Mexico. Thus, the first node in the large international network 

involves developing relationships with officials that assist with obtaining visas. 

The next node in the international network is working with cartels in Mexico to pick up the 

victims at the airport in Mexico City, hold them in stash houses for as long as necessary, and 

transport them from Mexico City to the U.S.-Mexico border. In one case, an interviewee 

described meeting a U.S. border patrol agent at a club in Los Angeles and developing him to 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
66

the point where the border patrol agent eventually took $5000/head in bribe money for 

victims that he allowed through the U.S.-Mexico border in Tijuana. 

FIGURE 7.3. INTERNATIONAL NETWORK MODEL

Once inside the United States, the Eastern European sex trafficking operators’ network 

expands to crime groups that specialize in document fraud in the U.S. The Armenian mafia 

runs a document forgery service that charges $400 for a driver’s license and $350 for a 

social security card. They provide identification documents for whatever state is 

requested, and whenever the victims moved to a new state they would purchase a new 

license. One interviewee noted that Asian sex trafficking operators used a different 

network of criminals for their document forgery services that provide them with real 

driver’s licenses with fake names on them.

The last part of the network includes all the venues to which the international sex 

trafficking operators provide the victims. In some cases, these international operators own 

their own clubs and venues where the victims are trafficked, but they may also be paid by 

other club owners to provide the victims to them. 

In general, those running international sex trafficking operations are highly adept at 

spotting, assessing, developing, and eventually pitching government officials, cartels, 

mafias, and other criminals and crime rings that can assist them in carrying out their 

operations, thereby maintaining a vast network of facilitators around the globe.

These international networks generally house the victims in condos that they own or 

apartments that they rent. One interviewee noted that Eastern European victims are 

rotated out of the United States every 6 months and that one international sex trafficking 

operator has between 20 to 25 victims in the United States at a time. 

Model 4: Tenancingo, Mexico Model 

A different sex trafficking model is that used by the Tenancingo, Mexico group operating 

across the United States, but especially in Queens, NY, Atlanta, GA, and North and South 

Carolina. In this model, hundreds of pimps recruit victims in Mexico and Central America. 

Sometimes the pimps themselves spot the victims and coerce them through a “lover boy” 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
67

story. Other times the pimps use scouts in these counties to spot vulnerable girls. The 

pimps pay the smuggling fee to transport the victims across the U.S.-Mexico border; the fee 

is approximately $4000 to $6000. Once across the border the victims are transported to 

their destination. Each pimp maintains control over one to five victims. 

Pimps then subcontract the victims to brothel owners. One interviewee said: “The brothel 

owner provides the place, the pimps provide the girls.” Each brothel owner may work with 

up to 10 pimps who provide the victims. A brothel generally works four women at a time. 

Some brothel owners run multiple brothels, generally out of apartments, while others run 

only one. 

The brothel owner employs drivers who pick up and drop off the victims at the pimps’ 

locations. Drivers use the brothel owners’ cars, and the brothel owners pay the gas and 

insurance. Drivers normally transport four victims at a time in the car. The drivers also 

serve the function of advertising by handing out cards in the street with the telephone 

number for the brothel. Some drivers work for multiple brothel owners, while other 

drivers work for only one brothel owner (especially if the brothel owner runs more than 

one brothel). Drivers are told not to talk to anyone, including the victims, the police, and 

the pimps. Drivers work seven days/week and are paid roughly $120 per day. They 

communicate with the brothel owners via cell phone and pay all the tolls in cash rather 

than through toll tags.

 

The pimps maintain ownership over their own victims; however, they also trade victims 

with each other in order to provide new victims to the brothel owners “to keep it fresh for 

the customers.” Victims are traded among pimps in different cities and states, all of whom 

provide girls to different brothel owners in those locations. The underlying variable that 

creates the network among pimps is that they are all from Tenancingo, Mexico. One 

interviewee stated: 

It’s a network where people trade women back and forth. Sometimes the [brothel owner] would tell 

 a pimp about another [brothel owner] in another city. The [brothel owners] know about [brothel 

 owners] in other cities partly because the girls would start talking and say they worked for someone 

 else in some other city. So [brothel owners] would tell pimps about other [brothel owners] where 

 they could make good money. Pimps know about other pimps because they are all from the same 

 village in Mexico, Tenencingo. A family in Tenencingo runs the organization. The pimps are an 

 organization, they are very coordinated with each other. The whole town is involved. 

FIGURE 7.4. TENANCINGO, MEXICO MODEL

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
68

The customers are mainly undocumented workers from Mexico or Central America. 

Customers arrive at the brothel, pay the brothel owner, go into the bedroom, receive their 

services, then leave. The sex act is negotiated between the customer and the victim. 

Brothel owners keep customers coming back by providing television, soda, and candy. 

The brothel owner keeps half of the money and gives the other half of the money to the 

victims to give to their pimps. The victims keep nothing. Pimps may verify that victims are 

not stealing any money by calling the brothel owner to confirm the amount made, or by 

checking the money against the number of condoms the victim used that day. Pimps then 

provide for the victims’ expenses and supply their condoms (which they buy in bulk at 

1000 condoms for $85). 

ADVERTISING

The modes of advertising for commercial sex services vary significantly. One interviewee 

stated, “Word of mouth is big in any business, and it’s really really big in this one. I had a 

lot of respect in the area because people knew I wasn’t’ going to talk. Even if I got popped, 

I’m not going to take others down with me.” Some sex trafficking operators did not have to 

advertise much because buyers knew they were trustworthy and had “good product.” 

“Doctors, lawyers, CEOs would fly in just to have sex. If you have quality females, the 

customers are going to gravitate. If you have the supply, men will gravitate.” When 

business was slower, they have an established customer base and are able to “go through 

their phones” to reach out to regular buyers. 

Beyond word of mouth and establishing a strong reputation, which cuts down on 

advertising costs in the long-term, Backpage.com was a very common way of advertising 

(along with many other websites). Before advertisements on Backpage.com became free in 

2015, one interviewee said that they used “vanilla visas” or prepaid credit cards to 

purchase a $300/day advertisement on Backpage.com. “You need to keep posting and keep 

posting to stay relevant.” Gangs commonly use Backpage.com, and they also would 

advertise their victims at major events such as bike shows and conventions. 

The major exception to this form of advertising is the Mexican model. Advertising under 

this model is primarily through passing out cards on the street. The cards usually have 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
69

some advertisement on them for men’s clothing or massage, and then the cards would also 

have a phone number listed. When the cards are handed out, they verbally convey that it is 

for prostitution. Clients would then call the phone number, and the person on the other 

end would give them an address. 

PRICING & PAYMENT

The cost for a sex act varied dramatically. Some interviewees said that the cost varied the 

most based on the type of sex act a buyer wanted. “Anal is what they pay most money for—

things they won’t do to their wives. Also, golden showers, scats, the kinky stuff. If you’re 

going to make her totally devalue herself, then you better pay and pay good.”

17 Price also 

varies based on the race of the victim. “Skinny, blond hair, blue eyes are worth the most.” 

Another interviewee noted, “The amount the girls make depends on how pretty they are.” 

Finally, it was noted that buyers pay more for more time. 

In the hybrid model, one pimp with five private girls could have 20 to 30 buyers per day 

(between 4 to 7 buyers per private girl) at $250 each time (for a 30 minute sex act).18 This 

amounts to $35,000 per week for one pimp. Independents would have two to three buyers 

per day, making roughly $3500 per week. One interviewee who worked as an independent 

and as a driver noted that she made $20,000 per month. Buyers that become regulars 

receive specials, such as “See 10 girls, get one half price.” 

In one medium-sized Midwestern city, where there are roughly 50 pimps, each with 

roughly five private girls making $250 per encounter per day with roughly 5 buyers per 

day, the annual gross revenues of one segment of the hybrid model alone is just under $115 

million. 

The Eastern European network model is different. They make up to $20,000 per week per 

victim between stripping and sex acts, and they have roughly 25 victims at any given time. 

This amounts to $500,000 per week. For the Eastern European victims with blonde hair 

and blue eyes, the rate is up to $1000 for a 15-minute sex act. The revenue is allegedly split 

70%/30% with the victims. 

The Tenancingo, Mexico model has yet a different pricing structure. The cost of a 15 

minute encounter ranges from $20-$35. There are roughly 200 pimps from Tenancingo, 

Mexico in Queens, NY alone, and each pimp has between 1 to 5 victims working for him. 

Each victim has between 8 to 12 buyers per day. Thus, the minimum annual gross revenue 

from the Tenancingo network in Queens, NY is roughly $36.5 million per year, but it could 

be as high at $100 million. 

 

17 Golden showers is being urinated on and scats is being defecated on. 

18 Three of the interviewees, all of whom fit into the hybrid model in some manner, and all of whom worked 

along the East Coast, said that one 30 minute encounter cost between $200-$300. The number of customers 

per victim per day ranged from 4 to 10. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
70

In the Tenancingo model, customers pay only with cash, and cash is the most common form 

of payment across the other models, as well. However, in the hybrid model, pre-paid debit 

cards (e.g., green dot cards) and pre-paid credit cards are also used. Interestingly, it was 

also noted that customers sometimes barter with victims for cars or other items as a form 

of payment. 

MANAGING MONEY

Given the mostly cash-basis of the underground sex economy across all different sex 

trafficking models, the most common way to manage the cash was to launder it. Organized 

crime groups engaged in human trafficking may set up legal business entities that are 

tangentially related to the sex trafficking business as a means to legitimize the money and 

set up payroll. The most common forms of business by which revenue from sex trafficking 

is laundered include modeling agencies, nail salons, barber shops, tanning salons, and car 

repossession businesses. 

In the Tenaningo, Mexico model, moving money is not as sophisticated. This organization 

has couriers from Mexico who arrive into the U.S. on Friday and depart again for Mexico on 

Monday. It is not clear how many couriers there are, how they are connected to the pimp 

network, and who the money is sent to. 

MANAGING RELATIONSHIPS

The organized criminal groups operating sex trafficking enterprises have to manage 

relationships with a variety of stakeholders, first among them the victims themselves. 

Among the most popular ways to manage the victims is to make them believe they are 

loved and cared for with words and gifts. Pimps buy their victims clothes, diamonds, and 

purses. One said, “The girls depended on me for protection. Every woman wants to feel 

protected and safe. And they were loyal to me because of that. I made them feel pretty, 

safe, and secure.” Another interviewee stated, “I tried to create trust and develop 

relationships with them so they feel safe.”

In addition to managing their own individual relationships with the victims, pimps also 

manage the relationships among the victims. Several interviewees noted that they worked 

to foster competition among the victims to make more money by rewarding “hard work” 

with “vacations, shopping sprees, and jewelry.” In order to compete for the rewards, the 

victims became “fierce and heated” in their relationships and would “steal clients” from 

each other. One mentioned having motivational meetings with the victims: “Every Sunday I 

would sit them down together and debrief on the week, discuss how much each person 

made, and motivate them to make more.”

However, when the victims “get out of their lane” they face being beat and threatened by 

the pimp. One interviewee said: “He [the pimp] would beat the hell out of them” if they 

misbehave by stealing from the buyers, the pimp, or trying to exert too much 

independence. However, this is not necessarily the case in all models. One interviewee 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
71

state, “I didn’t hit them or cause them to fear. For me it was more about the financial 

dependence on me.” Another interviewee said that he did not hit or slap because “[Y]ou’re 

hurting your product. If you hurt the girl you can’t make the money.” A different 

interviewee said, “We didn’t want the girls to get hurt because we got money from the 

girls.”

 

Therefore, for those that are not violent, they find other ways to manage “discipline issues” 

with the victims. One way is to take away their money. One pimp who allegedly split the 

revenue 60%/40% with his victims said, “Money is the whole key to everything. I tell 

them, ‘If you don’t want to work anymore, there’s a line of other girls that will.’” Another 

simply said, “You treat them like they’re kids and start taking away their privileges.”

Beyond managing the victims, the sex trafficking organizations also manage relationships 

with competitors. One interviewee said that the underground sex economy is a “strong 

network, and you try to stay on everyone’s good side.” 

There are a few reasons to try to maintain good relationships with competitors. The first 

reason is simply the violence that can take place if bad blood is created. “Anything having 

to do with night life is nasty—drugs, violence—it’s dangerous and people are suspicious.” 

Many interviewees mentioned that pimps carry guns, and that they buy weapons on the 

black market from Gangs. Another stated that pipe bombs are also used in retaliation for 

taking business away. 

Suspicions run very high in the Gang model, where, despite talk of “brotherhood,” “no one 

ever knew what was what” or who they could trust. In the hybrid model, it was stated that 

pimps do not often talk to other pimps out of suspicion and fear of “pimpnapping,” which is 

when one pimp kidnaps another pimp’s victim, often at gunpoint. However, in the 

Tenancingo, Mexico model, the pimps do not compete with each other “because they are 

one organization.”

Some within the business operations, such as drivers, opt out of starting their own 

independently run operation out of fear of angering those already in the business. One 

former driver said, “I could have opened my own business, but I didn’t know enough pimps 

to run it. If I opened my own business, the boss would be angry. He probably wouldn’t 

hurt me, but he would be angry because I’d be taking knowledge from his business and 

opening my own.”

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
72

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

This report sheds light on the extent to which different types of organized criminal groups 

are engaged in human trafficking in the United States, who the individuals are that 

comprise these groups, as well as where and how they operate. The findings have a 

number of implications for criminal justice policy and practice, which will be discussed in 

this chapter. 

1. Organized crime lacks a clear, broadly accepted definition in the anti-human 

trafficking community. Without a working understanding of what constitutes 

“organized crime” in the context of human trafficking, the effectiveness of countertrafficking efforts may be hampered and law enforcement efforts could be cut short 

before full networks are mapped and disrupted (see #2 below). This research 

reveals that important trends can be uncovered by examining human trafficking 

groups, hence policymakers should establish a clear definition of “organized crime” 

and the broader anti-human trafficking community should agree on a set typology 

that can assist law enforcement and prosecutors as they investigate and prosecute 

these types of cases. 

2. Since the passage of the TVPA in 2000, prosecutions of human trafficking 

cases with three or more defendants have remained flat while prosecutions of

cases with one or two defendants have increased steadily. Although human 

trafficking has been framed as an organized crime issue, most of the cases that have 

been prosecuted involve one or two defendants. There may be many potential 

reasons for this, but the law enforcement community should critically examine these 

reasons and determine whether this is the most efficacious manner to handle these 

cases going forward.

3. The majority of individuals prosecuted for human trafficking crimes in the 

United States operated as part of some type of organized criminal group. This 

data implies that an organized crime approach is warranted but generally lacking in 

federal investigations and prosecutions of human trafficking cases. Where 

appropriate, prosecutors should establish an “organized crime” strategy to 

prosecuting human trafficking cases. The marginal cost of prosecuting as organized 

crime is low, while the return on investment is potentially very high, as: 1) more 

perpetrators would be prosecuted per case; 2) trafficking networks would be more 

significantly disrupted; and 3) the deterrence effect upon organized crime groups 

would be increased.

8. The demographic profiles of defendants and victims reveal important 

patterns in human trafficking operations involving organized crime. The 

findings in this report reveal some clear, discernable patterns about human 

trafficking operations in the United States based on the demographic details of 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
73

defendants and victims, at least on the basis of the cases that have been prosecuted. 

The counter-human trafficking community should continue to educate judges, 

prosecutors, law enforcement, and the general public about the various 

organizational and operational capacities of the different types of organized crime 

groups engaged in human trafficking to better prevent, disrupt, and prosecute 

networks. There should be a thorough examination of early intervention and 

prevention efforts targeted at potential victimizers.

4. There are clear push and pull factors motivating human trafficking offenses. 

Those that engage in human trafficking in the United States are not motivated only 

by profit; many have experienced their own forms of trauma and grooming that 

facilitated the belief that this type of crime was a viable option. A lack of 

understanding about past motivations prevents effective rehabilitation programs 

for future reintegration, as well as prevention programs for potential victimizers. 

The counter-human trafficking community should develop more robust, traumainformed rehabilitation programs for trafficking offenders and prevention programs 

for high-risk individuals that: 1) account for the high incidence rate of childhood 

abuse and neglect among offenders; 2) provide training and educational assistance; 

and 3) aid in the development of new and positive social networks. 

5. Illegal Enterprises are perhaps the most highly sophisticated and diverse type 

of organized crime group engaged in human trafficking. The criminal justice 

community should intensify its focus on Illegal Enterprises. Targeting this type of 

organized crime group through increased investigation, prosecution, and public 

awareness campaigns may provide a greater return on resources invested given the 

following: 1) this group’s involvement in all forms and combinations of trafficking 

make it vulnerable to increased law enforcement scrutiny; 2) the number of victims 

exploited by this type of group; 3) the diversity of criminal activity it employs (and, 

hence, the diversity of chargeable offenses available to prosecutors); 4) the 

transnational scope of many of these groups’ supply chains; and 5) the publicly 

visible nature of their operations (by definition, an Illegal Enterprise operates under 

a business name that is registered with the state and/or used in advertising).

6. Federal prosecutions have verified human trafficking crime locations in all 50 

states, as well as two territories. The public should be made aware that human 

trafficking in the United States is occurring everywhere, and local communities 

should be made aware of the specific types of human trafficking that are most 

prevalent around them. 

7. There are no federal human trafficking cases that can clearly be established as 

cartel/mafia/syndicate. It is not clear if the lack of cartel/mafia/syndicate 

involvement in human trafficking is a function of the way cases are being 

investigated and prosecuted or the real lack of engagement in this criminal 

enterprise. More research should be conducted on the involvement of 

cartels/mafias/syndicates in facilitating human trafficking operations. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
74

REFERENCES

Abadinsky, Howard. 2010. Organized Crime, Ninth Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth 

Cengage.

Albanese, Jay S. 2011. Transnational Organized Crime and the 21st Century. New York: 

Oxford University Press.

Albonetti, Celesta. 1987. “Prosecutorial Discretion: The Effects of Uncertainty.” Law and 

Society Review 21:291-313. 

Andrews, Donald Arthur and James Bonta. 2003. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct (3rd

ed). Newark, NJ: Lexis/Nexis. 

Aos, Steve, Marna Miller and Elizabeth Drake. 2006. “Evidence-based public policy options 

to reduce future prison construction, criminal justice costs, and crime rates” (Report No. 

06- 10-1201). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

Bouché, Vanessa, Amy Farrell, and Dana Wittmer. 2016. “Identifying Effective CounterTrafficking Programs and Practices in the U.S.: Legislative, Legal, and Public Opinion 

Strategies That Work.” National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, United States 

Department of Justice. NCJRS Document No.: 249670. 

Brennan, Denise. 2010a. “Key issues in the resettlement of formerly trafficked persons in 

the United States.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 158:1581. 

Brennan, Denise. 2010b. “Thoughts on Finding and Assisting Individuals in Forced Labor in 

the USA,” Sexualities 13(2):139-152. 

Bruckert, Chris, and Colette Parent. 2004. Organized crime and human trafficking in Canada: 

Tracing perceptions and discourses. Research and Evaluation Branch, Community, Contract 

and Aboriginal Policing Services Directorate, Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Bruggeman, W. 2002. “Illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings seen as a 

security problem for Europe.” Paper presented at the European Conference on Preventing 

and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings: Global Challenges for the 21st Century. 

Brussels.

Bruinsma, Gerben and Guus Meershoek. 1997. “Organised Crime and trafficking women 

from Eastern Europe in the Netherlands.” Transnational Organized Crime 4:105-18.

Chacón, Jennifer. 2010. “Tensions and Tradeoffs: Protecting trafficking victims in the era of 

immigration enforcement.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 158. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
75

Clawson, Heather, Nicole Dutch, Susan Lopez, and Suzanna Tiapula. 2008. “Prosecuting 

human trafficking cases: lessons learned and promising practices.” National Institute of 

Justice, Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice. NCJRS Document 

No.: 223972. 

Dalla, Rochelle. 2003. “When the Bough Breaks...: Examining Intergenerational ParentChild Relational Patterns Among Street-Level Sex Workers and Their Parents and 

Children.” Applied Developmental Science 7(4):216-228.

Dank, Meredith, Bilal Khan, P. Mitchell Downey, Cybele Kotonia, Debbie Mayer, Collen 

Owens, Laura Pacifici, and Lilly Yu. 2014. “Estimating the Size and Structure of the 

Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight Major US Cities.” Urban Institute.

Dempsey, Michelle Madden. 2015. “Decriminalizing Victims of Sex Trafficking.” American 

Criminal Law Review 52: 207. 

DeStefano, Anthony. 2008. The War on Human Trafficking: U.S. Policy Assessed. New 

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 

Durchslag, Rachel and Samir Goswami. 2008. “Deconstructing the Demand for Prostitution: 

Preliminary Insights from interviews with Chicago men who purchase sex.” Chicago 

Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation.

Estes, Richard J. and Neil Alan Weiner. 2001. “The commercial sexual exploitation of 

children in the U.S., Canada, & Mexico” (full report). University of Pennsylvania. 

Farrell, Amy and Stephanie Fahy. 2009. “Human Trafficking in the U.S.: Public Frames and 

Policy Responses.” Journal of Criminal Justice 37(6): 617-626. 

Farrell, Amy, Jack McDevitt, Rebecca Pfeffer, Stephanie Fahy, Colleen Owens, Meredith 

Dank, and William Adams. 2012. “Identifying Challenges to Improve the Investigation and 

Prosecution of State and Local Human Trafficking Cases.” Human Trafficking Data 

Collection and Reporting Center Research and Technical Reports.

Farrell, Amy, Jack McDevitt, and Stephanie Fahy. 2008. “Understanding and Improving Law 

Enforcement Responses to Human Trafficking, Final Report.” Human Trafficking Data 

Collection and Reporting Center Research and Technical Reports.

Finckenauer, James O. 2005. “Problems of definition: What is organized crime?.” Trends in 

Organized Crime 8(3):63-83.

Finckenauer, James O. and Jennifer Schrock. 2001. Human Trafficking: A Growing Criminal 

Market in the U.S. Washington DC: International Center, National Institute of Justice.

Frohman, Lisa. 1991. “Discrediting Victims’ Allegations of Sexual Assault: Prosecutorial 

Accounts of Case Rejections.” Social Problems 38:213-226. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
76

Hagan, Frank E. 1983. “The Organized Crime Continuum: A Further Specification of a New 

Conceptual Model,” Criminal Justice Review 8:52-57.

Hagan, Frank E. 2006. “’Organized Crime’ and ‘organized crime’: Indeterminate problems of 

definition.” Trends in organized crime 9(4):127-137.

Hodge, David R. and Cynthia A. Lietz. 2007. “The international sexual trafficking of women 

and children.” Journal of Women and Social Work 22(2):163-174.

Hopper, Elizabeth and Jose Hidalgo. 2006. “Invisible Chains: Psychological Coercion of 

Human Trafficking Victims.” Intercultural Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 1.

Hsu, Kevin. 2007. “Masters and Servants in America: The ineffectiveness of current United 

States anti-trafficking policy in protecting victims of trafficking for the purposes of 

domestic servitude.” Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy 14:489.

Jahic, Galma and James O. Finckenauer. 2005. “Representations and misrepresentations of 

human trafficking.” Trends in Organized Crime 8(3):24-40.

Janson, Lara. 2013. “Our Great Hobby: An analysis of online networks for buyers of sex in 

Illinois.” Chicago Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation, 5-17.

Klein, Malcolm and Cheryl Maxson. 1996. “Gang Structures, Crime Patterns, and Police 

Responses.” National Criminal Justice Reference Center 188511.

Kutner, Max. 2015. “Sex Slaves on the Farm.” Newsweek.

Lakhani, Nina. 2015. “Tenancingo: the small town at the dark heart of Mexico’s sex-slave 

trade.” The Guardian.

Landenberger, Nana A., and Mark W. Lipsey. 2005. “The positive effects of cognitivebehavioral programs for offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective 

treatment.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 1:451-476. 

Latimer, Jeff, Craig Dowden, and Danielle Muise. 2005. “The Effectiveness of Restorative 

Justice Practices: A Meta-Analysis.” The Prison Journal 85(2):127-144.

Lee, Maggy. 2011. Trafficking and Global Crime Control. Los Angeles: Sage.

Levy, Alexandra F. and Martina E. Vandenberg. 2014. “When ‘Mandatory’ Does not mean 

Mandatory: Failure to obtain criminal restitution in federal prosecution of human 

trafficking cases in the United States.” Human Trafficking Pro Bono Legal Center.

Lipsey, Mark W. and Francis T. Cullen. 2007. “The effectiveness of correctional 

rehabilitation: A review of systematic reviews.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science

3:297-320. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
77

Lyman, Mark W. and Gary W. Potter. 2011. Organized crime. (5th ed.). New York: Prentice 

Hall. 

Maltz, Michael. 1985. “Toward Defining Organized Crime,” in H.E. Alexander and G. Caiden 

(eds.). The Politics and Economics of Organized Crime, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.

Maltz, Michael. 1994. “Defining Organized Crime,” in Robert J. Kelly, Ko-Lin Chin, and Rufus 

Schatzberg (eds.). Handbook of Organized Crime in the United States, Westport, CT and 

London: Greenwood Press.

Moster, Aviva, Dorota Wnuk, and Elizabeth L. Jeglic. 2008. “Cognitive behavioral therapy 

interventions with sex offenders.” Journal of Correctional Health Care 14:109-121. 

Musto, Jennifer. 2013. “Domestic minor sex trafficking and the detention-to-protection 

pipeline.” Dialectical Anthropology 37(2):257-276.

Okech, David, Whitney Morreau, and Kathleen Benson. 2012. “Human Trafficking: 

Improving victim identification and service provision.” International Social Work

55(4):488-503.

Owens, Colleen, Meredith Dank, Amy Farrell, Justin Breaux, Isela Banuelos, Rebecca Pfeffer, 

Ryan Heitsmith, Katie Bright, Jack McDevitt. 2014. “Understanding the Organization, 

Operation, and Victimization Process of Labor Trafficking in the United States.” Urban 

Institute.

Pearson, Erica. 2012. “Small Mexican town of Tenancingo is major source of sex trafficking 

pipeline to New York.” New York Daily News.

Picarelli, John. 2009. “Organised Crime and Human Trafficking in the United States and 

Western Europe,” in Strategies Against Human Trafficking: The role of the security sector, ed. 

Cornelius Friesendorf. Vienna: National Defense Academy and Austrian Ministry of 

Defense and Sport.

Pollock, Joycelyn and Valerie Hollier. 2010. “T Visas” Prosecution Tool or Humanitarian 

Response?” Women & Criminal Justice 20:1-2. 

Richard, Amy O. 1999. International trafficking in women to the United States: A 

contemporary manifestation of slavery and organized crime. Bureau of Intelligence and 

Research (State) Washington DC.

Rieger, April. 2007. “Missing the Mark: Why the trafficking victims protection act fails to 

protect sex trafficking victims in the United States.” Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, 30.

Risley, Amy. 2010. “Sex trafficking: The ‘other’ crisis in Mexico?.” The Latin Americanist

54(1):99-117. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
78

Roe-Sepowitz, Dominique. 2012. “Juvenile Entry into Prostitution: The Role of Emotional 

Abuse,” Violence Against Women 18(5):562-579. 

Sadruddin, Hussein, Natalia Walter and Jose Hidalgo. 2005. “Human Trafficking in the 

United States: Expanding Victim Protection Beyond Prosecution Witness.” Stanford Law & 

Policy Review 16:379. 

Schloenhardt, Andreas. 2001. "Trafficking in migrants: Illegal migration and organized 

crime in Australia and the Asia Pacific Region." International Journal of the Sociology of 

Law 29.4:331-378.

Schmidt, Janell and Ellen Hochstedler Steury. 1989. “Prosecutorial Discretion in Filing 

Charges in Domestic Violence Cases.” Criminology 27:487-510. 

Shelley, Louise. 2003. “Trafficking in women: the business model approach.” The Brown 

Journal of World Affairs, X(I):119-31.

Shelley, Louise. 2010. Human Trafficking: A Global Perspective. New York: Cambridge 

University Press. 

Shively, Michael, Kristina Kliorys, Kristin Wheeler, and Dana Hunt. 2012. “A national 

overview of prostitution and sex trafficking demand reduction efforts, final report.” 

National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice. 

NCJRS Document No.: 238796. 

Smith, Kendal Nicole. 2011. “Human trafficking and RICO: A new prosecutorial hammer in 

the war on modern day slavery.” George Mason Law Review 18(3):759-791.

Spohn, Cassia, John Gruhl, and Susan Welch. 1987. “The Impact of the Ethnicity and Gender 

of Defendants on the Decision to Reject or Dismiss Felony Charges.” Criminology, 25:175-

191. 

Spohn, Cassia and Jeffrey Spears. 1996. “The Effect of Offender and Victim Characteristics 

on Sexual Assault Case Processing Decisions.” Justice Quarterly 13:649-679. 

Torg, Cynthia Shepherd. 2006. “Human trafficking enforcement in the United States.”

Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 14:503-520.

Vacca, James S. 2004. “Educated prisoners are less likely to return to prison.” Journal of

Correctional Education 55(4):297-305.

Väyrynen, Raimo. 2005. "Illegal immigration, human trafficking and organized 

crime." Poverty, international migration and asylum. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 143-170.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
79

Visher, Christy A., Pamela K. Lattimore, Kelle Barrick, and Stephen Tueller. 2016. 

“Evaluating the Long-Term Effects of Prisoner Reentry Services on Recidivism: What types 

of services matter?” Justice Quarterly, February.

Wheaton, Elizabeth M., Edward J. Schauer, and Thomas V. Galli. 2010. “Economics of Human 

Trafficking.” International Migration, 48:114–141.

Williams, Phil. 2002. Transnational Organized Crime and the State. In R.B. Hall (ed.) 

Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. West Nyack, NY: Cambridge 

University Press, 161-82.

Williams, Phil. 2008. “Trafficking in women: The role of transnational organized crime.” In 

E. Newman and S. Cameron Trafficking in Humans. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. 

Wilson, Helen and Cathy Spatz Widom. 2010. “The Role of Youth Problem Behaviors in the 

Path from Childhood Neglect to Prostitution: A Prospective Examination,” Journal of 

Research on Adolescence 20(1):210-226.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
80

APPENDIX A: CASE SEARCH PROTOCOL 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
81

Search Protocol #1 (SP1) 

The purpose of this protocol is to standardize the way we collect and record information of cases 

from various databases. The document provides instructions for searches to run, how to 

download documents, and then how to save the documents to show the search they came from. 

For the first search (Bloom), each researcher is assigned various states to focus their research. 

The researchers are instructed to perform each search for each state assigned to the researcher, 

download the cases, and save them in the manner instructed. 

1. Bloomberg Law (Bloom)

 At the home page, under “research” CLICK “State Law”

 Select YOUR STATE 

 Enter SEARCH TERMS 

a. Human Trafficking:

 “Human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering 

b. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitut!) or pander! or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering) 

c. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia or 

cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

d. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering 

 On the left hand side of the page, there is a date drop-down menu 

o Click on the drop-down menu and select “date range”

o Enter 

 From: 01/01/2000

 To: 12/31/2013

 To Download cases:

 Select 

o Court Dockets and then select

o Court Opinions

o (only download files from these two sets) 

 In each set of cases, select the cases you wish to download by clicking 

the white box to the left of each case (likely all) 

 Click “Print/Download” at the top of the results page 

 Select the following: 

o Select: “Selected documents”

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
82

o Include: “General Information”

o Output: PDF

o Paper Size: Letter 

o Click “exclude Bloomberg Cover Page

o Click “Print/Download”

 A yellow message will appear notifying you that your documents are 

being prepared

 Click “Go to the Download Center”

 Click on your documents OR select multiple documents and click 

“Zip/Download”

o **NOTE**: If you click “zip/download,” you must unzip the 

files (usually by double clicking the file in your computer’s 

download folder) and then save the resulting documents. 

 To Save Cases 

a. After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following (include 

spaces before and after dashes): 

i. SP1 – Bloom – [Case Type] – [YOUR STATE] – Batch # – # 

of cases 

1. Case Type Instructions: 

a. For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

b. For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

c. For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

d. For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

2. Batch # Instructions 

a. If you must download more than one pdf for a 

particular search, assign a number to each 

document and place it in parentheses after a 

final dash 

2. Westlaw Classic (WestCrim) 

 (do not use WestlawNext for this search) 

 On the left hand side, locate “Search for a database”

 Type crfiling-all 

 Click “Go”

 Under “Additional Restrictions” select ALL 

 In the Search Box, type: [search terms] 

o Search Terms (type exactly as they appear below): 

a. Human Trafficking 

 “Human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering & DA(aft 01/01/2000) 

b. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitut!) or pander! or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering) & DA(aft 01/01/2000)

c. Labor Trafficking 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
83

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia 

or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering & DA(aft 

01/01/2000) 

d. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “Visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! 

or “organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering & DA(aft 01/01/2000) 

 To Download Cases: 

o Select the cases by clicking the clear box to the left of each case name 

o Then click the “download” button in the top right of the results page (it 

looks like a piece of paper with an arrow pointing down) 

o Choose the following 

 Save to: My Computer 

 Format: PDF 

 Selected Documents 

 Full Text 

o Click “Save”

o A pop up window will appear. Click “complete download”

 To Save Cases 

o After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following 

(include spaces before and after dashes): 

 SP1 – WestCrim – [Case Type] – Batch # – # of cases

1. Case Type Instructions: 

a. For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

b. For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

c. For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

d. For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

2. Batch # Instructions 

a. If you must download more than one pdf for a 

particular search, assign a number to each 

document and place it in parentheses after a 

final dash 

3. Westlaw Classic (WestCiv) 

 On the left hand side, locate “Search for a database”

 Type filing-all 

 Click “Go”

 Under “Additional Restrictions” select ALL 

 In the Search Box, type: [search terms] 

o Search Terms (type exactly as they appear below): 

a. Human Trafficking 

3. “Human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering & DA(aft 01/01/2000) 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
84

b. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitut!) or pander! or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering) & DA(aft 01/01/2000)

c. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia 

or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering & DA(aft 

01/01/2000) 

d. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “Visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! 

or “organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering & DA(aft 01/01/2000)

2. To Download Cases: 

o Select the cases by clicking the clear box to the left of each case name 

o Then click the “download” button in the top right of the results page (it looks 

like a piece of paper with an arrow pointing down) 

o Choose the following 

o Save to: My Computer 

o Format: PDF 

o Selected Documents 

o Full Text 

o Click “Save”

o A pop up window will appear. Click “complete download”

3. To Save Cases 

o After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following (include 

spaces before and after dashes): 

o SP1 – WestCiv – [Case Type] – Batch # – # of cases 

1. Case Type Instructions: 

a. For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

b. For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

c. For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

d. For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

2. Batch # Instructions 

a. If you must download more than one pdf for a 

particular search, assign a number to each 

document and place it in parentheses after a 

final dash 

4. In WestlawNext (WestNext)

 On the homepage, next to the search box Click ALL STATES and ALL 

FEDERAL

 Next to the search bar at the top, Click “advanced”

 Near the bottom of the page, there is a DATE drop-down menu

o Select “all dates after”

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
85

o Enter  01/01/2000

 Enter the search terms in the “Any of these terms” box

a. Human Trafficking 

 “human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering 

b. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitute!) or pander! Or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering) 

c. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia 

or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

d. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! 

or “organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering 

 To Download Cases: 

o Select the cases by clicking the clear box to the left of each case name 

o Then click the “download” button in the top right of the results page (it 

looks like a piece of paper with an arrow pointing down) 

o Choose the following 

 What to deliver: Documents 

 Format: PDF 

 As: A single merged file 

o Click “Download”

o A pop up window will appear. Click “Download”

 To Save Cases 

o After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following 

(include spaces before and after dashes): 

 SP1 – WestNext – [Case Type] – Batch # – # of cases 

1. Case Type Instructions: 

o For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

o For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

o For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

o For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

2. Batch # Instructions 

o If you must download more than one pdf for a 

particular search, assign a number to each document 

and place it in parentheses after a final dash 

5. Lexis Nexis (LexNex) 

 Go to Lexis Advance (advance.lexis.com) 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
86

 Directly below the search bar you will find three tabs: “Content Type,” 

“Jurisdiction,” and “Practice Area”

 Click “Content Type”  “Cases” & “Briefs, Pleadings, and Motions” & 

“Dockets”

 Click “OK”

 Click “Jurisdiction”  ALL JURISDICTIONS 

 Click “Practice Area”  All Practice Areas and Topics 

 In the search bar, enter [“Search Terms”]

a. Human Trafficking:

 “Human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or “organized 

crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering

b. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitut!) or pander! or brothel and (gang! or “organized 

crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering)

c. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or slave! or 

servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or 

conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

d. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or “document 

servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! or “organized crime” 

or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

 On the left hand side of the page, locate a “timeline” link

 If the starting date is prior to 01/01/2000, click the “From” box and 

enter 01/01/2000 

 At the top of the results page you will see five tabs: 

o “Snapshot” “Cases “Briefs” “Dkts” 

o Enter each tab and select the relevant cases (***This is important. Lexis 

divides the results up by search type***) 

 To Download the documents  Select the relevant documents by clicking the 

clear box to the left of each document (or select all by clicking the clear box at 

the top) 

 Click the floppy disc icon at the top of the results page 

 Click “Selected Documents”  PDF  Download 

 A pop up window will appear. Click the file link in the pop up to 

download the file 

 To Save Cases 

 After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following (include 

spaces before and after dashes): 

 SP1 – LexNex – [Case Type] – Batch # – # of cases 

1. Case Type Instructions: 

o For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

o For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

o For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

o For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

2. Batch # Instructions 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
87

o If you must download more than one pdf for a 

particular search, assign a number to each document 

and place it in parentheses after a final dash 

Search Protocol #2 (SP2) 

The purpose of this protocol is to standardize the way we collect and record information of case 

data from media. The document provides instructions for searches to run, how to download 

documents, and then how to save the documents to show the search they came from. 

Each researcher is assigned specific searches to focus their research. The searches are general –

they cover all federal cases. Thus, each researcher will run either the “Human Trafficking,” “Sex 

Trafficking,” “Labor Trafficking,” or “Visa Fraud / Document Fraud” search. The researchers 

will then download the cases and save them in the manner instructed. 

1. Bloomberg Law (Bloom) 

 At the home page, under “research” CLICK “Dockets”

 In the “keywords” search box, Enter SEARCH TERMS 

e. Human Trafficking:

 “Human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering 

f. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitut!) or pander! or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering) 

g. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia or 

cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

h. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering 

 On the bottom of the page, there is a date drop-down menu 

o Click on the drop-down menu and select “date range”

o Enter 

 From: 01/01/2000

 To: 12/31/2013

 Click “Search”

 Jurisdiction 

o Federal 

 Return to the search results page 

 On the left hand side of the page, select “federal”

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
88

 Scroll down. On the left hand side of the page, under “Federal Nature 

of Suit,” select “criminal”

 Download all dockets 

 To Download cases:

 In each set of dockets, select the cases you wish to download by 

clicking the white box to the left of each case (likely all) 

 Click “Print/Download” at the top of the results page 

 Select the following: 

o Select: “Selected documents”

o Include: “General Information”

o Output: RTF/Doc 

o Paper Size: Letter 

o Click “exclude Bloomberg Cover Page 

o Click “Print/Download”

 A yellow message will appear notifying you that your documents are 

being prepared

 Click “Go to the Download Center”

 Click on your documents OR select multiple documents and click 

“Zip/Download”

o **NOTE**: If you click “zip/download,” you must unzip the 

files (usually by double clicking the file in your computer’s 

download folder) and then save the resulting documents. 

 To Save Cases 

b. After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following (include 

spaces before and after dashes): 

i. SP2 – Bloom – [Case Type] – [FEDERAL] – Batch # – # of 

cases

1. Case Type Instructions: 

a. For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

b. For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

c. For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

d. For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

2. Batch # Instructions 

a. If you must download more than one document 

for a particular search, assign a number to each 

document and place it in parentheses after a 

final dash 

2. Lexis Advance 

 Go to advance.lexis.com 

 On the home page, locate the search bar at the top 

 Locate the three drop down menus below the search bar 

 Click content type 

o Select “dockets”

o Click “ok”

 Click the “jurisdiction” tab

o Select “all jurisdictions”

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
89

 Click the “practice area” tab

o Select “criminal law and procedure”

 Enter [Search Terms] 

e. Human Trafficking:

 “Human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering 

f. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitut!) or pander! or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering) 

g. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia or 

cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

h. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or 

racketeering 

 On the left hand side of the page, locate a “timeline” link

 If the starting date is prior to 01/01/2000, click the “From” box and 

enter 01/01/2000 

 To Download the documents  Select the relevant documents by clicking the 

clear box to the left of each document (or select all by clicking the clear box at the 

top) 

 Click the floppy disc icon at the top of the results page 

 Click “Selected Documents”  Docx  Download 

 A pop up window will appear. Click the file link in the pop up to 

download the file 

 To Save Cases 

 After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following (include 

spaces before and after dashes): 

 SP2 – LexNex – [Case Type] – Batch # – # of cases 

3. Case Type Instructions: 

o For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

o For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

o For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

o For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

4. Batch # Instructions 

o If you must download more than one document for 

a particular search, assign a number to each 

document and place it in parentheses after a final 

dash 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
90

 3. Westlaw Next (WestNext) 

 Go to next.westlaw.com 

 On the main page, under “All Content,” click “trial court documents”

 Scroll to the bottom of the page. Under “Topical,” click “Criminal Law”

 Verify that “All State and Federal” is selected in the drop down menu next to the 

search bar at the top of the page. 

 Enter Search Terms 

e. Human Trafficking 

 “human traffic” or “human trafficking” and gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering 

f. Sex Trafficking 

 (traffic! /s prostitute!) or pander! Or brothel and (gang! or 

“organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering) 

g. Labor Trafficking 

 “Labor traffic” or “labor trafficking” or “forced labor” or 

slave! or servitude and gang! or “organized crime” or mafia 

or cartel! or conspiracy or RICO or racketeering 

h. Visa Fraud / Document Fraud 

 “visa fraud” or “visa servitude” or “document fraud” or 

“document servitude” or “document tampering” and gang! 

or “organized crime” or mafia or cartel! or conspiracy or 

RICO or racketeering 

 Filter

o On the left hand side of the page, select 

 Criminal

o Click, “apply filters”

 Download the documents

 To Download Cases: 

o Select the cases by clicking the clear box to the left of each case name (or 

click “select all items” at the top of the page)

o Then click the “download” button in the top right of the results page (it 

looks like a piece of paper with an arrow pointing down) 

o Choose the following 

 What to deliver: Documents 

 Format: Word Document 

 As: A single merged file 

o Click “Download”

o A pop up window will appear. Click “Download”

 To Save Cases 

o After the file has downloaded, change the filename to the following 

(include spaces before and after dashes): 

 SP2 – WestNext – [Case Type] – Batch # – # of cases 

3. Case Type Instructions: 

o For Human Trafficking” cases, enter “HT”

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
91

o For Sex Trafficking cases, enter “ST”

o For Labor Trafficking cases, enter “LT”

o For Visa Fraud cases, enter “VT”

4. Batch # Instructions 

o If you must download more than one document for 

a particular search, assign a number to each 

document and place it in parentheses after a final 

dash 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
92

APPENDIX B: CASE CODING PROTOCOL 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
93

CASE CODING PROTOCOL 

The purpose of this protocol is to ensure that all research assistants are coding all cases in 

the exact same format using the same information. 

Case Name: 

The case name, which is usually USA v. LAST NAME OF FIRST DEFENDANT. Use case name 

as listed on the docket. 

Case Number: 

The criminal case number from the US District Court. Be sure that the case number has “cr” 

(criminal) in the middle and not “mj” (magistrate). We want the CRIMINAL case number 

only. Obtain the number at the top of the docket. 

Start Date: 

Date the case was filed, found at the top of the docket. Only the year is required. 

End Date: 

Date the case was terminated, found at the top of the docket. Only the year is required. If 

no terminated date is present at the top of the docket, leave this blank. 

State: 

Two letter code for the state in which the case is being heard. 

Fed District Location: 

The federal district location in which the case is being heard. Found at the top of the docket 

that states “(Location) Federal District of (state).”

Fed Circuit Number: 

The federal circuit number for the state in which the case is being heard. Look on the 

federal district court map online to determine what federal circuit a state is in. Federal 

district court map can be found by searching for “federal district court” and inside the 

Wikipedia link for “United States district court.”

Judge Name:

Name of the US federal district court judge hearing the case. 

Judge Race: 

Google the name of the judge and either look at the picture or read bio to determine the 

race of the judge. 

Judge Gender: 

Determine the gender of the judge through the picture or bio. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
94

Judge Tenure:

The year the judge was appointed as a federal district judge. Obtain information from 

judge’s bio online.

Judge Appointed By: 

The partisan identity of the president who appointed the judge. 

Case Summary:

A very brief summary of the case. 

Minor Sex/Adult Sex/Labor Trafficking: 

Determine if the case is about sex trafficking of minor victims, sex trafficking of adult 

victims, or labor trafficking. You must read the indictment to obtain this information (and 

can also be obtained through news articles about the case). It is possible for a case to be 

more than one type of trafficking – the categories of labor trafficking, adult sex trafficking, 

and minor sex trafficking are not mutually exclusive. In the case that a minor is trafficked 

and turns 18 (becomes an adult) while being trafficked, this is still coded as just minor sex, 

NOT both minor and adult sex. 

Type of Labor:

If a labor trafficking case, determine the primary type of labor. If more than one type of 

labor, determine which type of labor was performed the most and indicate that type of 

labor in the first drop down. Do the same for the second and third most performed type of 

labor if applicable. If type of labor trafficking is unknown, then select unknown. If the type 

of labor trafficking is known but is not listed in the drop down, then select other. 

Type of Sex: 

If a sex trafficking case, determine the primary method of sex trafficking. If more than on 

type of sex trafficking, determine which method was used the most and indicate that 

method in the first drop down. Do the same for the second most performed type of labor, if 

applicable. If type of sex trafficking is unknown, then select unknown. If the type of sex 

trafficking is known but is not listed in the drop down, then select other. 

Number Victims: 

Total number of victims. This information is obtained via the last indictment that was filed 

in the case (i.e. the most superseded indictment). Sometimes the indictments list all the 

victims (which makes it easy), other times you have to read through the indictment and 

news articles to determine the total number of victims. This number will be the MINIMUM 

number of victims known, not necessarily all of the victims. When there is a discrepancy 

between the indictment and news articles, use your best judgment based on perceived size 

of the overall operation and the likelihood there were more victims than what they are 

actually being indicted for. 

Number Victims Minor: 

Number of victims that were minors. The indictment indicates which of the victims are 

“minor” or “child” or “juvenile” victims, sometimes listed and sometimes not. The number 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
95

of victims that were minors is based on those known in the indictment and/or news 

articles and should be considered the MINIMUM number of minor victims. If there is no 

information about the ages of the victims, then leave this blank. When there is a 

discrepancy between the indictment and news articles, use your best judgment based on 

perceived size of the overall operation and the likelihood there were more victims than 

what they are actually being indicted for. 

Number Victims Foreign: 

Number of victims that are not natural born citizens of the United States. If there is no 

mention in the indictment or news articles of a nationality, then assume none are foreign 

born. 

Number Victims Female: 

Number of victims that are female. Obtain this information from the indictment and/or 

news articles. May need to infer from pronouns used in the indictment referring to victims. 

Number Victims Male: 

Number of victims that are male. Obtain this information from the indictment and/or news 

articles. May need to infer from pronouns used in the indictment referring to victims. 

Number Victims with Gender Unknown: 

Number of victims with gender unknown. If unable to find the genders of victims, then 

indicate that here. 

Recruit: 

Primary method by which the victims were recruited. If there is a second method that is 

used often, indicate that in Recruit2. If the recruit method is unknown, then indicate 

unknown. 

Recruit Web: 

If victims were recruited through a website, then indicate the website used. This 

information can be found in the indictment and/or news articles. If no website is stated, 

leave this blank. 

Sale Web: 

If victims were sold online, indicate the website used. This information can be found in the 

indictment and/or news articles. If no website is stated, leave this blank. 

Under Defendant Name

First name/last name: 

The first and middle name (if listed) of the defendant are indicated in first name. The last 

name of the defendant is listed in last name. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
96

Alias: 

If the defendant has an alias or multiple aliases, put the information here. This information 

can be found under the defendant’s name on the docket.

Gender: 

The gender of the defendant. Can be determined by name. If it is not discernable by name, 

read the indictment and news articles to determine how they refer to the defendant 

(he/she). 

Race: 

The race of the defendant. This may require googling the name and looking at Google 

images, or searching for news articles on the case. Sometimes this information is also 

indicated in the indictment. If the defendant was sentenced to time in prison, the inmate 

locator can be used to find race. The Bureau of Prisons inmate locator will only indicate if 

the defendant is white, black, Asian, or American Indian. If a defendant is Hispanic, the 

inmate locator will list them as white so you may still have to use your best judgment 

sometimes, based on the name and information of the victim. 

Country of Origin:

For each defendant, list the country of origin. Obtain this information from the indictment 

and/or news articles (more often found in news articles). Often, if the country of origin is 

not explicitly stated, it is the USA but this still requires you to use your best judgment. If it 

is difficult to determine a country of origin, leave this blank. 

Birth Year: 

The year the defendant was born. Sometimes the birthdate of the defendant can be found 

in the indictment. If you cannot find it in the indictment, then search the Bureau of Prisons 

inmate locator if the defendant was sentenced to time in prison. This will give you their 

current age and you can subtract that from the current year. For example, if the defendant 

is 56 and the current year is 2016, then do 2016 – 56 = 1960. The birth year is 1960. If 

none of these methods work, search the news articles for the age of the arrest or 

sentencing and then use the same math as before but using the arrest year or sentencing 

year, respectively. If none of these work, leave this blank. 

Arrest Age: 

The age of the defendant when he/she was arrested. If this information is readily available, 

then insert age. If not, and you have the arrest date and birthdate, you can figure out the 

age at arrest. If these fail, then you should look up news articles about the arrest of the 

defendant and find the arrest age from the news articles. 

Charge Date: 

Date the government filed the charges/indictment. Search the docket for “indictment” and 

report the date that the original indictment was filed (no need to report the subsequent 

dates of the superseding indictment(s)). Make sure the charge date is for that defendant. 

Some defendants may not be charged until a superseding indictment. Although rare, there 

are some cases that the docket may not have the date the original indictment was filed. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
97

With these cases, look for the date the complaint was filed by searching for “complaint” or a 

bill of information by searching for “information.” When searching for an information, 

make sure it is the document that was used for the formal charging of the defendant. 

Arrest Date: 

Date the defendant was arrested. Search the docket for “arrest as to” or for “warrant 

returned executed” and report the date of the arrest/warrant executed. 

Detained: 

Indicate if the defendant was detained between arrest and first hearing, or if they were 

released. Search the docket for “order of detention” to determine if they were detained. 

Also search for “conditions of release” to see if they were released. If they were 

temporarily detained, this should still be coded as detained. 

Bail Type: 

Type of bail amount the defendant was required to pay, if any. If the defendant was 

detained (as indicated by previously coding detained), then this cell remained blank, unless 

it was a temporary detention that led to a release. If the defendant was released, the 

docket will indicate if they are required to post bail. If the docket indicates a “personal 

recognizance” or “own recognizance (OR)” or “Release on Recognizance (ROR)” bond, then 

code as personal recognizance. Code surety or non-surety based on what the docket states. 

Personal Recognizance – A no-cost bail where the defendant is only required to sign a 

written promise that they will appear in court. 

Surety – Where someone else (often a bail bondsperson) guarantees the amount of bond if 

the defendant fails to appear when required to show up in court. 

Non-Surety – Where the defendant’s signature alone guarantees the amount of the bond 

and they are not required to post any property or obtain the services of a professional bail 

bondsperson as collateral. 

Bail Amount: 

The bail amount the defendant is required to pay. Do not include dollar sign or comma in 

the bail amount. If the bail amount is $10,000, then code 10000. For those defendants that 

were detained, this cell should remain empty. For those with personal recognizance bonds, 

this cell will be 0 because the defendant was not required to pay any bail. 

Date Terminated: 

Enter the date the case was terminated. If separate defendants are terminated at different 

times, then enter the date terminated specific to each defendant, which can be found under 

the defendant’s name in the docket. This date will not necessarily be the same across all 

defendants in a case. 

Sentenced Date: 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
98

This is the date the defendant was sentenced. You should search the docket for “sentencing 

hearing as to FIRST LAST.” If the defendant was never sentenced (i.e. all counts are 

dismissed), then code the sentencing date as the same date as the termination date. If the 

defendant does not have a sentencing or termination date, leave this blank. 

Total Sentence: 

This is the total number of months sentenced (if consecutive, then adds up all consecutive 

sentences, if concurrent, then total concurrent months). This can be found in the 

“Disposition” column next to the defendant’s name on the docket. If the total sentence is 

“Time Served” then code 0. If they are sentenced for life, then code 1200 months (100 

years). This should not be coded for probation, only time they were sentenced to prison. 

Occasionally, a defendant may be re-sentenced through appeals or because the sentence 

may be amended (due to new evidence or other factors) – in these cases, use the most upto-date sentencing. 

Restitution: 

This is the total amount the defendant is required to pay in restitution. This can be found 

in the “Disposition” column next to the defendant’s name. Do not include a dollar sign or 

commas in the restitution column. For example, if defendant is to pay restitution in the 

amount of $100,000, then you would code 100000. If there are cents in the amount of 

restitution, do not worry about coding the cents. 

Asset Forfeit: 

If the defendant has been required to forfeit any assets at all, then code yes. If the 

defendant is not required to forfeit any assets, then code no. This can be found in the 

“Disposition” column next to the defendant’s name. This may also be indicated if there was 

an “asset forfeiture provision” in the indictment and the docket indicates that the asset 

forfeiture provision was ordered through for that defendant. There are also situations 

where there may be a forfeiture allegation listed under a charge on the docket – if this 

charge is sentenced then that is considered asset forfeiture. 

Appeal: 

The top of the docket will have the appeals court case number if the case has been 

appealed. However, that does not mean that all defendants have appealed their sentence. 

Thus, to determined whether a specific defendant has appealed, search in docket “Notice of 

appeal by FIRST LAST”

Supervised Release: 

Total number of months the defendant received supervised release. If they are supervised 

release for life, the code 1200 months (100 years). 

Probation: 

Total number of months the defendant received probation. This is NOT the same as 

supervised release. If a defendant received probation for life, then code 1200 months (100 

years). 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
99

Felonies Charged: 

The total number of felonies charged. Obtain this information from the docket. (The 

information actually comes from the indictment but the docket is usually a more organized 

version of the felonies being charged, so we use the docket for the most part when counting 

the number of felonies charged – exceptions are listed in the following paragraphs). Under 

each defendant’s name, there are pending charges and/or terminated charges. Count the 

total number of DIFFERENT federal statutes (pending and/or terminated – do NOT count 

charges under the complaints section) under which the defendant is being charged. We are 

not interested in the number of counts for each statute here – only the number of different 

statutes from the last superseding indictment. For example, if there are three counts of 

1324 and two counts of 1591 then that is only two different statutes (felonies) charged. 

You count only the charges from the most recent indictment (indicated by s after the 

statute number). Some cases have no superseding indictments, and some cases can have 4 

(indicated by ssss). You need to make sure that you are coding based on the most recent 

superseding indictment (if one exists). Be sure you are not double-counting the same 

statute, and be sure you are using the charges ONLY from the superseding indictment, and 

not any previous indictments. 

There are some situations where there is a subsequent superseding indictment filed in 

order to dismiss charges, but the pending or sentenced charges are still under a prior 

indictment. In those cases, proceed with coding pending or sentenced charges per prior 

indictment, and terminated charges with both prior and most recent superseding 

indictments. (i.e. do not code ONLY based on the most recent superseding indictment as in 

most cases with straightforward charges). 

There are some situations where a superseding indictment replaces a statute with another 

statute. For example, the first indictment may indicate the first charge under statute 371, 

which would look like this: “18:371: CONSPIRACY (1)” but the superseding indictment 

replaces that charge with a different statute, which would look like this: “18:1591: SEX 

TRAFFICKING OF CHILDREN BY FORCE, FRAUD AND COERCION (1s).” The number 1 at 

the end of each charge indicates that it is the first charge but the “s” at the end of the second 

charge shows that the superseding indictment replaced that specific charge with a different 

statute. When this happens, only count the charge on the most superseded indictment. Do 

not count statute 371 in the example above, only statute 1591. 

For extra clarity, there are some situations that you may see the person was charged with 

two statutes on one count. Here are two examples: 1591 and 1594 or 1324 and 2. Both of 

these examples would be counted as two separate felonies charged. Note that “2” can also 

appear as “18:2” just as 1591 and 1594 (or other statutes) can appear as “18:1591 & 

18:1594” where the 18 is referring to Title 18 of the US Federal Code. 

If a statute is listed twice under the same count, it is likely referring to different subsections of the same statute and that statute is only counted once for that specific count. 

This is only if the same statute is listed multiple times under the same count. 

Felonies Sentenced: 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
100

The total number of felonies sentenced. Obtain this information from the docket in the 

disposition column to the right of the pending/terminated charges column. If the 

disposition for a charge has any sort of sentence (prison time, fines, restitution, etc.) 

indicating that they have either pleaded guilty or have otherwise been found guilty of this 

charge, then count that as a felony sentenced. If the disposition column indicates that the 

charge has been dismissed or terminated or defendant has otherwise been found not guilty, 

then DO NOT count this in the count of felonies sentenced. If the defendant has not yet 

been sentenced and/or the case is still pending, then code 999. 

Under Statute 

Statute: 

Was the defendant charged under this federal statute? If yes, code yes. If no, code no. If no, 

then all remaining columns associated with that statute remain empty. If yes, then proceed 

to fill out the remaining columns associated with that statute. IF THERE IS A DISCREPENCY 

BETWEEN CHARGES IN DOCKET AND CHARGES IN INDICTMENT, USE THE DOCKET 

CHARGES FOR CODING. 

Counts: 

Number of counts charged under the statute. You count only the charges from the most 

recent indictment (indicated by s after the statute number). Some cases have no 

superseding indictments, and some cases have four+ (indicated by ssss). You need to make 

sure that you are coding based on the most recent superseding indictment (if one exists). 

You count the number of times the defendant is charged in the last superseding indictment 

under that particular statute. If the defendant was charged under multiple sections of the 

same statute for the same count, then that still counts as one count for that statute. For 

example, if the a count reads as “18:1594C.F, 18:1591(e)(2), 18:1591(a)(1) and 1591(a)(2), 

18:1594(c)” then that is read as two statutes charged (1591 and 1594) and one count of 

1591 and one count of 1594.

Counts Nolle Prossed: 

This is the number of counts under that statute that were dismissed, dismissed with 

prejudice, dismissed without prejudice, or termed. If a charge was dismissed pursuant to a 

plea agreement, do NOT code for those here. 

Plea Dismissed: 

The number of counts dismissed pursuant to plea bargain. If there is a plea agreement 

indicated in the indictment for that defendant, and there were charges dismissed at 

sentencing, then those charges dismissed are counted here. 

Plea Guilty: 

The number of counts to which the defendant plead guilty. 

Trial Guilty:

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
101

The number of counts to which the defendant has received a guilty verdict in a trial. 

Trial Not Guilty: 

The number of counts to which the defendant has received a not guilty verdict by trial. 

Fines: 

This is an actual fine assessed to the defendant. Do not include a dollar sign or commas in 

the fine. For example, if the fine is $100,000, the you would code 100000. This is NOT the 

special assessment. Almost all defendants have to pay a special assessment of $100, but 

this is not a fine. If the fine was waived or if there is no fine, then code 0. 

Sentence: 

This is the number of months the defendant is sentenced to prison for a specific charge (not 

the total number of years). If they received a life sentence, then code it for 100 years, or 

1200 months. If the sentence is “Time Served” then code 0 months. 

Probation: 

This is the number of months a defendant got probation. If they got probation for life, then 

code for 100 years, or 1200 months. Probation is often imposed as a substitute for 

imprisonment. This is NOT the same as supervised release, which is imposed in addition to 

imprisonment. Here we are coding only for probation, not for supervised release. 

Victim Countries 

The known countries of origin of the victims. If the victim country is the United States, then 

put the United States. 

Under Criminal Methods 

Mode: 

This is the method by which the victims were transported during trafficking. There can be 

up to four methods. 

International: 

Is the trafficking international? If the victims are foreign but the traffickers did not bring 

them to the US, as in the traffickers took advantage of them already being in the US and 

only trafficked them in the US, then it is NOT international. 

Inter-state: 

Once in the US, did the trafficking occur in more than one state? 

Entry Method: 

Did the victims enter the country legally or illegally? 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
102

Legal Method: 

Only complete if victims entered legally. How did the victims enter the United States? This 

is meant to understand if they are using legal means to get people into the United States. So 

this can still false visas that were obtained through legal means. 

Illegal Method: 

Only complete if victims entered ILLEGALLY. How did the victims enter the United States? 

This would include fraudulent, forged, or stolen visas. This would also include “coyotes” or 

“guides” or “smugglers.”

Entry Port: 

Name of the port/location where victims entered the United States (e.g. DFW Airport, JFK 

Airport, Mexico-US Border, Canada-US Border, etc.). If the airport listed is not an 

international airport then it cannot be an entry port, list the actual port that they used to 

enter the US from another country. If they entered through the Mexican or Canadian 

border, then state that under “name” and if possible, list the US state that they entered into. 

Base Location: 

The location of the primary criminal base of operations. There can be more than one but 

this is where the organization of the criminal activity takes place. Some examples: The 

location of the businesses owned by the criminals of an illegal enterprise; the location of 

the houses where traffickers keep the trafficked people; the location of a man’s house 

where he kept a minor female, where the victims were harbored, etc. 

Crime Locations: 

Locations of the forced labor (hotels, farms, etc.) and/or sex trafficking (strip clubs, hotels, 

streets, etc.). The base locations can also count as crime locations. Include as many crime 

locations as possible and be as specific as possible. For examples, look at these cases: USA 

v. Baravik; USA v. Yang (2005). 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
103

APPENDIX C: LETTER TO INMATES 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
104

MM/DD/YYYY 

 Re: Request for an interview

Dear JANE DOE (INMATE NUMBER): 

You are invited to take part in a study being conducted by Texas Christian University. As part of 

this study, we will be talking with inmates to learn more about their activities prior to 

incarceration. You have been selected to participate in a one-on-one interview with me and one 

other researcher. The interview will last approximately 30 minutes. 

We will be coming to your facility DATE TO DATE. At that time, we will give you more 

information about the study and you will have time to ask questions about it. Then you can 

decide if you want to participate – the choice is up to you. If you do not want to participate, you 

will be free to leave. Please note that your willingness or refusal to participate has no positive or 

negative consequences for your incarceration. 

If you do choose to participate, the information you give us will be kept completely secret. We 

will combine the information you give us with responses from everyone else we interview. Your 

name or details about you will never be used in a report. The interview will be kept confidential 

and anonymous, and no one will ever be able to trace back information to you. 

Studies like this one are an important source of information. We hope you will join us to learn 

more about the study. 

Sincerely, 

Vanessa Bouché, Ph.D. 

Assistant Professor 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
105

APPENDIX D: INFORMED CONSENT 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
106

Informed Consent Form 

My name is Vanessa Bouché and I’m a professor at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, 

Texas. We are doing this study for the U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. 

Our goal is to learn about your employment history prior to incarceration and your involvement 

in any underground economies such as drug dealing, pimping, promoting prostitution or the 

selling of fake goods or services. 

The following things will happen in this interview: 

You will be asked, in private, about your employment history prior to incarceration and your 

involvement in any underground economies such as drug dealing, pimping, promoting 

prostitution and the selling of fake goods or services. We will talk about your business and the 

people you worked with before going to prison. This interview will take about 60 to 90 minutes. 

You may refuse to answer any question and you may stop the interview at any time. If you want 

to speak with a counselor at any point during or after the interview, we will contact the 

appropriate person(s) to make sure you can speak to someone right away. 

We promise you the following things: 

Confidentiality: Everything you say will be kept confidential. Nobody outside of the Texas 

Christian University team will be told your name and any other information about you without 

your permission. That means that the government, such as the Bureau of Prisons and FBI, and 

other people, such as the general public, will not know what you say to us. We are going to 

combine what you say with everyone else we talk with. That way no one will be able to figure 

out who said what. 

Any information that you tell us cannot be used to change your status here in __________ 

Federal Facility. Talking to us will not change the programs or services you get in prison or 

when you go home. 

The confidentiality is protected by law under Title 28 Part 22 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. That means that information discussed in the interviews (except as otherwise 

mentioned) are fully protected from law enforcement investigation. We also ask that you not 

discuss new or unprosecuted criminal activity during today’s interview. If you begin to talk 

about these activities, we will stop you from continuing to do so. Everyone who works on this 

project must sign a contract to make sure they do not to tell anyone outside of the research team 

anything about you. 

There is one exception to our promise of confidentiality. We will tell someone if you tell us 

specific information about child abuse, your plans to commit a future crime, or your plans to hurt 

yourself or others. But we don’t plan to talk about those things. 

Security of information: In addition to confidentiality, all of the information provided in this 

interview will be held securely. All paper documents from this interview will be shredded. All 

original transcript information with personal identifiers will be scanned and stored locally in an 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
107

encrypted archive file on a desktop computer that requires a domain login from the original user 

to be accessible. The computer itself is located in the locked personal office in a university 

building and accessible only to authorized personnel. A copy of each interview transcript without 

any personal identifiers will be generated and used for our analysis to prevent disclosure of 

sensitive information. These documents will be treated as a restricted-use collection. Access to 

the information will be granted only to the research team members, consultants, and to qualified 

researchers upon inquiry. 

Voluntary Participation: You may refuse to answer any questions or provide any information 

whenever you want. You may stop the interview at any time. If you do not answer our questions, 

we will not tell anyone here in [name of the facility]. Talking to us will not change the programs 

or services you get in prison or when you go home. Same if you don’t talk to us.

Possible Risks or Discomforts: Some of the interview questions are personal and it is possible 

that they may make you feel uncomfortable or upset. There are no right or wrong answers and 

you can skip any questions you do not want to answer. If you become upset for any reason, you 

can ask to stop the interview. If you want to take a break at any time during the interview, please 

let us know. I can also alert your case counselor who can meet with you if you feel that would be 

helpful. 

If you have any questions about the interview or the study, you can write to: 

Texas Christian University, Department of Political Science Attn: Dr. Vanessa Bouché, 2855 

Main Dr., Fort Worth, Texas 76129 

By signing this form, I agree to participate in this interview process as described above: 

Individual’s Name:______________________________________ (Please Print)

Individual’s Signature:___________________________________ 

Date:___________________________________________ 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
108

APPENDIX E: INMATE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
109

Interview Protocol

Background Questions 

1. How long have you been in this facility? 

2. What is/are the main offense(s) you are currently serving time for? 

3. How old are you? 

4. What race do you identify yourself as? 

5. What is the highest level of education you completed? 

Business Structure 

6. Prior to incarceration, did you see yourself as running or being involved in running a 

business? 

7. Were you involved in the production or procurement of material or people? If not, were 

you involved in the distribution and or marketing of the product and/or people? Or 

both? 

8. How did you recruit individuals to work for you? 

9. How did you get started in your business? 

10. Did you have a business model that you followed? If so, could you describe it? 

11. Was your business a one-person operation or did it involve partnering with others? 

12. What cities did that business operate in? 

13. Which city was best in terms of business? 

14. If you rank that city as a 10 on a scale of 1-10, how would you rank the other cities (in 

terms of business)? 

15. If you worked with others: How many people did you work with directly? 

a. Can you describe them (e.g. age, race, etc.)? We are not interested in any identifying 

information such as names, addresses, etc.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
110

16. How many people did you work with indirectly?

a. Can you describe them (e.g. age, race, etc.)? We are not interested in any identifying 

information such as names, addresses, etc.

17. In what capacity did you work with others? (Time, location, tasks, etc.) 

18. How did you communicate with others? (e.g. texting, phone conversations, social 

network sites, multi-player video game chats, etc.) 

19. Who did what? How was that decided? 

20. How was responsibility divided?

21. Did everyone cooperate?

22. How was conflict resolved? 

23. How did you manage work relationships?

24. Were there certain rules or regulations that you enforced with your employees? 

25. How often did people/employees come and go?

26. How were new employers, employees or partners found?

27. If you worked alone, how did you manage that? 

a. How large was your business? 

b. How do you find suppliers (of labor or material)? 

c. How do you find and manage customers? 

28. How did your (business) involvement change over time? 

a. Was that business better at the time of your arrest than it was 5 years prior? 

b. How would you rate it on a scale of 1-10? 

29. Did you have business competitors? 

a. If yes: How many did you have? 

b. How many did you do business with? 

c. Were there more competitors at the time of your arrest than there were 5 years prior? (For 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
111

whichever is higher, if that is a 10 on a scale of 1-10, what was it at the other time?) 

d.Can you tell me about them, especially how they were similar to or different from your 

operation? We are not interested in any identifying information. 

30. How would you compare the size of your business with those of your competitors? 

a. Can you rate their businesses in comparison with the one you were involved in on a scale of 1-

10 at the time of your arrest? 

31. Has the number of competitors changed over time? 

Technical Organization 

32. How many transactions would you make in a typical day? 

33. What kinds of transactions were most typical? How much money did that bring in? 

34. Where did you work? (What part of the city, etc.) 

35. How many apartments/buildings/etc. did you/your business maintain? What was the cost 

of that? 

36. Did you work there with others (or perhaps others you worked with worked elsewhere?) 

37. What kind of hours did you work? What about others? 

38. What kind of money were you making? 

39. What forms of payment did you accept (e.g. cash, credit, etc.)? 

40. How did you move people/goods from place to place? 

41. How was security maintained? 

42. What kinds of security precautions did you take? 

42. In your business, did you use any things like computers, vehicles, security equipment, 

communications devices, etc.? 

43. How much did all of that cost you? 

44. Can you tell me about an unusual business related expense? 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
112

45. How did you find clients? 

a. Did you use certain kinds of social networking websites? 

47. How/what did you do to ensure or encourage they return as customers? 

48. How would you describe your clients (race, ethnicity, jobs, etc.)? 

49. How did you publicize your business? 

a. What did that cost you? 

50. How did you distribute your goods/humans? 

51. How did you manage your money? 

a. Did others help you with that?

b. If so, who?

c. How did you chose these individuals?

d. Were there any types of financial services or products you needed and could only 

get with one bank/institution? (e.g. online access, pre-paid cards with higher 

limits, ePayment capability, merchant processing, etc.) 

52. What problems did you have with money management? 

53. What did you spent your money on? 

54. How much money did you reinvest back into the business? 

55. Did you use certain methods to hide your money (e.g. green dot cards)? 

56. What losses did the business suffer? 

57. Did you have any long-term plans on what you wanted to do with your money? 

58. How did you deal with risk? 

a. Did you consider the work risky? 

b. What were some of the risks that you thought about (prison, arrest, loss of business) 

and how did these compare to each other? 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
113

c. What sorts of activities (transporting people, finding new clients, renting hotels) did 

you think were most risky? 

d. What were the risks of these activities? 

e. How did you respond to risk? What measures did you take to protect yourself from 

these risks? 

f. Do you think that other individuals in a similar business as yours know the risks before 

they enter the business? 

Other Illicit Network Questions 

59. What other businesses/individuals were important to maintaining your business? 

60. How frequently were you in touch with them? 

61. How long have you known them? 

62. Did you exchange goods or services with them? Did they with you? 

Other 

63. How did you get the girls/individuals working for you to continue to work for you? 

64. Do you feel the representation of “pimps” or “organized crime group” (or applicable 

term) in the media is accurate? 

65. How would you compare those images with your perception of yourself? 

66. Have you known people that did fit the media representations of “pimps” (or applicable 

term)? 

67. How would you describe differences and similarities between yourself and the way you 

did your business with others in the same line of work who you knew or were aware of? 

68. What was an average day in your life like while involved in (activity)? 

69. What was an exceptional day like? 

70. On a scale of 0-10, with 10 being the best, how are you adjusting to prison life? 

71. Realistically speaking, what would make you go up just one point higher on that scale? 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice 
114

72. What are your plans for the future? 

 a. One week from now? 

 b. Upon release? 

 c. One year post-release? 

73. What are your best “lessons learned” from the experiences that brought you to prison? 

74. What would you tell a young person interested in joining this business or organization? 

75. What would you tell a person who is interested in working as an employee of an 

organization or business similar to yours?

Thank you very much for your time and participation 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice