Judge Acquits Backpage Co-Founder Michael Lacey on Most Counts
The court found insufficient evidence to sustain 53 of 84 remaining counts against Lacey.

A federal judge has acquitted Backpage co-founder Michael Lacey of dozens of counts, including a majority of those on which federal prosecutors planned to retry Lacey later this year. U.S. District Judge Diane Humetewa also acquitted former Backpage executives Jed Brunst and Scott Spear on multiple counts of which they were convicted by a jury last fall.
"After viewing the record in the light most favorable to the Government, the Court finds there is insufficient of evidence to support convictions under Counts 19–51 as to Mr. Lacey and Counts 66–99 as to Messrs. Lacey, Brunst, and Spear," concluded Humetewa.
In November, a jury found Lacey guilty of just one the 86 counts against him and not guilty of one count as well. The jury was hung on the other 84 counts, including all charges that Lacey actively facilitated prostitution or participated in a conspiracy to facilitate prostitution via the online classifieds site he founded with his longtime newspaper partner James Larkin. (Larkin took his own life last summer a few days before the trial was scheduled to begin.)
The feds then decided to retry Lacey on those 84 counts, despite the fact that there had already been two trials on the same charges. (The first, in 2021, was declared a mistrial after prosecutors and their witnesses couldn't stop talking about sex trafficking despite none of the defendants facing sex trafficking charges.)
Now, Humetewa has acquitted Lacey on 53 of the remaining 84 counts against him. Additionally, Humetewa acquitted Spear, former executive vice president of Backpage, of 10 of the counts on which he was found guilty by the jury and acquitted former Chief Financial Officer Brunst of 18 of the counts on which he was convicted.
Two of the other defendants were acquitted on all charges by the jury.
Lacey, Spear, and Brunst could still be in serious trouble.
Lacey is still looking at a retrial later this year on the remaining counts against him, which include one count of conspiracy to violate the federal Travel Act by facilitating prostitution, 17 counts of violating the Travel Act by facilitating prostitution, and several different money laundering counts.
And on June 17, Lacey is scheduled to be sentenced on the one count—international concealment of money laundering—on which the jury found him guilty. It comes with a possible sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison. Lacey plans to appeal his conviction on this count, and there seems like a good chance it will be successful, since the money he allegedly "concealed" was reported to the federal government with all the proper paperwork. But he could still face prison time as that appeals process plays out.
Brunst is scheduled to be sentenced along with Lacey in June and even with Humetewa's acquittals, he still faces sentencing on 14 counts. And Spear, who is scheduled to be sentenced on July 9, still faces sentencing on 29 counts.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Lacey plans to appeal his conviction on this count, and there seems like a good chance it will be successful, since the money he allegedly "concealed" was reported to the federal government with all the proper paperwork. But he could still face prison time as that appeals process plays out. "
How much of this is actual justice vs how much of this is eff-you for doing something we don't like, so we are going to club you to death with the legal process ?
""how much of this is eff-you for doing something we don’t like, so we are going to club you to death with the legal process ?""
Wouldn't surprise me.
I could also see it as prosecutors not liking to lose and will ignore the concept of justice just to get a win.
Some people have the opinion that the prosecutor not wining means justice was not severed. You'll be seeing more of this in the future.
Wasn't this one of the cases where the judge was married to the prosecutor who brought the charges or something similar? The Arizona lawyers with too few vowels in their names.
It's sadly even less than that I imagine. The entire Backpage case was a vehicle for Kamala Harris to gain national attention. She's in the White House now so she no longer needs it. They probably won't let the case drop until it's confirmed she doesn't have to run for pres if Joe kicks the bucket.
Harris tried, and failed, to bring a case against Backpage in California.
You do know who actually did bring the case, right? Jeff Sessions, Trump's first AG.
This is injustice. They drove his partner to suicide.
Trial by duel is the only civilized form of justice that has ever existed.
What about that whole witch in the pond thing?
Yeah, that was much better. Just had to see if she weighed less than a duck.
Defendants should be able to challenge the prosecutor to a duel in lieu of a trial.
Agree
There is no possible justification for Federal laws concerning prostitution (whatever that is) and "trafficking" is such a vague, broad and poorly defined notion that any Federal laws against it should be declared to be unconstitutional by the Federal courts.
Obviously, our justice system professionals learned something in kindergarten: if at first you don't convict, er, succeed, trial, trial, again.
ps. How many rounds will it take with Trump?
A good case can be made that these US attorneys' positions should be abolished. They are hammers looking to fit people up for nail suits.
If the US AG wants to prosecute, he can send somebody out from DC. The local attorneys are too cozy with regional federal LE.
Who are you to second-guess Jeff Sessions, the Trump Administration’s perfectly-picked Attorney General who made the initial decision to prosecute the Backpagers in federal court in 2018?
Is Lacey running for office as a Republican? That’d explain the DOJs various violations of his Constitutional rights.
He was initially prosecuted by the Trump Administration, which you could argue was at one time "Republican" (or at least had a bunch of Republicans working for it). I'm sure he has only warm feelings for Republicans.
Leaving ONLY 53 counts?
I'm assuming the reason for piling on the charges was to try and force a plea deal. Prosecutors ought to pay a price for unsuccessful over-charging.