Quantcast

American Arrested In Costa Rica For Promoting “Sex Tourism”

Photo courtesy of the OIJ

Photo courtesy  OIJ

QCOSTARICA- In what is believed to be the first case of its kind, Friday the Organismo de Investigación Judicial (OIJ) arrested a U.S. citizen at the San Jose airport on the crime of  “Promoting Sex Tourism”.

The OIJ press office says the 65 year-old man, whose identity was not released to the press, had been under investigation by the Sección de Delitos Contra la Integridad Física, Trata y Tráfico since earlier this year, after receiving confidential information, saying the suspect dedicated himself to promoting sexual tourism through a social network.

The OIJ says they were able to confirm that the suspect uploaded photos and videos on the social network, promoting Costa Rica a sex tourism destination.



The arrest took place at the Juan Santamaria (San Jose) airport in Alajuela and agents seizing a computer, camera, business cards and photographs of women.

Photo courtesy OIJ

Photo courtesy OIJ

 

Source: Organismo de Investigación Judicial


Costa Rica's private transportation services AVANTI Costa Rica. Discreet and reliable service.
If you enjoyed this, please SHARE IT so other readers can find it and enjoy it.
What are your thoughts? Post your comments below or post to our official FACEBOOK page.

32 Responses to "American Arrested In Costa Rica For Promoting “Sex Tourism”"

  1. Ken Morris  5 September 2015 at 6:22 pm

    Great! It’s bad enough that these guys come down here, but really bad when they posture as experts and promote the country to others like them.

    One scumbag down, only a few hundred left to fall.

    • Linus Thelin  7 September 2015 at 5:30 am

      Lol fatty

  2. Jack Elder  6 September 2015 at 1:27 am

    Prostitution legal, talking about prostitution illegal. 3rd world much?

  3. AdamRich  6 September 2015 at 9:45 am

    Just because something is legal, does not mean you go around promoting it. Where I live it is legal to carry a gun, but I’m not in the street everyday brandishing mine and telling everyone they should get one. Tact.

    • Jack Elder  6 September 2015 at 10:34 am

      Tacky, yes. But illegal? It’s common among failed states to shift focus towards external entities. Seems CR is going the way of Venezuela on this.

      • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 6:49 am

        It is actually illegal to pimp, advertise, or to otherwise profit from the prostitution activities of another person, in Costa Rica. Folks from the USA find this strange, but there are similarities in the USA…

        Advertising Cigarettes? Cigarettes are still legal in the USA, right? Why no TV ads for them?

    • Ken Morris  7 September 2015 at 1:44 pm

      This is a line of reasoning I thought of too, and actually in the case of carrying guns, it is often illegal to carry them openly while legal to carry them concealed. The permit is after all usually for concealed carry, not open carry, and in fact Costa Rica’s law does require concealed as opposed to open carry. Thus, we have a clear instance of a law that already makes a distinction between what’s legal to do and illegal to promote.

      I though think the more relevant distinction in this case is between private and public. Lots of things, like going to the bathroom and prancing around naked at home, are legal in private but illegal in public. I think prostitution is generally considered a private activity in the eyes of Costa Rican law, and thus not anything it wants to ban, but promoting prostitution publicly is a different thing.

  4. Hachi Ko  6 September 2015 at 5:55 pm

    Costa Rica Law is… well… not Specific on this matter. However, the idea is reasonably clear. Prostitution is a part of Latin American culture, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. However, selling it as a sort of “Disneyland for Gringos” who want to party for a week with 20-something girls is probably not, in my opinion, what the lawmakers had in mind.

    The law says that prostitution is legal. The law also says that it is illegal to profit from the prostitution activities of other people. If you’re promoting sex tourism, you’re crossing a line.

    • Linus Thelin  7 September 2015 at 5:31 am

      Yes, if he receives any financial benefit it is crossing the line, if not then its not crossing the line.

    • Ken Morris  7 September 2015 at 1:48 pm

      It appears that the arrested fellow did profit financially from promoting sex tourism, but even if he didn’t, we can ask if he profited in other ways, such as by gaining elevated social status, even a kind of fame, among his peers.

  5. Deez  6 September 2015 at 8:23 pm

    Free Cuba Dave!

  6. John Doer  7 September 2015 at 8:16 am

    Guess Costa Rica doesn’t like being known for whores. If Cuba Dave isn’t making any money for his posts there shouldn’t be anything they can do to him. He did nothing illegal.

    • Ken Morris  7 September 2015 at 1:56 pm

      Actually, there is a law explicitly prohibiting the promotion of Costa Rica as a sex tourist destination, so in fact what Cuba Dave did is illegal.

      Now, it can always be argued that the law Cuba Dave broke is itself unconsititutional, and thus that the law itself is illegal. However, getting to this conclusion will require a successful challenge to the law. Unless or until that happens, Cuba Dave is a criminal.

      • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 6:46 am

        “IS” a criminal? He broke a law? That has been verified? That’s the fastest that I’ve ever seen a person charged, tried in court, and convicted…

        • Ken Morris  8 September 2015 at 1:57 pm

          Fair enough. Although breaking the law alone makes a person a criminal, by definition, if you want to argue that I don’t know for a fact that this fellow broke the law, you are right, I don’t know.

          However, I actually wouldn’t know it if he is later convicted, either. All I would know then is that a court considered him a criminal, but since courts make mistakes too, I still couldn’t be positive.

          Legally I suppose this fellow is merely a suspect, not a criminal, but then again so also would be Hitler, since I don’t believe any court got around to convicting him.

          • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 4:37 pm

            I would agree that, morally speaking, a person is a criminal at the very moment that he commits a crime. However, I would also advise caution when casting judgment upon a person without actually witnessing the alleged crime. I’ve read the above article, and I don’t see the suspect’s name anywhere in the article. I do see one photo of the rear-view of what appears to be a white male.

            We indict people because we believe that it is reasonable to believe that they are guilty of a crime. We then try them in court to make sure that we haven’t gotten our facts wrong. That’s how the system works. I rest easier knowing (or hoping) that we make sure that there aren’t any hidden “Easter Eggs” before we convict someone of a crime.

            Being a criminal is very different from being “found guilty” of a crime. In this case, I don’t think that either one is sure to apply… yet. I wasn’t there… I didn’t see what happened… I don’t know what kind of data is on those computers or memory cards. I like my facts verified. I don’t know the guy, although I have met him briefly.

            I don’t like the concept of assuming that a guy is guilty of a crime based on what I read in the newspapers or on the Internet, or hear on TV. I don’t know the guy. So, just because qcostarica posts a photo of the back of some dude’s head, I’m supposed to say, “Fry Cubadave?” Ummm… I don’t think so.

          • Ken Morris  8 September 2015 at 7:17 pm

            We’re on the same page. I don’t know him either, and don’t believe I’ve ever met him. I would certainly resist rushing to judgment were he to have been accused of almost any other crime.

            However, this crime (assuming the law making it a crime survives constitutional challenge, should there be one) involves promoting Costa Rica as a sex tourist destination. Thus, the evidence for his guilt or innocence is only a Google search away. I therefore Googled him, and saw with my own eyes evidence that suggests to me that he’s guilty as charged.

            This isn’t a crime like a bank robbery where anyone who wasn’t there doesn’t know what happened. It’s a crime for which the evidence is only a mouse click away for anyone who wants to find it.

            I never said, “Fry Cuba Dave,” and as I mull it (without obviously knowing all the details) this isn’t my opinion. My opinion is that deportation coupled with a ban on re-entering is roughly the right outcome for him. This would be plenty to get the rest of the sex tourists and sexpats to tone it down a bit, as well as to discourage those who refuse to tone it down to stay away.

            Personally, I’d rather see the case make its way through the courts so that we can get some jurisprudence out of it, but that’s just what interests me. If the practical outcome is only to tone it down some and get rid of the egregious offenders, that will be enough.

            BTW, some people confuse me as an anti-prostitution crusader. That I am not. I am an anti-asshole crusader. To my mind, Cuba Dave’s “crime” wasn’t a failure to keep his zipper zipped but being an arrogant asshole about it. Since lawmakers can’t easily pass a law against assholes (as much as they would like to) they resort to legalese substitutes like the law Cuba Dave was arrested for violating. Stripped of the legalese, though, I think this fellow was basically arrested for being an asshole. This raises interesting legal questions, though from what I Googled, he seems to me to be guilty as charged.

          • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 7:39 pm

            I appreciate your response… But I don’t think that we’re QUITE on “The Same Page.”

            YOUR WORDS:

            I don’t know him either, and don’t believe I’ve ever met him. The evidence for his guilt or innocence is only a Google search away. I therefore Googled him, and saw with my own eyes evidence that suggests to me that he’s guilty as charged. It’s a crime for which the evidence is only a mouse click away for anyone who wants to find it. from what I Googled, he seems to me to be guilty as charged.

            Well… ALL HAIL GOOGLE!!! What do we need with all of these pesky police, lawyers and judges, when GOOGLE has the whole world’s legal problems solved?

            The fact is… You don’t have a clue who Cubadave is, or if he even exists. You read something on the Internet, Googled it, and… NOW… you have all of the information that you need to condemn a man that, as far as you know, doesn’t even exist.

            —————-

            > some people confuse me as an anti-prostitution crusader. That I am not. I am an anti-asshole crusader

            To swing this discussion completely around, 180 degrees…

            I agree with you on this point, 100%. Legality and crime aside…

            I think that prostitution should be legal. That’s my opinion, I won’t go into detail any further on that right now. I also believe that going around bragging about your sexual exploits with prostitutes and promoting sex tourism as a sort of “Disneyland” vacation, portraying a wonderful country like Costa Rica as one big Whorehouse, is just despicable behavior. As you implied… we do, in fact, need less of that behavior.

          • Ken Morris  8 September 2015 at 8:39 pm

            Tranquilo. When the crime involves posting things on the internet, the internet is the place to find the facts. I don’t need to know the fellow who posted them is any more than I need to know the captain of an oil tanker that spilled oil if I can see the oil spill with my own eyes. Whether or not his mother loved him and what his astrological sign is are irrelevant. Of course, if Cuba Dave wants to defend himself by claiming that someone else posted the stuff under his name while he was at church, or maybe that his identity is a fictional character, the identity issue becomes a question. But let’s wait and see whether that question arises. Right now the charge involves posting stuff on the internet, and that’s why Hail Google is relevant.

            Well, prostitution is legal in Costa Rica, or probably more accurately not illegal, so this isn’t an issue. Neither apparently is it an issue between us, since we agree this is the right legal call. We also seem to agree that portraying Costa Rica as an adult Disneyland whorehouse isn’t necessarily good just because prostitution is legal and happens. I’d almost be tempted to say that we’re on the same page, though I guess I better wait and see. After all, this is only the internet.

          • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 8:51 pm

            I tend to agree with your general principles. I just wonder who made the leap and decided that it was Cubadave? What if he shows up online tomorrow and says, “I’ve been in Denver for the past 2 months.”? “Yeah, that guy does kinda look like me, from behind…”

            > prostitution is legal in Costa Rica, or probably more accurately not illegal

            I hear this argument all of the time. Did you know that are no laws that make it legal to own an 8-Track Tape Player? or to eat Lima Beans? Why does everyone make such a big deal out of sex not being “legal”, just “not illegal.” Almost everything that we do is simply “not illegal.”

            > if Cuba Dave wants to defend himself by claiming that someone else posted the stuff under his name while he was at church, or maybe that his identity is a fictional character, the identity issue becomes a question.

            Therein lies the fallacy. Forgetting for a moment that there is no official mention of anyone called “Cubadave” being arrested, “Cubadave” is not even a real name, as you can find out on GOOGLE.

            Cubadave doesn’t have to defend himself… primarily because there is no real person with the real name of Cubadave. The burden of proof is on the accusers of the man who was arrested. He doesn’t have to prove anything. He just has to refute anything that anyone else can Prove, which is precisely nothing.

          • Ken Morris  8 September 2015 at 11:59 pm

            Oh, AM Costa Rica did a story that you might have missed. Cuba Dave is David Strecker. I didn’t Google the Cuba Dave who was in Denver, and neither was this the alias arrested.

            Well, when something is regulated out the yin yang, it makes a certain amount of sense to call it “not illegal.” Alcohol is not illegal–as long as a person is old enough, pays the tax, and so on. I haven’t seen 8-tracks or lima beans so regulated, even though you’re right, they’re “not illegal” too.

            Fallacy? Now why do I bristle at such words?

          • Hachi Ko  9 September 2015 at 12:30 am

            I am well aware that Cubadave is the online persona of one David Strecker. I don’t need AM Costa Rica to tell me that. However, my point is that there is really no proof that that is the person who was arrested on Friday.

            The Denver thing was just a hypothetical situation, as in… what if the guy that everyone is assuming was arrested turns out not to have been in Costa Rica on that day?

            The alcohol subject is an interesting one. I’ve spent some time in Eastern Europe. In many of those countries, beer is, for all practical purposes, the same as Coca-Cola or Pepsi. While a bartender probably wouldn’t sell a 7-year-old kid an open beer, I’ve seen many 7-year-olds pick up a 6-pack for Dad on the way home from school. It’s perfectly legal, in many countries, to sell a kid a beer. Selling Wine and hard liquor to a kid is usually a different story.

            Overall, I get what you’re saying. What I’m saying is that I wasn’t there, I don’t know the guy, and I certainly don’t know for sure exactly what he has done. It’s not my place to judge him, although I would certainly support any justice system that prosecuted him for suspected violation of a law.

          • Hachi Ko  9 September 2015 at 12:51 am

            After you mentioned it, I did find and read that article in AM Costa Rica, which finally Named Cubadave as the guy that got arrested on Friday. AM Costa Rica’s article also said that he was arrested “as he got off a plane at Juan Santamaria airport Friday.”

            After noticing the 62/65-year-old age discrepancy earlier, I’m already skeptical about some of the “facts” that are being presented as established truth in this incident. Here’s another issue that just doesn’t sound right to me…

            I received a reliable report from a person that I trust completely. He was very puzzled when he saw my post on another board about Cubadave possibly being arrested at SJO on Friday. Why? Because he was sitting with Cubadave at one of the bars in the Hotel Del Rey on Thursday night. So… If Cubadave was at the Del Rey on Thursday night, how likely is it that he was “getting off” a plane at SJO on Friday? Of course, it’s not impossible. There are at least a couple of possible explanations, but this whole thing is starting to sound a little fishy.

          • Hachi Ko  9 September 2015 at 1:10 am

            > Well, when something is regulated out the yin yang, it makes a certain amount of sense to call it “not illegal.”

            I can understand that…

            Here’s one that usually catches most folks off guard…

            Prostitution is just as “not illegal” under U.S. Federal Law as it is “not illegal” in Costa Rica. Prostitution is Perfectly Legal under U.S. Federal Law, as there is no U.S. Law that prohibits prostitution. There are, however, several U.S. laws that make interstate human trafficking and pimping illegal, and that make the entry of aliens into the USA for the purpose of prostitution illegal.

            The only U.S. Federal Law that addresses prostitution in general is a law that is supposed to prevent prostitution within a “reasonable distance” of a U.S. Military base or other U.S. Military installation. There is NO U.S. Law that makes prostitution, in general, illegal.

            However, every U.S. State, except Nevada, has made prostitution illegal. Nevada has allowed its subordinate counties to make their own decisions on the matter, and prostitution is legal in some areas within Nevada.

            U.S. territory outside of the 50 States does not have as much “leeway” as the States, and so prostitution is almost always illegal in those areas. However, there is a push underway, by the government of Puerto Rico, to legalize prostitution there.

          • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 4:46 pm

            This is my conundrum regarding people who “know” that a person is guilty before he is tried in court… sometimes just moments after the person is arrested. Here’s what I would like to see…

            If you KNOW that a person is guilty, then put your money where your mouth is. Declare, openly, “This person is guilty. I know it to be true. He should not go to court. He is is guilty. He should be sentenced immediately, with no lawyer, no jury, and no day in court.”

            If people were willing to say that, I would have a lot less of a problem with the “guilty until proven innocent” mentality that seems to be prevalent in the USA, Costa Rica, and most other supposed “Democracies” these days.

          • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 4:56 pm

            > this fellow is merely a suspect, not a criminal, but then again so also would be Hitler, since I don’t believe any court got around to convicting him.

            That doesn’t make Hitler “Not a Criminal”… It just makes him not “Found Guilty” of a crime. I didn’t realize that Hitler was never tried posthumously. Is that true? It doesn’t really matter, I suppose.

  7. Livingcolor  8 September 2015 at 1:24 am

    This guys has exxxposed a lot of young woman,their families,and kids or kids friends may have seen mami on the net somewhere or their friends iPhone.As much as I laugh when I hear about how this guy bounces around like a rock star doing aggressive groupies.Enough is enough .CostaRica doesn’t need help promoting an industry that’s suppose todiscreet among mongers There’s never a big ass billboard sign above these businesses saying whores for rent and free picture of all the whores.

    • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 6:58 am

      To the best of my knowledge, Cubadave has never done that. Despite his “brashness”, I’ve never known him to be a liar or a con-artist. He has 2 rules when he takes a photo or a video of a girl…

      1) Is it OK if I take a photo or video of you?

      2) Is it OK if I post it on the Internet?

      His stated policy is not to take or post a photo or video of anyone without their permission.

      I’ve met the guy a couple of times, although he’s not a close friend. His philosophies are different from mine, and that’s OK. It’s his notoriety and his outspoken nature that attract attention to him and get him into trouble. There are tens of thousands of guys who do what he does in Costa Rica, they just don’t have a blog and a website about it.

  8. Rico  8 September 2015 at 8:45 am

    The lack of information from the local Spanish press makes it difficult to find anything out, given the Q does nto have a reporting staff, limited access to officials and the close-to-the-chest attitude of the OIJ. What we do know is that he is being accused of sexual tourism. In Costa Rica, you get accused and then police investigate if there is sufficient proof (evidence) that a crime has actually been committed, followed up by a charge.

    Meanwhile, the courts decide if you go free or get locked up during the investigation. In this case, given the flight risk, he is locked up. So were former presidents Calderon and Rodriguez some years ago. So, cannot call locking up a foreigner unfair, when two former presidents had the same. Of course, the detention (prison) can always be appealed on a regular basis, the prosecutor having to show cause for the continued detention. Not being a Costa Rican, with no ties (ie a property, cash, business, etc) to Costa Rica means foreigners – Americans, Nicas, Colombians, Italians, etc) will wait it out in San Sebastian.

    Again, to be clear, in law he has only been accused and is being held in detention awaiting the outcome of the investigation, possible charges, a trial and sentence.

  9. Rico  8 September 2015 at 6:31 pm

    Reminder, if you include any type of link to your comments, it is automatically queued for approval.

    Age is relative when reporting, writing an article, so for a year or two year difference, quite normal. Now, if it were several years or a decade, then there is something wrong.

    • Hachi Ko  8 September 2015 at 6:46 pm

      I don’t have any problem with the post being queued for approval. The link was relevant to the point, and I was willing to wait.

      As for this one:

      > Age is relative when reporting, writing an article, so for a year or two year difference, quite normal.

      So… it’s OK for facts to be “approximately correct?” They are either correct, or they are not. If something is presented as fact, then it should be accurate. If the article had stated “in his mid-60s” or “in his early 60s”, that would be accurate and acceptable. But to just just say, “Did I say that the USA dropped One atomic bomb on Japan? I meant Two. No big deal. Now, if I had been off by 5 or 6 atomic bombs, that would be different, of course.”

      It’s sloppy reporting, and even though no name is mentioned in the article, this guy has already been indicted, tried, convicted, and sentenced.

  10. DMR4736 .  11 September 2015 at 11:10 am

    used to run into him often, in sosua at cmp, passions, along the beach, d latins………

You must be logged in to post a comment Login