DC Madam case goes to trial

The DC Madam trial has been going on for the last few days, and though I'd never give up an opportunity to shame congressmen who hired prostitutes but never tried to get anti-prostitution laws revoked, I think this went a little too far. According to the Washington Post article, over one hundred names of former prostitutes were released, and many were forced to testify about the nitty-gritty details of their work, including this entirely unnecessary exchange (with some context first; all emphasis is mine):

It's particularly unfortunate when considering what the former escorts earned for this public disgrace: $130 for their 90-minute "calls." Add in travel time, and these sex workers toiled for perhaps $40 an hour.

Yet prosecutors act as if they've caught a major organized crime figure. An IRS agent yesterday showed the jury photos of her home -- a mop and cornflakes box in evidence -- and recited Palfrey's sewer bill, electricity payment, car maintenance and check to Office Depot. One juror's eyes closed, and her head dropped. Others yawned. "I'm not sure why the jury needs to see any of this," the judge pointed out. "Waste of time."

The same might be said of the rest of the case.

Wednesday, Connelly was grilling the 63-year-old former escort. "Did you specifically discuss what happened when you went in the shower?" the prosecutor wanted to know.

The witness explained, "I was having sex."

"What would happen if you were menstruating?" Connelly asked.