© COPYRIGHT 2016 by Kristina A. Lugo 2016 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED DEDICATION To my late father, Fernando Lugo, who always assured me I could do anything, and his brother, Eugeño Jiménez, who took over that job after he was gone. And, to the victims of human trafficking I have had the privilege to encounter during the last several years. You are stronger and more resilient than anyone I have ever met. THE TIES THAT BIND: A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF A LARGE GANG SEX TRAFFICKING NETWORK IN THE UNITED STATES BY Kristina A. Lugo ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the effect of network position on the probability that a sex trafficking network member avoided indictment in a specific gang RICO prosecution, and what that says about the functioning of trafficking networks and their resistance to fragmentation strategies by law enforcement. Ties between members, particularly involving members that broker relationships between otherwise disconnected individuals or groups, are hypothesized to be conduits through which benefits flow, such as power, information, or influence. Others hypothesize that brokerage positions can hold disadvantages, so that an advantageous position in one network may be disadvantageous in another. An individual in a brokerage position might also use his/her power strategically to block the flow of benefits between others. This study used police and court data to examine how brokerage, measured in different ways, influenced the probability of avoiding indictment. As of this writing, this is the first social network analysis of an individual human trafficking network in the United States, and the largest such study of a human trafficking network in terms of network size examined. It is distinctive in that it includes extensive data on both indicted and unindicted individuals in sufficient numbers to use broad boundaries and include the impact of porous network borders. Avoiding indictment is the dependent variable, and it is used as a proxy for survival, which is an important utility that offenders and victims alike want to maximize. Rational utility ii maximization by network members is important to consider when examining the operation of criminal trafficking networks as business enterprises. Results support the notion that relying on betweenness centrality alone to measure brokerage does not work as predictably well in larger networks; its effect was miniscule and not statistically significant in every model where degree centrality, or the sheer number of people one is connected to, was included. This is contrary to the results of several network analyses involving smaller networks for a few important reasons, including the presence of multiple redundant ties and the lengths of paths between individuals in larger, more mature networks. Further, the impact of degree centrality is shown to have a curvilinear effect that reverses direction after a certain point, and clustering coefficient emerged as a measure of brokerage worthy of more study. Important insights are also offered regarding the symbiotic relationships between perpetrators and victims. On a practical level, the goal of this study was to explore the extent to which identifying brokers in a sex trafficking network could help law enforcement target network members that would best fragment a network, a strategy thought to reduce criminal networks’ ability to operate and exploit victims. The study shows that the size and complexity of the network, the presence of redundant ties, and the structure of components connected by cut points may call for different law enforcement strategies in dismantling larger gang sex trafficking networks. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are numerous people without whom this dissertation would never have happened. To my colleagues at International Justice Mission, especially Terence Fitzgerald, who have mentored me; American University professors Ed Maguire, Richard Bennett, Jon Gould, and others who taught and encouraged me. To Jay Albanese at Virginia Commonwealth University, Andrew Fox at California State University, Fresno, Sharon Melzer at George Mason University, and John Picarelli at the National Institute of Justice, thank you for guiding and teaching me. Thanks also to Francesco Calderoni at Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan for his advice and feedback, to Jennifer Roberson for being a sounding board. I also extend my sincerest gratitude to the task force members that investigated this case, including officers from the San Diego County Sherriff’s Department, and Special Agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Homeland Security Investigations for sharing their time with me for interviews; and to Ami Carpenter at University of San Diego, and Sheldon Zhang at San Diego State University for connecting me to the members of the task force. Most of all, I thank the lead detective from the Oceanside Police Department, who led the investigation that helped so many victims and who gave untold time and access to collect the data needed for this study. None of this work would have been possible without you, and I am forever in your debt. I also thank my family, including cousins Vanessa Jiménez, Adam Vana, Serena Jiménez Ashby, Claudia Fortunato and many others, as well as my Aunt Pat Jiménez for their ongoing support. Last, but certainly not least, thank you to my sister, Mary Lugo, for not only being my copy editor but for her unwavering support over the last many years. I love you. Thank you. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. iv LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ....................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 9 General background: Human and sex trafficking ............................................................. 18 The present study .............................................................................................................. 34 Roadmap for the dissertation ............................................................................................ 38 CHAPTER 2 MAXIMIZING UTILITY AND THE PROBABILITY OF SURVIVAL IN A GANG SEX TRAFFICKING NETWORK: HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND NETWORK: THEORIES IN A BOUNDED RATIONAL CHOICE MODEL ........................... 40 Victimization and perpetration in gang-controlled sex trafficking: How do they operate? ....................................................................................................................... 41 Traditional Criminology and Organized Crime ................................................................ 47 Bounded Rational Choice: Underlying Framework ......................................................... 50 Network Theory ................................................................................................................ 57 Synthesizing Theory ......................................................................................................... 76 Conceptual model ............................................................................................................. 78 Research questions (Redux) .............................................................................................. 80 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 82 General methodology .................................................................................................................... 82 Research setting ................................................................................................................ 84 Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 86 Sampling and Boundaries ................................................................................................. 93 Dataset construction .......................................................................................................... 97 Data analysis procedures................................................................................................. 110 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS: IS BROKERAGE PROTECTIVE? ................................................ 114 Case History .................................................................................................................... 115 Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................................................... 129 Social Network Analyses ................................................................................................ 144 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 164 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: IT’S WHO YOU KNOW ...................... 168 Summary of Research and Findings ............................................................................... 168 Theoretical Implications and Generalizability ................................................................ 172 v Practical Implications.....................................................................................................