JONESBORO, Ark. — When a Tree Massage worker complained that she never got to see the sun, her boss told her she could stand at the back door, according to a newly released Jonesboro police report.
The worker, listed in the report as a 61-year-old woman, told investigators she worked 13-hour days, slept inside the Southwest Drive business and was locked in at night. Her luggage, she said, was kept at a separate apartment she could not access.
Those allegations prompted police to pursue a human-trafficking allegation in June. By Oct. 5, owner and business manager Na Li, 65, had pleaded guilty to second-degree promoting prostitution under an agreement that placed her on two years of probation, with a $10 fine and additional costs and fees.
The records released to NEA Report under the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act provide a closer look at how police built the case: a complaint routed through the FBI, surveillance, a customer’s admission of paying for a sexual service, an employee’s account of confinement and searches that recovered her luggage.
They also show why the investigation and the final court outcome need to be examined separately. The police narratives reviewed for this report describe the evidence investigators gathered. They do not explain why prosecutors agreed to the particular plea terms.
Prosecutor Sonia Hagood did not respond to request for comment.
What prosecutors filed and what the plea settled
The first-appearance sheet listed three allegations: trafficking of persons, unauthorized use of another person’s property to facilitate a crime, and second-degree promoting prostitution. The sheet marked trafficking as a Class A felony. Trafficking was therefore listed at the initial court appearance.
But when filed the criminal information on August 12 was filed, the trafficking charge was gone. The only charges were unauthorized use of another person’s property to facilitate a crime, and second-degree promoting prostitution. Both counts alleged conduct between Feb. 23 and June 25.
As we previously reported, Li pleaded guilty to second-degree promoting prostitution Oct. 5 before Circuit Judge Chris Thyer. Prosecutors dropped the separate property-use charge. The order imposed two years of probation and no jail or prison term.
The court used Arkansas’ first-offender provisions, deferring further proceedings without making a finding of guilt or entering a judgment of guilt. The October agreement resolved the two counts listed in the August information.
The $10 fine was one part of the financial assessment:
| Assessment | Amount |
|---|---|
| Fine | $10 |
| Court costs | $150 |
| Booking fee | $40 |
| DNA sample fee | $250 |
| Total of those listed assessments | $450 |
| Probation fee | $35 per month |
The monthly fee is additional to the $450. The sentencing order was signed by Thyer, Deputy Prosecutor Katherine E. Calaway-Turner and defense attorney Michael Lilly.
The complaint that reached the FBI
The investigation began with a 55-year-old woman who said a return visit to Tree Massage was nothing like her first.
Sgt. Christopher Pigg wrote that he received a summary of an FBI tip on Feb. 9. He interviewed the woman Feb. 22 about her experience at 5510 Southwest Drive, Suite 6.
The woman described an earlier couples massage with her husband as normal and good. On a later visit, she said, a different worker repeatedly exposed her and touched intimate areas despite being told to stop. She also reported being burned with hot rocks she had not requested and being pressured for a larger tip.
The complainant told Pigg she had nearly 26 years of experience in the skin-care industry and believed the massage was unprofessional.
She also described contacting the business afterward. According to Pigg, a woman she understood to be an owner offered a refund, but the customer said she wanted to report the conditions rather than get her money back.
A $70 massage and a $100 tip
By April, investigators were watching the business with a surveillance camera. Pigg documented vehicles arriving and leaving at late-night and early-morning hours.
On April 24, he recognized a 28-year-old man entering the massage parlor. Sgt. Bill Brown questioned that man four days later.
Brown’s account describes a conversation that began with questions about the man’s activities after work. After Brown asked specifically about the massage business and explained that he investigated human trafficking, the man admitted he had been there and had received sexual services, according to the report.
Pigg’s summary puts a price on the April visit: $70 for the massage, followed by manual sexual stimulation and a $100 tip.
Brown wrote that the man described additional services being offered after payment for the massage, with prices varying by the service. The man said he personally had received only manual stimulation. He also reported encountering different workers on different visits.
The raid — and a customer who denied wrongdoing
Pigg wrote that a search warrant for the business and an arrest warrant for Li were issued June 22. Officers executed the warrants June 25.
At about 11:30 a.m., a man entered Tree Massage. At 11:55 a.m., officers moved in. Li was outside talking on her phone when she was taken into custody.
Inside, police found a worker and a 38-year-old male customer receiving a massage. The worker went with an advocate and an officer to Hope Found. The customer agreed to an interview at the police department.
That customer’s account was different from the April customer’s. He repeatedly denied receiving or being offered sexual services.
Detective Calvin Newman described pressing him about possible records and video from the business. The customer continued to deny wrongdoing and eventually asked to stop answering questions. Newman wrote that he ended the questioning, confirmed there was no additional evidence restricting the man from leaving, and escorted him out.
Thirteen-hour days and a locked door
At Hope Found, Officer Faith Ann Kelemen interviewed the worker with assistance from an interpreter and advocate Megan Brown. Kelemen wrote that the worker first received medical care and that the interview was recorded.
The woman described moving among massage businesses in several states before coming to Jonesboro. She said a worker at an Oklahoma parlor had told her Li needed help. She also described using a driving service advertised on WeChat to travel between businesses, at a cost of $500.
Her account of working for Li centered on control over her time, money, belongings and ability to leave.
For a $70 massage, she said, Li received $40 and she kept $30. She described other splits for higher-priced services, too. Kelemen recorded a workday of 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m.; Pigg’s summary recorded 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Both describe 13-hour days.
The worker said Li told her not to leave the business and reprimanded her for going outside. When she complained about never seeing the sun, she said, Li told her she could stand at the back door.
Kelemen also recorded the allegation that Li locked the worker inside at 9:30 p.m. before leaving. The woman said she sometimes asked Li to stay because she was afraid to be alone.
According to the worker, Li threatened to take more money from her pay when angry, including after she missed two calls from a client. The worker said she felt she had to listen because Li was the boss.
On sexual services, the worker said customers at massage parlors asked for sex acts and offered larger tips. She told Kelemen that Li had said sex acts had been performed at Tree Massage before.
Pigg specifically cited the worker’s account of being kept at the business, its alleged sexual activity and the removal of her belongings when explaining why police added trafficking to Li’s charges.
The luggage gave police something to check
The worker’s statement about her suitcases led investigators to a second location.
On June 26, Pigg searched an apartment under a warrant signed by Judge Scott Ellington. He found two suitcases. One contained paperwork bearing the worker’s information, and he took it to Hope Found to be returned to her. He initially left the other suitcase because it contained no identifying paperwork, according to the report.
After Hope Found told him the second suitcase also belonged to the worker, Pigg wrote that he prepared another warrant and retrieved it June 29.
He also checked surveillance footage from June 11, the date the worker said she arrived. His report describes an orange Jeep backing up to the front door at about 2:45 p.m. and a woman unloading bags and suitcases before entering.
Cash, phones and the limits of the forensic record
The search produced cash, financial papers, phones, tablets and notebooks.
Detective Keri Varner documented extracting data from some devices. A later entry says two devices yielded only partial extractions because they were locked.
Another officer, Rich Rothwell, used an alternate light source to photograph stains on bedding and paper towels. His report says the reactions could indicate several types of bodily fluid. He wrote that he did not collect any items himself.
A later allegation named Li directly
On June 29, a 32-year-old male customer told Pigg about a Father’s Day visit on June 21.
The man alleged that Li touched his genitals during a massage and gestured toward a sexual service while asking, “you happy?” He said he declined and later left a $20 tip, which appeared to upset her.
Unlike the April customer’s account of an unnamed worker, this man’s statement identified Li as the person involved.
Li denied the allegations during her June 26 court appearance. As previously reported, she told Judge David Boling through an interpreter: “Your honor, I heard what was just read, I can swear none of those were true, not even a single one.” Her later guilty plea was to second-degree promoting prostitution.
Why prosecutors omitted trafficking remains unanswered
Proving second-degree promoting-prostitution is a different task from proving trafficking.
For the involuntary-servitude provisions, the trafficking statute addresses conduct such as knowingly harboring or maintaining a person while knowing or having reason to know that the person will be subjected to involuntary servitude. The statutory definition includes inducing or compelling labor, services or commercial sexual activity through specified means, including restraint, taking property, threats, deception or coercion.
That’s why the worker’s allegations about the locked door and withheld belongings matter.
The Aug. 12 information establishes which charges prosecutors filed, but does not explain why they omitted trafficking, how they evaluated the evidence or what testimony would have been available at trial.
None of the documents we could find showed the worker recanting her statement or the prosecutor concluding her account was false.
The $10 fine raises another question
There is a legal distinction to examine alongside the fine itself. Act 663 of 2025 increased second-degree promoting prostitution to a Class D felony for a first offense and provides for a $2,500 first-offense fine “upon conviction.” The current provision retains that language.
Li entered a negotiated guilty plea – but her guilty verdict will be deferred if she stays out of trouble. Arkansas’ first-offender law allows eligible defendants to receive probation without being guilty. If the defendant follows all conditions of the plea deal, it can lead to dismissal and sealing of records.
As for the fine, the first-offender statute allows a fine of up to $3,500. Why Li’s was $10 requires an explanation from the attorneys or the courts. It remains unanswered.
The case was still listed as active after the plea
The final entry in the police report is dated Oct. 6 — the day after the plea. Brown wrote that Li came to the police department to retrieve property. After speaking with Pigg, he documented releasing property to her. Li identified all of the listed items except one, designated E20, which was logged back into evidence as E22. The entry uses evidence numbers rather than describing each object.
NEA Report requested the investigative file Oct. 7. In an Oct. 8 response, JPD’s Public Information Official Sally Smith said it was still listed as active because the detective was waiting for information from another agency.
Later that afternoon, Smith said she had spoken with Pigg. She wrote that a credit-card return was no longer needed, that police had been waiting on Homeland Security’s portion of the investigation, and that Pigg had closed the case that afternoon.
The redacted, 16-page report was supplied Oct. 9. Its cover sheet lists the case as closed.
Smith said the redactions included names, addresses and financial information that could be used in future investigations if Li opened another similar business. She also said Li was banned from the Gladiolus property, while saying she was unsure about the Southwest Drive property.
The case, by date
- Feb. 9: Pigg receives the summary of a tip submitted to the FBI.
- Feb. 22: Police interview the woman whose massage complaint helped launch the investigation.
- April 24–28: Police observe a customer visiting the business and later interview him about paying for a sexual service.
- June 11: The worker says she arrives at Tree Massage; Pigg later reviews surveillance from that date.
- June 22–25: Warrants are issued and officers search the business, arrest Li and interview the worker and a customer.
- June 26–29: Police search an apartment and recover luggage; Li appears in court and receives a $150,000 bond.
- July 21: Pigg documents his review of bank cards and receipts.
- Aug. 12: Prosecutors file a criminal information charging unauthorized use of property to facilitate a crime and second-degree promoting prostitution. It contains no trafficking count.
- Oct. 5: Li enters the negotiated plea and receives two years of probation, a $10 fine and additional assessments.
- Oct. 6: Li retrieves property from police; one item is logged back into evidence.
- Oct. 7–9: NEA Report requests the file; the city reports it closed and releases the redacted report.
DOWNLOAD THE INVESTIGATIVE FILE HERE: JPD-Incident-26-01464_Redacted
Source note: This report draws on all 16 pages of Jonesboro Police Department incident report 26-01464. The charging history is documented in the first-appearance sheet and the criminal information electronically filed Aug. 12 in Craighead County Circuit Court case 16JCR-26-710. Plea and sentencing details come from NEA Report’s previous reporting on the Oct. 5 court filings. Records-release details come from the city’s Oct. 8–9 correspondence.
The account describes reported allegations and does not say or otherwise imply any finding of guilt in a trafficking case.
SHARE THIS STORY WITH OTHERS:
Discover more from NEA Report
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
