What I said was that taping the conversation would be considered a crime here in California. I am right about that, and there are sections of the California Penal Code which explicitly make such taping a crime unless either EVERYONE being taped knows they are being recorded or those who don't know have no reason to consider the conversation private.
No one has denied that you have a right to express your opinions. What we have done is urged you to voluntarily stop before someone gets hurt. I shouldn't be telling sick people what treatment they need or telling construction crewa how to build an office tower, because I wouldn't know what I was talking about. If I gave such advice and someone followed it, people could be hurt or killed. The same is true for you. You shouldn't be telling people how to protect their rights, because at least for now you don't know what you are talking about.
I think you mentioned in one of your posts that you have a "pre-law degree." I'm not sure what classes you took to get that degree, but your present understanding of the law is really terrible. I'm sure you are smart enough to learn it well, but you haven't done that yet and you shouldn't be advising people until you have.
A provider asked if I would be willing to use my name to sign a rental agreement for an apartment. The only incentive for doing this is a longer gfe session with a discount. Any legal risks since I have a job and family?
She gets caught seeing clients there, you're promoting prostitution. Don't do it.
if he does not "know" she is seeing clients there how will he be liable. i know a girl who was busted in her incall and she did not have her name on the lease, the guy who did was not even questioned. but this might be diff. state to state
if she has drugs in the residence or gets arrested, he is equally liable
you are legally required to watch the company you keep and stay away from anyone who you think is breaking the law
I know wannarideher means well, but this is the second time today I have seen a message from her which is dead wrong. You are not required to "stay away from anyone who you think is breaking the law" unless you have a prior court order that says you are. After all, how would defense attorneys make a living if they had to avoid people who seemed to be criminals?
The lessor of an apartment is not liable merely because a subtennant commits a crime on the premises. The definitions of possession, prostitution, solicitation, and most other crimes include what is called "specific intent" - an intention to do the acts which make up the crime. If you have drugs on your property and don't know it, you are not guilty of possession. And if someone else is committing prostitution in your apartment without your knowledge the result is the same.
The problem is that this guy DOES know. In California, at least, he's on the hook for a separate crime. I don't know the name offhand, but trust me on this one.
Also, even if the lessor doesn't know it might look like he does, and in that situation he would be prosecuted. He might win, but he would have a lot of explaining to do and he would spend a lot of money defending himself.
A bad idea all around.
P.C. sections 315 & 316.
I was always told throughout childhood to stay away from drug dealers and anyone who I knew was a felon b/c I could be arrested for being an associate
I don't know if that is a cruel threat given to teenagers and is useless to anyone who knows the law but I was told that if I was at a college party and the police did a raid, I would get arrested too even if I didn't smoke pot and if my boyfriend was known to be trouble by police that there were charges that could be put on me which is why I don't have any roommates or allow people I don't know for at least a year into my car.
Helping someone commit a crime is criminal, but merely socializing with that person is not. If it was, you would have no friends.
The First Amendment says the government cannot unduly interfere with your freedom to associate with others. Only an injunction or restraining order can prevent you from spending time with whomever you choose, and before such an order can be imposed there must be proof based upon your own past conduct that you are harassing someone and/or are likely to be a threat to others. Even then, the order must specify which people you have to avoid.
Police "raids" are infrequent, and even when they happen the officers only arrest those whom they reasonably believe have broken the law. Here in California, police cannot arrest someone for a misdemeanor (and simple possession of pot is a misdemeanor here) unless they actually see the suspect commit the crime. This means that even if you WERE breaking the law, you would only be arrested if the police observed you doing so or if there was good reason to believe you had previously comitted a felony. Merely being present when someone else breaks the law is not a crime, but your theory says it is enough just to be with that person even when he ISN'T breaking the law. I'm afraid you're way off on that one.
And the idea that you could be charged with a crime just because your "boyfriend was known to be trouble" is even further off. Even HE couldn't be charged just because he "was known to be trouble." A person can only be arrested and charged for an actual criminal act, and the fact that people consider someone to be "trouble" is just their belief and is not criminal. After all, how could justice possibly be served by arresting someone for what other people think about him? But even if you are with a boyfriend when he COMMITS a crime you are not guilty of anything. Active participation or assistance after the fact is criminal, but just being there when it happens is not.
If you really believe these things, have you isolated yourself in order to prevent people from becoming friends with you or dating you so they wouldn't be arrested? Or have you formed relationships while believing that you were turning the other person into a criminal? Either way, your mistaken beliefs about the law have probably damaged your life. I hope my explanations will help make you happier by making it easier for you to bond with others.
And please don't take this the wrong way, but I suggest that you stop giving people pointers on this board. Your understanding of the law is not just mistaken but warped (I don't mean to say that YOU are warped, just that your understanding of the law is wildly at odds with the truth), but offering guidance suggests to the reader that there is reason to believe you know what you're talking about. You're not likely to help anyone here but you may cause some real problems for other readers.
in SC you can be arrested for walking down the street in a high crime neighborhood or at least 14 years ago you could
mom had a girlfriend who lived in a bad neighborhood and she was constantly harassed by cops ...it may have been loitering and the law may have changed over the years but she was charged with something and it wasn't prostitution or theft
You CAN be arrested for just about doing anything but the likelihood of that happening is pretty low because the cops know that they will get their asses sued if they harass people who are just "walking down the street".
As always when you get information second hand there may be bits and pieces that are left out or disclosed in such a way as to make the party look better. Why was your Mom's GF constantly harassed by cops? Was she a SW? Was she a user? Was she hanging out in places where they congregate? These are rhetorical questions. I'm simply pointing out that you shouldn't always believe what someone tells you happened to someone else.
this incident did happen when I was a child but I still distrust the cops.
I have heard from many people that things were very different in the early eighties.
women had to have their boyfriends out of the house by midnight if they were on welfare or their children where taken away
I am in my twenties so this happened before my time but I do believe this discussion board is for everyone and one of you is already wrong about the law when you told me that audiotaping was illegal. If you guys don't live in the South, or are attorneys in the South I should be allowed my two cents b/c I have many friends who have gotten away w/ murder and then I have friends who can't do anything w/o being arrested b/c it is who you know more than what you know and selective prosecution is very popular in the South.
A 6th generation southern gentleman rarely gets any trouble from the law compared to non-christians, non-whites, females, and gays. I think that if jurors remembered this at every trial and voted accordingly, we would end selective prosecution and big brother laws like the ones against gambling and prostitution
What I said was that taping the conversation would be considered a crime here in California. I am right about that, and there are sections of the California Penal Code which explicitly make such taping a crime unless either EVERYONE being taped knows they are being recorded or those who don't know have no reason to consider the conversation private.
No one has denied that you have a right to express your opinions. What we have done is urged you to voluntarily stop before someone gets hurt. I shouldn't be telling sick people what treatment they need or telling construction crewa how to build an office tower, because I wouldn't know what I was talking about. If I gave such advice and someone followed it, people could be hurt or killed. The same is true for you. You shouldn't be telling people how to protect their rights, because at least for now you don't know what you are talking about.
I think you mentioned in one of your posts that you have a "pre-law degree." I'm not sure what classes you took to get that degree, but your present understanding of the law is really terrible. I'm sure you are smart enough to learn it well, but you haven't done that yet and you shouldn't be advising people until you have.
"I have heard from many people that things were very different in the early eighties.
women had to have their boyfriends out of the house by midnight if they were on welfare or their children where taken away"
This is a national board so whatever your local rules were back 20+ years ago really have no bearing anywheres else. I don't know what South Carolina did or did not require welfare mom's to do back then but neither do you since you are getting this secondhand - just like all your other stories.
Good grief. If your name is on the lease your ultimately responsible for rent and any damage. If the apartment becomes an apartment of disrepute, your a target for prosecution and proving that you knew and assisted the enterprise (you knew the nature of her business and signed the lease) is not farfetched. Your reputation within the community may take a hit as well. In any event, I look forward to hearing how you explain your name on the lease to your spouse.
GFE my ass. I'd call it a train wreck in slow motion experience.
I certainly would not, unless the woman is known to my entire circle of friends and family. Even then, you would need a great reason why you are signing the agreement for your family.
The risk to you is far too great.
There is a lot of risk (you would be legally responsible for the dwelling -- rent, damages, illegal activity) for what appears to be little upside, other than a small savings. Don't do it.
Please, start thinking with the big head. I'm no lawyer, but even if you're not legally liable for her actions such as "operating a house of prostitution" you are most definitely liable financially. One other thing to consider, if she is ever arrested, the police will almost certainly be contacting you as your name is on the lease. Legal ramifications aside, are you prepared to explain to your family why the police are calling you?
Don't do it! Don't do it! Don't do it! Now ask me how I really feel.
Please tell me you aren't serious. Really. You want to sign a rental agreement for a provider so that you can get a longer GFE with a discount and you have a family? Girlfriend's stuff must be pure platinum inside and out. I am not hear to judge you but please think with your big head. Think this out very carefully. Better yet, ask yourself this exact question but say it out loud and see how it sounds to you.
Right on point.
1. She gets busted, the police see your name on the list, you know she's seeing guys in the apartment; an aggressive DA might decide you're operating or abetting the operation of a house of prostitution.
2. A client gets rough with her, or complains of being ripped off. See the above.
3. She skips out owing rent, you're on the hook for the unpaid balance.
In each of these cases, the police or the landlord will come directly to you, most likely at your home. Are you beginning to see the picture here?
-if she has bad credit might be several months in advance, but at least it keeps your name off the lease - and you can always let her earn the deposit back
Just one thought! Are you out of your Freekin mind???
I'll join in the chorus of those advising against it.
I think most posts have ignored or only briefly mentioned what would to me be the most significant risks.
I should say first that I fully agree with Sidone's advice. You'd do very well to ignore wannarideher's latest anecdotal advice which entirely mis-states the law, no matter how well intentioned she may be.
What I'd be most worried about if I were you, though, is the damage that signing this lease could do to your credit. If she stops paying, intentionally or otherwise, *you* will be liable for the rent, and it is your credit that will suffer if the landlord chooses to report the failure to pay to credit bureaus.
Short version, this is a phenomenally bad idea.