The new definition of prostitution is commercial sex. That is found in Black Law's dictionary.
“Expose. v. To show publicly, to display, “ -Black Law’s dictionary 6th edition.
The word “to sale” means to offer. So the root meaning of the word prostitution is “to be in a determined position to show publicly to offer.”
Latin meaning of words are legally binding on the legal system (ex. Pro Se, writs of habeas corpus).
Since state law uses the word “prostitution”, the law is in context of a person who has a determined position to show publicly an offer.
Once the person is determine position to show publicly and the act of offering sex or entering into an agreement for sex for pay the act becomes prostitution. The only way a person can show publicly is there another person who is a public person.
If two private person and one offer sex for pay in private, the offer is showed in private so the offer is private. The prostitution laws don’t apply because it is out of context of the Latin meaning that is binding on the legal system. The prostitution laws are in the context of a public show not a private show.
After hobbyist went on a date with an escort for one hour, the escort and the hobbyist becomes a private persons. So if private persons exchange money or things of value in private, the state laws on prostitution don’t apply because the act is out of context of the state law. Anything of value being exchanged for sex act between two private persons in private is considered private sexual intimacy not prostitution.
The court case Bergen v Wood 14 Cal.App.4th 854 (1993) supports my legal theory. This case declares a sexual relationship that has companionship as a collateral is not prostitution even if there is evidence of monetary payment. Duane Wood and Birgit Bergen became private persons when they engage in social companionship together. The social companionship transforms them from public persons to private persons.
If there is a sex for pay agreement in private between the private escort and the private hobbyist, the act is not prostitution because there was no public offer. Since it is not prostitution, it will qualify for Lawrence Texas Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) protections.
Lawrence v Texas doesn’t cover public sex acts which include public sale of sex (prostitution).
What happen in State v. Green 989 N.E.2d 1088 was that he did not dated the undercover cop when he offered sex for pay. If he of dated the undercover cop for one hour and made his offer for sex for pay in private, Lawrence v Texas would of cover his ass. His ass got burned because he offer sex for pay to a stranger. A stranger is a public person in the show.
In order to convict someone for prostitution, the prosecutor must prove there is a public offer or public agreement. A public offer or agreement is only can be made when the offer or agreement in a context of a public show. A public show requires one public person.
Disclaimer: Not legal advice. Just Legal Theories.
The word prostitution means in Latin means to “expose to sale” and “stand.” Stand means determined position.
“Expose. v. To show publicly, to display, “ -Black Law’s dictionary 6th edition.
The word “to sale” means to offer. So the root meaning of the word prostitution is “to be in a determined position to show publicly to offer.”
Latin meaning of words are legally binding on the legal system (ex. Pro Se, writs of habeas corpus).
Since state law uses the word “prostitution”, the law is in context of a person who has a determined position to show publicly an offer.
Once the person is determine position to show publicly and the act of offering sex or entering into an agreement for sex for pay the act becomes prostitution. The only way a person can show publicly is there another person who is a public person.
If two private person and one offer sex for pay in private, the offer is showed in private so the offer is private. The prostitution laws don’t apply because it is out of context of the Latin meaning that is binding on the legal system. The prostitution laws are in the context of a public show not a private show.
After hobbyist went on a date with an escort for one hour, the escort and the hobbyist becomes a private persons. So if private persons exchange money or things of value in private, the state laws on prostitution don’t apply because the act is out of context of the state law. Anything of value being exchanged for sex act between two private persons in private is considered private sexual intimacy not prostitution.
The court case Bergen v Wood 14 Cal.App.4th 854 (1993) supports my legal theory. This case declares a sexual relationship that has companionship as a collateral is not prostitution even if there is evidence of monetary payment. Duane Wood and Birgit Bergen became private persons when they engage in social companionship together. The social companionship transforms them from public persons to private persons.
If there is a sex for pay agreement in private between the private escort and the private hobbyist, the act is not prostitution because there was no public offer. Since it is not prostitution, it will qualify for Lawrence Texas Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) protections.
Lawrence v Texas doesn’t cover public sex acts which include public sale of sex (prostitution).
What happen in State v. Green 989 N.E.2d 1088 was that he did not dated the undercover cop when he offered sex for pay. If he of dated the undercover cop for one hour and made his offer for sex for pay in private, Lawrence v Texas would of cover his ass. His ass got burned because he offer sex for pay to a stranger. A stranger is a public person in the show.
In order to convict someone for prostitution, the prosecutor must prove there is a public offer or public agreement. A public offer or agreement is only can be made when the offer or agreement in a context of a public show. A public show requires one public person.
Disclaimer: Not legal advice. Just Legal Theories
Let do some legal word play. For example Rhode Island’s Prostitution laws.
§ 11-34.1-2 Prostitution ( Latin ones that in a determined position to show publicly an offer (public show) ). – (a) A person is guilty of prostitution when such person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee. Any person found guilty under this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six (6) months, or to a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both.
If the sex for pay offer is in a private show, this law doesn’t apply. Why? The state law is communicating when they use the word prostitution to mean in the context of someone who is in a public show not a private show. If the legal system doesn’t recognizes Latin root meaning, a defendant can tell the judge that he doesn’t recognizes Pro Se, writs of habeas corpus, writs of mandamus, writs of certiorari, etc
The state’s prostitution laws are in the context of public sale. I did some more research on the Latin usage. The Latin meaning is” stand to make visible to the public attempt to sell”. So when the state statutes uses this word ”prostitution” it constrict it to public sale. It doesn’t apply to private sale of sex. Private sale of sex is not in context of the true meaning the state’s definition of prostitution.
If you put sexually suggestive advertisement like BBBJ, CBJ, (GFE. maybe), etc., the prostitution laws can apply to you because you make a public offer.
If you don’t put these on your ads and you render companionship before the sale, the sale is private.
Lawrence v Texas deals with private sexual conduct. It doesn’t deal with public sale of sex or public display of sex acts, or sex in public locations.
If you don’t point it out to the legal system, they will keep misapplying these statutes to private conduct between consenting adults. The reason is we let them due to ignorance of the true meaning of words.
The state’s prostitution laws are in the context of public sale. I did some more research on the Latin usage. The Latin meaning is” stand to make visible to the public attempt to sell”. So when the state statutes uses this word ”prostitution” the statutes is restricted to public sale. It doesn’t apply to private sale of sex. Private sale of sex is not in context of the true meaning the state’s definition of prostitution.
If you put sexually suggestive advertisement like BBBJ, CBJ, etc., the prostitution laws apply to you because you make a public offer.
Lawrence v Texas deals with private sexual conduct. It doesn’t deal with public sale of sex or public display of sex acts, or sex in public locations.
If you don’t point it out to the legal system, they will keep misapplying these statutes to private conduct between consenting adults. The reason is we let them due to ignorance of the true meaning of words.
The new definition of prostitution is commercial sex. That is found in Black Law's dictionary.
“Expose. v. To show publicly, to display, “ -Black Law’s dictionary 6th edition.
The word “to sale” means to offer. So the root meaning of the word prostitution is “to be in a determined position to show publicly to offer.”
Latin meaning of words are legally binding on the legal system (ex. Pro Se, writs of habeas corpus).
Since state law uses the word “prostitution”, the law is in context of a person who has a determined position to show publicly an offer.
Once the person is determine position to show publicly and the act of offering sex or entering into an agreement for sex for pay the act becomes prostitution. The only way a person can show publicly is there another person who is a public person.
If two private person and one offer sex for pay in private, the offer is showed in private so the offer is private. The prostitution laws don’t apply because it is out of context of the Latin meaning that is binding on the legal system. The prostitution laws are in the context of a public show not a private show.
After hobbyist went on a date with an escort for one hour, the escort and the hobbyist becomes a private persons. So if private persons exchange money or things of value in private, the state laws on prostitution don’t apply because the act is out of context of the state law. Anything of value being exchanged for sex act between two private persons in private is considered private sexual intimacy not prostitution.
The court case Bergen v Wood 14 Cal.App.4th 854 (1993) supports my legal theory. This case declares a sexual relationship that has companionship as a collateral is not prostitution even if there is evidence of monetary payment. Duane Wood and Birgit Bergen became private persons when they engage in social companionship together. The social companionship transforms them from public persons to private persons.
If there is a sex for pay agreement in private between the private escort and the private hobbyist, the act is not prostitution because there was no public offer. Since it is not prostitution, it will qualify for Lawrence Texas Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) protections.
Lawrence v Texas doesn’t cover public sex acts which include public sale of sex (prostitution).
What happen in State v. Green 989 N.E.2d 1088 was that he did not dated the undercover cop when he offered sex for pay. If he of dated the undercover cop for one hour and made his offer for sex for pay in private, Lawrence v Texas would of cover his ass. His ass got burned because he offer sex for pay to a stranger. A stranger is a public person in the show.
In order to convict someone for prostitution, the prosecutor must prove there is a public offer or public agreement. A public offer or agreement is only can be made when the offer or agreement in a context of a public show. A public show requires one public person.
Disclaimer: Not legal advice. Just Legal Theories.
Social companion is found in the secret cannon. The court cases that I cited were based on the cannon.
I did not got the new definition until today. It doesn't change my legal theory.