You are not the first to consider this, nor will you be the last, but they are called laws for a reason and you cannot "Rube Goldberg" your away around illegality.
Rochester PD assisted. Names included in article so I can't post the link
GOOGLE: Owatonna Sex Trafficking
It made the news about a week ago. Friends told me about it last night. Articles say PD is training the local hotels on how to spot prostitution
...have been involved. All 3, however, refer to these standard, typical LE stings as sex trafficking but there's nothing to support that the imaginary women who were used to entice innocent, norrmal every day working Joes were being trafficked by imaginary pimps. Have the media become so brain washed that any normal Solicitation of Prostitution charge is referred to as sex trafficking?! Where's their journalistic integrity? All of these news reporters should be fired for not doing their due diligence and rooting out the facts before reporting such lies.
These stings appeared to be a lazy and futile approach to combat sex trafficking. Going after the demand isn't going to do it. They should put more effort on the the suppliers, i.e. pimps, instead.
Its only illegal when you exchange money or something of value for sex. It seems to me that there ought to be a way around that issue which would then make it legal.
I've not researched this, but perhaps something like using bitcoins and having the transaction take place in a foreign country but verifiable. Maybe some kind of escrow service that is in a foreign jurisdiction.
I'm confident that with a bit of out-of-the-box thinking that you could get around the laws. I can almost guarantee there is a loophole somewhere
I've not researched this, but perhaps something like using bitcoins and having the transaction take place in a foreign country but verifiable.
You just read that the transaction would take place in another country under laws outside of the U.S. using a form of currency that for the most part is anonymous and difficult to track.
As I tried to convey...it would take some research and I cited that example only to get the thought process rolling but didn't mean it to be interpreted as the definitive solution.
I have to wonder, if a 3rd party received my money and they paid the provider would that be considered an exchange of money from me to her for sex or could it be presented under another umbrella?
I think the connection between money and sex needs to be obfuscated in some way -- making it difficult to prosecute.
The example you suggest would move the crime from a Minnesota misdemeanor to a Federal felony.
Agreeing to exchange anything of value in exchange for a sex act is prostitution and illegal period, end of sentence.
Minnesota Statute 609.321:
Subd. 9.Prostitution. "Prostitution" means hiring, offering to hire, or agreeing to hire another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact, or being hired, offering to be hired, or agreeing to be hired by another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact.
Notice it doesn't say "money", it could be an offer of travel, shopping or anything of value.
Subd. 9.Prostitution. "Prostitution" means hiring, offering to hire, or agreeing to hire another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact, or being hired, offering to be hired, or agreeing to be hired by another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact.
Notice it doesn't say "money", it could be an offer of travel, shopping or anything of value.
But I don't think you're following.... My post had nothing to do with what was exchanged. My post was about thinking outside the box. For example, if I pay Egor over in Russia $305. Egor keeps $5 for his trouble and sends $300 to lovely Portia (whom I've never met). Perhaps he sends it to her bank account located in Slovania. Portia and I meet up a week later and have sex. Did I pay for sex? Can it be proven I did? What about if the bank account in Slovania is under an alias?
My point has nothing to do with specific examples. Rather...I'm just suggesting that with some clever thought I'll bet there is a way around the whole legality thing.
By the way, I've never seen an escort.
See my post above.
You are not the first to consider this, nor will you be the last, but they are called laws for a reason and you cannot "Rube Goldberg" your away around illegality.
Although, a criminal conviction does rest on the production of specific pieces of evidence of a transaction or an agreement to a transaction. There definitely are ways around that, not that I'm going to flaunt them here.
If you are arrested for the crime of seeing a prostitute. The only chance you have is that LE made mistakes in the process of gathering evidence and/or getting you to link sex act with compensation. If you think you are going to finagle a end run around the officers, remember that they have busted dozens of Johns. It is your first trip to that rodeo.
That, however misses the larger point. The 20 gentlemen busted in Albert Lea and Owatonna have had the information of their arrest ensconced in perpetuity on the internet.
Your problem at that point is reputational rather than legal. Even if (a big if) you are successful at fighting the charge, the information is still out there. The best, and lowest cost, path available to you at this point is something called an Alford plea. This means you don't technically plead guilty, but admit that LE has sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction. You pay the relevant fine and keep your private parts away from prostitutes for a year or two. You then petition to have your record expunged.
If you are married at the time, you probably won't be for long. That is the expensive part.
You then work the internet to drive you name to a third or fourth page of a Google search so a perspective employer doesn't see it
Thank you for that post and hitting the nail on the head at where the damage really gets done - which is getting your name in the paper. The accusation alone is what is most damaging.
The term "human trafficking" irks me as it does others on this thread. It just sounds more dramatic for media reporting purposes.
I can see why though, I mean everyone knows Albert Lea and Owatonna are basically the sex trafficking epicenters of the USA.
That, however misses the larger point. The 20 gentlemen busted in Albert Lea and Owatonna have had the information of their arrest ensconced in perpetuity on the internet.
Your problem at that point is reputational rather than legal. Even if (a big if) you are successful at fighting the charge, the information is still out there. The best, and lowest cost, path available to you at this point is something called an Alford plea. This means you don't technically plead guilty, but admit that LE has sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction. You pay the relevant fine and keep your private parts away from prostitutes for a year or two. You then petition to have your record expunged.
If you are married at the time, you probably won't be for long. That is the expensive part.
You then work the internet to drive you name to a third or fourth page of a Google search so a perspective employer doesn't see it.
No law is perfect. Online off-shore casinos are a case in point.
I had hoped that there might be some intelligent discourse and thinking outside the box that might lead to some interesting discussions but I see that'ts not the case. Its the same ol' doom and gloom story.
Book TV talk shows?? Sheesh, what a fucktard. You posted that you have not even participated in this hobby, yet you want to give us advice????? When the average guy (or gal) is busted it creates havoc in their lives. Many of the players here are married. Being arrested means big trouble in the marriage and many lose jobs. I'm assisting 2 men right now who had their arrests publicized and are now in divorce proceedings and one has lost his job and car.
So maybe it's just a curiosity for you CuriousSort, but to many here being busted is dead serious and IS NOT a game. Not "doom and gloom", but real consequences to be avoided.
Actually, I'd book some TV talk shows to discuss how I was falsely arrested for prostitution when I had booked an hour of an escort's time to interview her for the book I'm writing on prostitution in America.
No law is perfect. Online off-shore casinos are a case in point.
I had hoped that there might be some intelligent discourse and thinking outside the box that might lead to some interesting discussions but I see that'ts not the case. Its the same ol' doom and gloom story.
So maybe it's just a curiosity for you CuriousSort, but to many here being busted is dead serious and IS NOT a game. Not "doom and gloom", but real consequences to be avoided.
Actually, I'd book some TV talk shows to discuss how I was falsely arrested for prostitution when I had booked an hour of an escort's time to interview her for the book I'm writing on prostitution in America.
No law is perfect. Online off-shore casinos are a case in point.
I had hoped that there might be some intelligent discourse and thinking outside the box that might lead to some interesting discussions but I see that'ts not the case. Its the same ol' doom and gloom story.
Man....I see I had way too high of expectations for any semblance of an intelligent conversation. Should have known better given where I'm posting. Not one person here remotely understood the point. I'll leave it at that. I'm done with this conversation.
veryone understood your point
Everyone understood your point.
Incorrect. One person (not you) understood. The rest of you didn't even come close. It was pathetic, actually. No insult intended...just the truth.
If you had understood the point....you might have actually brainstormed and come up with something to contribute. For example, is it possible a church could be established where sex is part of the means of worship and the "donation" is a donation to the church? Essentially, a brothel but perhaps shielded by separation of church and state and laws that enable people to worship as they see fit. That's an example of thinking outside the box. Not saying it would work to set up a church, just saying that's an example of something someone could have shared as part of an interesting discussion
Nothing I said had anything to do with an individual fighting the system. I was alluding to changing the way the entire business works and exploring means that it might be able to be done making it impossible for anyone to be prosecuted. That's thinking outside the box. Show me one post on this thread where someone contributed an idea? Correct...now you get the point
...just look at what happened a few years ago with the Temple Goddesses in Phoenix. They used the approach you are suggesting but it didn't work out so well for the true believers. Not saying the ladies lives were exactly ruined but trying to restart your life as an early 40ish sex offender has to really suck. Wasn't that the premise of the David Koresh / Waco sex deviants? Send me all your money and your daughters and we shall dwell in an earthbound Utopia? Didn't work out so well for them either.
So, hun, really all of us understood but you're the one not gettin' it:
https://youtu.be/urNFQw8VIvA
Any time we free thinkers try to come up with a societally friendly way to get our dicks tickled, our fucktard liberal, moderate and conservative leaders ( HA! ) write laws and regulations that thwart it.
You're not creative and you haven't proposed any 'thinking outside of the box' ideas to this forum. It seems like you're about 20 to 30 years behind the curve of ideas that just might work. LOL! This is not a new concept, this sex for pay thing, that you've recently discovered and lack the balls to experience.
You said you were done with this conversation so, why are you still trying to convince the savvy members of this board that they're closed minded on this issue when they're simply pragmatic? You're insincere and not trustworthy. The way around the laws has already been figured out through verification methods and verification services.
If you have to defend one of your statements by saying, "no insult intended" then you're really saying that the insult was explicitly intended, otherwise, you would have tempered your thoughts and expressed your idea in a way that wouldn't come across as potentially insulting.
Just accept the fact that you have nothing new and innovative to add to this issue that hasn't been thunk of before and stop insulting other people when they point out things that were tried but didn't work out so well. Please try to get up to speed with the rest of us so we no longer have to laugh at your pathetic insults. And remember to ...
'Relax....it's just sex!'
-- Modified on 4/29/2015 1:11:12 AM
So, hun, really all of us understood but you're the one not gettin' it:
https://youtu.be/urNFQw8VIvA
Any time we free thinkers try to come up with a societally friendly way to get our dicks tickled, our fucktard liberal, moderate and conservative leaders ( HA! ) write laws and regulations that thwart it.
You're not creative and you haven't proposed any 'thinking outside of the box' ideas to this forum. It seems like you're about 20 to 30 years behind the curve of ideas that just might work. LOL! This is not a new concept, this sex for pay thing, that you've recently discovered and lack the balls to experience.
You said you were done with this conversation so, why are you still trying to convince the savvy members of this board that they're closed minded on this issue when they're simply pragmatic? You're insincere and not trustworthy. The way around the laws has already been figured out through verification methods and verification services.
If you have to defend one of your statements by saying, "no insult intended" then you're really saying that the insult was explicitly intended, otherwise, you would have tempered your thoughts and expressed your idea in a way that wouldn't come across as potentially insulting.
Just accept the fact that you have nothing new and innovative to add to this issue that hasn't been thunk of before and stop insulting other people when they point out things that were tried but didn't work out so well. Please try to get up to speed with the rest of us so we no longer have to laugh at your pathetic insults. And remember to ...
'Relax....it's just sex!'
-- Modified on 4/29/2015 1:11:12 AM
You are not the first to consider this, nor will you be the last, but they are called laws for a reason and you cannot "Rube Goldberg" your away around illegality.
Name one John who has beat the rap on a prostitution bust.
Even if you win, you lose, because then it is published that you beat the charge.
If busted, STFU and get the case adjudicated as quietly as possible.
I agree with your premise Uptonogood. Curious is being a fucktard and eveyone played into him/her. But regarding your post 99.9% of those arrested for P4P will not be able to adjudicate in a quiet manner. The prosecutors have no reason to allow that to happen. You would have to spend literally tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees and more than a year of your life going to court dates to come close to a conclusion like that. And that's if you STFU which the average person can't understand when face to face with a boy or girl in blue. Just wait until a bi-partisan coalition of Senators and Representatives quietly pass a bill to make the rest of our civil liberties illegal. Fighting a felony is a bitch yo.
...however. I think you'd have a better chance of just showing up at her place with 200 or 300 real roses in assorted colors. That should outsmart them.
Just like there is no "LE check" that will keep anyone safe. In modern times you can't exchange anything of value without there being a trail that will be used against you in a court of "law".
Two other thoughts:
1. I would be happy to be your Egor. I'll hold on to that $305 for ya
2. You should really see an escort. It's great fun.
You want to be legal about it?
All you have to do is go to SD get a quickie marriage license and then have it annulled after the appointment is finished.
Let them try and prosecute that.
I've not researched this, but perhaps something like using bitcoins and having the transaction take place in a foreign country but verifiable. Maybe some kind of escrow service that is in a foreign jurisdiction.
I'm confident that with a bit of out-of-the-box thinking that you could get around the laws. I can almost guarantee there is a loophole somewhere.
I was just mentioning how the media is over using the word "trafficking" . I feel the same way.
The link is to the US Senate that just passed a trafficking bill that equates prostitution with trafficking and will give the feds and local LE much more enforcement power and federal money. It's not the news reports that are the problem imo, it is that the laws are blurring the line. The intent is to make prostitution busts potential felonies. We all want real trafficking laws to stop actual trafficking, but the breadth and scope of this new law and how it will be used against us has to be a concern for everyone in P4P. I have posted on this topic before and was told, "isn't going to happen". Guess what? If this law is signed by the Prez (and He says he supports it) then we will see its effects filter down to the local level in time.
It's wrongheaded, but no politician has the guts to say so, prosecutors can't wait to charge more with felonies and judges are almost gleeful in supporting using the trafficking laws to stop consensual adult P4P.
The bottom line is that the civvies think all women in this business are victims and all of us men are victimizers. They get told this by the thumpers on the right AND the woman's groups on the left. Take a look at some of the other countries that are pulling back from legal prostitution. In many countries where prostitution was legal, the laws have been changing due to pressure from womens rights groups, so now it is only legal for a woman to offer sex for $ but it is a crime for a man to pay. The trend is called the "Nordic Model" and is not friendly to P4P. Canada is the latest country to move away from legal prostitution to line up with the Nordic Model.
Not trying to be gloomy today, but facts are facts. Be careful out there. Diligence, research and screening have never been more important.
-- Modified on 4/24/2015 3:53:55 PM
have reasonably good info that the clients believed they were coming to see minors
IF true than the busts would be deserved but I'd like to see the ads or whatever drew them in. Even BP requires ages to be posted. Agreed that BP doesn't check ages, but how would a provider think that the providers were minors if the age shows otherwise?
...under age solicitation of a minor. That still doesn't equate to sex trafficking, tho since the 'girl' never existed to begin with. It's still a standard LE sting, no trafficking involved.
1) Yes
2) Gone
Neither of the stings mentioned had anything to do with trafficking. These are run of the mill busts of Johns showing up at hotels.
The task force that offers the training gets money from the Feds to combat trafficking. Thus they make ordinary busts, label them trafficking and keep the grant money.
The basic law in Minnesota has not changed, at least not yet.
But legislatures are focusing on the demand side of pay for play and calling all enforcement actions fighting trafficking.
Everyone here is safe. No one exchanges money of something of value for sex. It's time and companionship!!!
Transaction declined
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
We thank you for your purchase!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!