You must say that "I am exercising my 5th amendment right to remain silent." Keep saying it and "I want a lawyer" Just keeping silent without saying you are remaining silent and exercising your rights, can be viewed as guilt. This will not stop the cops from asking you more questions and trying to bait you into saying something. They CAN and WILL lie to you. The good cop/bad cop tactic is still used. Because it works. Open your mouth and I guarantee you will go to jail. The only chance you have is to exercise you right to remain silent. Cops don't care if you are innocent or guilty. To them, everyone is guilty and you are nothing more than paperwork and a possible overtime bump in their paycheck.
Looking for opinions on this. I always ask every provider I contact for the first time the following question when scheduling.
"Your fee is for your time and your time only correct?"
Many ladies have told me that they felt more comfortable seeing me because I made that statement while one accused me of trying to entrap her with that statement.
While I realize that me asking that question isn't a magical panacea against arrest or prosecution, I do feel it sets up an affirmative defense as it shows I didn't walk into the situation expecting to trade money for sex.
I also realize that every state has differing laws regarding this but I was wondering what the group think on this is
(still not a barrista)
an intentional conspiracy to commit an illegal act. Plus, why would you ever use the word "fee"? Why not some idiotic euphemism like "roses"? I'm sure that any reasonable judge or jury that hears that you merely offered 800 roses for two hours of someone's time would conclude that nothing nasty was happening.
I see it differently. Yes I have knowledge of that law and would by that statement be looking to not violate it. A fee paid for time is not illegal here in AZ (with the exception of one city) so using that term to me doesn't denote any illegal intention. Of course that's just my opinion.
s/he will burrow in on all the details especially why you felt you needed to confirm the fee was for time only to begin with. S/he will want to know what other services you were intentionally excluding by your statement. S/he will want to know why the provider's time only was worth the fee, and whether there is any well known market for similar time-only services. Just seems to me that the less said about any fee, donation, roses, honorarium, or move-in fee (ha ha) is the better. What I'm really driving at is that judges and prosecutors are not going to mince around playing word games in this type of case, and they are going to focus on the common sense interpretation of the totality of the facts. We should not delude ourselves that we can thread some magic word-needle that no one else ever thought of.
-- Modified on 12/26/2014 5:04:09 PM
...ask the questions and if you STFU and ask for a lawyer, they can only prosecute you with the evidence they have gathered themselves. You have a First Amendment right not to help them prosecute you.
They may indeed decide to prosecute him but they also may decide there's not enough evidence and go for lower-hanging fruit, like your example of idiots who talk to cops and prosecutors.
You must say that "I am exercising my 5th amendment right to remain silent." Keep saying it and "I want a lawyer" Just keeping silent without saying you are remaining silent and exercising your rights, can be viewed as guilt. This will not stop the cops from asking you more questions and trying to bait you into saying something. They CAN and WILL lie to you. The good cop/bad cop tactic is still used. Because it works. Open your mouth and I guarantee you will go to jail. The only chance you have is to exercise you right to remain silent. Cops don't care if you are innocent or guilty. To them, everyone is guilty and you are nothing more than paperwork and a possible overtime bump in their paycheck.
While not an “affirmative defense”…sign…. it is evidence that no offer to exchange money for sex has been made. If the prior correspondence is also sex neutral and no contrary language or conduct occurs during the encounter, the DA would probably not prosecute this one as a solicitation.
If, however, sex occurs, it is pretty useless. What are you going to do- argue that a professional lady just happened to succumb to your charms while you were paying her for just her tiome? And that you were willing to pay $400 or more for her time? You really think you could sell that one to the jury. LOL.
And it would not provide much protection from an arrest. Remember Arizona is one of the few states that does not follow the misdemeanor arrest rule, which means you can be arrested without a warrant, even though the crime does not occur in the presence of the officer. If the cops are watching a known lady do incall and you are one of a train of guys entering and leaving the room, they may claim probable cause just from watching you enter and leave the room. So what actually happens in the room is not as important in Arizona as other states. Mandatory jail time for a first offense, ouch
i googled... No luck.
Would seem like all states would be like AZ.
It is just not evidence of anything illegal per se. Other statements or actions you do could be deemed to be illegal anyway, which would negate anything else you happened to say.
It is kind of like saying that you weren't robbing a bank at 9 am this morning. That in its self doesn't prove that you didn't rob the bank at another time. It is therefore not an affirmative defense to anything. It is just not an incriminating statement, that's all.
I am neither a barrista nor a barrister. But I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Try learning how to at least spell the damn word correctly before attempting to give legal advice, and BAD legal advice at that.
You and your OP are TSTTT, but I couldn't help but laugh at the irony of the fact that you can't even spell the word. Thanks for the laugh, but remember, we are laughing AT you, not with you. lmao
The Canucks spell defense as defence.
My kid was a defenseman here in the States....but in Toronto she was a defenceman.
Shit...she wasn't a man either...but that's a whole different post to discuss 
As for his defense, err defence...there is no argument. Anything he can say will be used against him.
Never a shortage of these types that thinks using twisted grammar will somehow exonerate them LOL
You and your OP are TSTTT, but I couldn't help but laugh at the irony of the fact that you can't even spell the word. Thanks for the laugh, but remember, we are laughing AT you, not with you. lmao
It just seemed so ironic that I had to point it out.
but as you said, there is no shortage of morons who think that they can't outsmart LE by use of code words and LE checks. lol
Congratulations! Conan welcomes you!