Yes, but how about if you are sure you are seeing a recognized and reviewed agency person, or a highly reviewed person, one with a long history of reviews? And you do not state you are trading anything for anything? What can anyone say if they just see you entering the room? What can they do, does anyone with a legal background know?
Say I meet a known person/provider in a hotel, and dont discuss the exchange of anything for anything. I just show up there and visit. What can anyone say about it? Nothing is offered, nothing is promised, we just visit for as much time as we want. I think this is pretty iron clad. Any comments....
Two people don't just show up together in a hotel room by accident and start swapping spit among other bodily fluids with or without some kind of scheme behind it.
If there is any suggestion that something of value is being traded for said activities, and one of those people is LE, then the jig is up.
(still not a lawyer)
Yes, but how about if you are sure you are seeing a recognized and reviewed agency person, or a highly reviewed person, one with a long history of reviews? And you do not state you are trading anything for anything? What can anyone say if they just see you entering the room? What can they do, does anyone with a legal background know?
and regular handle on the same thread.
But anyhoo...
If you see a very well established provider, the odds of being bagged are extremely low, but not zero as some providers have been known to "flip" after being snagged somewhere else and start abetting LE.
Now, if they only see you enter a room, there's no crime in that. If she however is working for LE, you're toast as she'll claim it was P4P and you know that courts often take LE's word over yours. In any case, even if you win at trial, you are still publicly embarrassed and have to shell out five figures for a defense attorney.
If the whole thought of getting caught is so upsetting to you, I will suggest that this hobby is not your bag.
There are a few lawyers who occasionally visit this board. Maybe they'll have something to add
It's a rather common tactic of LE, in order to get probable cause to "kick in her door" LE will wait for an unsuspecting john to leave her incall, grab him and start making all sorts of threats about arresting him, plastering his picture all over the news, etc etc, and by the time they are done the poor slob starts confessing to having stolen the chalk from his third grade class.
The truth of the matter is, LE can't do shit to you for entering or leaving a room. If this ever happens to you, do NOT lie, but ask if they suspect you of committing a crime, if not then ask to leave, if so, then exercise your constitutional rights to have a lawyer present before answering any questions, AND ask if you are under arrest. Obviously you will not be under arrest at that point as they have nothing to charge you with, so repeat your request to go about your business.
As long as you keep your wits about you and don't start pissing your pants like so many do when face to face with LE, you should have nothing to worry about. Cops rarely make arrests when they know they have ZERO chance of the DA or ADA even filing charges, much less getting a conviction as it looks bad on their record. ZERO evidence combined with a suspect fully aware of his rights and unwilling to waive them means a zero chance of a conviction. The cops will simply "toss you back" and wait for a more malleable Victim to scare into confessing.
"Do not talk to the Police". It IS a crime to lie to them. It's not a crime to exert your rights. You will be required to correctly identify yourself (in my state they can hold you 72 hours for not identifying yourself) so LE can id you. It is your right to not answer questions or consent to any searches. LE has the right to pat you down for weapons & anything in plain view.
Nobody has ever talked there way out of a bust. Lots of folks talk their way into being busted.
Useful guidance, courtesy of "VICE.com"
Here is the second part, where the veteran detective responds to the law professor's remarks. In summary, he says "everything Professor Duane said is correct. That's what I do."
I read an article sometime back that had a creative idea on getting around the legal issues. Whereas paying for sex is illegal in almost every state, it isn't illegal to make adult porn. So this guy set up a business with multiple rooms, each with a camera on a tripod. Guys would come in and pick an "actress" from amongst the ladies at the establishment, go back to a room and then "direct" the lady for the film. Once the "business" was done, the guy walks out having paid for a film, not for sex acts and no crime had been committed. Great stuff!
In order to "make adult porn", you need two things: a pornography production license that's not easy to obtain, and the video must be for sale to the public. If these two conditions aren't met, it's still illegal, presumably on more counts than the ones we usually worry about. To add insult to the injury, many pornography companies require a man to bring a woman with him if he wants to audition. I'm sure that's meant to thwart the stereotypical hobbyist from obtaining sex by means of auditioning for porn. (Otherwise, lines of men wishing to audition would be out the door and around the block.)
~not a lawyer
Think about zoning restrictions, safety regulations, accounting, etc.
The list is almost endless. There's no way to get around the legal aspects of this hobby
I didn't say the guy got away with it forever. In fact, I believe it only became a story because the government finally shut him down. And, if memory serves, it was due to zoning issues. Much like a gangster getting busted for tax evasion, they always find a way!
Both the clients and providers are arrested all the time for just showing up for an appointment. Havent you heard "End The Demand is Here"
https://newrepublic.com/article/130803/shame-game
They charge the providers with suspicion of prostitution, and they charge the clients with intent or soliciting. They don't seem to care if the case is dismissed, as long as they can ruin people's lives.
This is why people should be supporting ESPLER v GASCON which appeal was filed on Fri Oct 30th 2016, and has a disabled client as a plantiff in the case.