If they can prove..that money changed hands between the parties..this is a very big issue.
I still stick to the ground that unless proof (sworn statement..in this issue..a mood point..unless proof of money,phone calls,etc)
My understanding has been that you cannot be charged with prostitution based on another's affidavit. EG, an act of solicitation or prostitution must be witnessed by LE either in a sting or on tape.
http://www.oaoa.com/news/nw073004a.htm
Will authorities be able to charge the 73 men in this story based on the affidavits of the providers or are the warrants simply scare tactics?
Thanks,
JTH
The affidavits or testimony of the providers would not be hearsay. If Jane has a session with John and testifies to it, it is an eyewitness account. If Jane told Steve about it and Steve testified, Steve's testimony would be hearsay.
There is a separate issue about the affidavits. The prosecutor is probably using the affidavits at this point for probable cause to arrest the accused men. When they get to trial, the prosecutor will have to use live testimony because you can't cross examine an affidavit.
Sad situation.
Sorry, LawDoctor, but I think you blew it on this one. The six ladies arrested are all eyewitnesses. If they testify against the customers then the D.A. will have a solid case against each of them. I have no idea why you think possession has anything to do with the case at all.
If they can prove..that money changed hands between the parties..this is a very big issue.
I still stick to the ground that unless proof (sworn statement..in this issue..a mood point..unless proof of money,phone calls,etc)
I may have flunked Poli. Sci. but even I know it is Moot not "a mood point." The statement of the ladies are what can convict. It may actualy be a scare tact., but if one person folds it will work and people will get convicted.