Re: Yeah, It's Dead. But........

Sometimes you have to beat it long after it's dead in order to make it tender enough to swallow.  

Look at the post below.  Do you think those five women now wish that they had screened better?  Most of the screening posts and threads are easily identifiable.  If you don't want join in beating the poor, dead equine, then skip over.

Screening is essential.  Can't talk enough about it.

you will get responses that are confusing at best bc you have not distinguished between offenses.

          Engaging in sex for a fee, agreeing to engage in sex for a fee, or offering to engage in sex for a fee are  all distinct crimes in Massachusetts with distinct elements needed to convict. LE may arrest for any of these crimes without a warrant if the officer has “reasonable cause” to believe the defendant has committed those crimes.

         There is certainly no requirement that the defendant explicitly offer, or explicitly agree to pay for sex or provide sex, as a prerequisite for an arrest for any of these crimes, and strictly circumstantial evidence may always be used to arrest and convict.

       But this sort of begs the question since you are left wondering what other evidence could meet the reasonable cause standard. This would differ depending on which of the three crimes you are talking about.

        I’m going to address only the crimes of offering to engage in sex for a fee, and engaging in sex for a fee. If the arrest is for offering to engage in sex for a fee, I do not see how an officer could have reasonable  cause to make the arrest, unless there was some verbal, written, or other communication from the lady to the client, or to the world, from which an offer could be inferred. Somehow both sex and money, and sex for money, must be expressed in some way. They can’t arrest her for what she’s thinking.

       I don’t think a magistrate would find that the mere maintenance of a web site offering time for pay is an illegal offer, especially where the web site contains the “this is not an offer of prostitution” disclaimer.

      Many observers who contend, without qualification, that these disclaimers are worthless miss this point – the disclaimer should be effective to keep the web site alone from being treated as an illegal offer, unless the web site contains contradictory language or – and I have seen this from even the most articulate and loquacious lady on TER – if the lady makes a  post on the regional boards that can be construed to make such an explicit offer and links it to her web site. Not smart.

        So I think you are correct, for all practical purposes, that there must some discussion, or other communication about sex for money, if the crime is offering to provide sex for money.

      If the crime is engaging in sex for a fee, it is a completely different story. If officer learns that client has walked into a room, places in bathroom an envelope with money that just happens to match lady’s hourly fee, and lady and client have sex, he most certainly can arrest both of you even though no discussion of sex or money between the two of you ever took place. “Officer I was just paying for her time and she just happened to really like me” is not going to save you from arrest in this situation. The law penalizes what you do and not how you label it.

       But that’s just my view. You should consult a licensed Mass atty for a legal opinion.