5 years trying to sting - gave up and traced her cell phone to arrest Case study of LE stake out a companion - massage gal and crazy false charges
A long-time Phoenix area massage gal shared with me her crazy recent experience after being arrested. The antics of LE is typical of what I have heard from others, but she has contacted me wanted her story to get out to warn others. Obviously, no one should offer anything sexual for money - that is illegal.
It turns out LE had been trying to sting her for five years, but her screening was so good they could never set up an appointment. However, her ads indicate a general location. (Dave notes I hate ads, where I have no clue even what city gals are in our metro area, is so large. I'm not going to drive to Sun City or Gilbert no matter how great they seem since I live in North Phoenix!)
They watched her ads and found she visited another city. From this, they thought she was running a prostitution syndicate operation and upon return raided her home. She has always worked just alone for herself. The visit to another city was the probable cause.
LE over the five years made various calls to her cell phone trying to set up an appointment. When they made a call that started tracking her call signal moving closer and closer to real location each time until they identified the house.
They staked out home and when they say a man leave they were able to find where he worked by starting with his license plate and researching name to find out where he worked. This is unusual in that most of the time I have heard of stakeouts the do a traffic stop on the driver and scare him into admitting an illegal act.
Two days later, the police go to man's office to talk about his massage, and they could talk there or go to his home and ask questions in front of his wife and two teenagers. Guy said that he got a massage which was all he got, nothing illegal.
LE goes to a judge for a search warrant with probable cause had been watching for five years, showed her ads both in Phoenix and another city. Said probably had girls working for her around the country, probably underage, probably dealing drugs as well and working with pimps. Of course, none of this was true but judge signs off on a warrant.
She retained an attorney (one I recommended), who got police report which included her being totally cooperative, transparent and helpful with no indication of any prostitution syndicate. Officer recommenced a minimal or no charge.
Attorney worked with the prosecutor who agreed to drop all State charges and just charge with city charges.
At next conference, the prosecutor told companion with her attorney that he could hardly believe the city went to all this effort since it was a complete waste of time. Showed companion the charges including no establishment license, no massage license, and unlawful activity. If she rejected them all, they would not have a jury trial, but a judge would decide (and probably charge all 3). Asked her to pick one which they would agree to settle for a $750 fine. She chooses no establishment license.
At sentencing signed papers and judge said go directly to the pay window of the court, she didn't have to wait in line and simply pay the $750 or could set up in installments. She paid the $750.
She then had to go to the police property dept a week later to get back her massage table and appointment book they took for evidence. They had already given back her laptop.
The detective called her to warn her not to have any ad for massage for one-year in the city but could advertise anywhere else as long as not in their city.
Although it was a minor final charge she did think the retainer paid to the attorney (actually about three staff attorney's involved), it was worth it since they knew the system and helped clear the way with the city prosecutor.
Conclusion: Our tax dollars at work and wasted police effort spanning five years, going after a massage gal not having an establishment license!
...five years and hundreds of man hours on a one-woman operation.
The OP was wrong in several assertions - It's not up to the prosecutor whether or not there will be a jury trial. There's a pesky little ol' thing called the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States that guarantees the right to trial by jury (exceptions are made for infractions like traffic tickets). The judge does not decide which counts will be "charged." It's up to the prosecutor to bring the charges and then the judge or jury decides on the guilt or innocence. And the prosecutor doesn't allow the defendant to "pick" which of the three charges she will plead to. He's not Monty Hall showing her doors #1, 2 and 3. He offers her the opportunity to plead guilty or no contest to one charge in exchange for dropping the other two counts. Note to OP: Look up the word "hearsay." Don't post hearsay.
All the state charges were dropped so only the minor misdemeanor or civil charges were involved which do not require a jury trial in Arizona. It was like the TS case a few years ago of Monika charged with manifesting prostitution and there was no jury option. In some cases such as the Phoenix Goddess Temple, I believe a bench trial may have had better result vs our conservative juries since clearly there was no "fee arrangment., yet jury convicted after 5 years in the court system and over a $million of costs for court, officers, defenders court time and the SWAT raid on the Temple. 39 wonderful ladies mostly had to plea for felonies to avoid long prison time - Founder now in prison for 4.5 years after credit for time served during trial.
I know of many cases going after one-women. One massage gal from home raided by SWAT and her mother arrived with Pizza to the broken in door and faced guns pointed at her by SWAT (was in Chandler) The prosecutor does decide what gets charged, they are the ones that offer plea aggreements, the judge only has to agree. - almost 100% does.
"And the prosecutor doesn't allow the defendant to "pick" which of the three charges she will plead to. He's not Monty Hall showing her doors #1, 2 and 3. He offers her the opportunity to plead guilty or no contest to one charge in exchange for dropping the other two counts. " Here the prosecutor felt the chargers State major charges were outragious as did the arresting officer when they found she was no sex trafficker of other women etc. All the city charges were a $750 civil fine and he let her choose no establishment license.
None of this is hearsay. She met me at my home to discuss, I saw her legal papers and I referred to an industry friendly attorney. The information was directly from the massage gal sharing her experience and details directly with me and her lawyer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3FPleejIEg Unless you were there when she was busted, it's hearsay. When you HEAR what someone has to SAY about her arrest, it's "hearsay." Get it? As scoed's hooker said: "Cheese and crackers!!!"
The legal rule on jury trials is that it either has to involve an offense of moral turpitude or a punishment of greater than 6 months incarceration. Moral turpitude includes theft and prostitution, but not according to the Arizona Court of Appeals, "manifestation" of prostitution. Manifestation is asking if someone is a government agent in public or within street view or asking in public or within street view for a breast to be shown or for a pat down on a private area. So, even if all three offenses were tried at the same time, the maximum sentence still would be six months, since there is no jury trial. While prostituion is moral turpitude, since manifestation of prostitution is not moral turpitude it does not mandate a jury trial. If you think that does not make sense, you could try to argue that to the Arizona Supreme Court, which will probably deny the petition for review and then you will be stuck at the prior Arizona Court of Appeals decision.
Posted By: BigPapasan
Re: I don't believe it either. No police dept. is going to spend... ...five years and hundreds of man hours on a one-woman operation.
The OP was wrong in several assertions - It's not up to the prosecutor whether or not there will be a jury trial. There's a pesky little ol' thing called the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States that guarantees the right to trial by jury (exceptions are made for infractions like traffic tickets).
The judge does not decide which counts will be "charged." It's up to the prosecutor to bring the charges and then the judge or jury decides on the guilt or innocence. And the prosecutor doesn't allow the defendant to "pick" which of the three charges she will plead to. He's not Monty Hall showing her doors #1, 2 and 3. He offers her the opportunity to plead guilty or no contest to one charge in exchange for dropping the other two counts.
Note to OP: Look up the word "hearsay." Don't post hearsay.
Honestly gentlemen! I don’t want to hurt your feelings but use your real head sometimes ok. Let’s stick to hobby ing and then get back to your own business. It all work better that way. This story has holes in it. Here is the next QUESTION? How much did you give her to help her out. Lol keep it simple Mr bean
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.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
