Prostitution and solicitation are classified as misdemeanors in most states. However, pimping and pandering are far more serious charges as they are considered felonies.

How is solicitation defined? Some states, such as California haves a blanket solicitation statute that applies to prostitutes as well as their clients. To be convicted of solicitation, there must be three elements. Specific intent to engage in an act of prostitution, a manifestation of an acceptance of an offer and there must some act in furtherance of the commission of an act of prostitution. In easy talk, you have to want to get laid, you have to offer to pay for the act and the gal or guy agrees, and then you have to set out to go to a place to do it or do something that indicates you are going to commit the act, like unzip your pants or put on a condom, or lube up your ass if you are the one who is going to be penetrated.Not all the chicks are dickless.

Almost all states will classify you as a sex offender if you are in any way convicted of a sex offense with a child or minor. Remember, a minor is still a minor when she or he is 17 years and 11 months old, and then you still have 30 days to wait. It is best to ask for an ID when in doubt. Some folks age a lot faster than others, i.e. drug addicts.

The area where you can easily end up being classified as a sex offender involves pandering, and here it can be a fine line between solicitation and procurement. Let’s say you ask a prostitute to attend your brother’s bachelor party and she agrees to pop out of a cake with an open mouth and perform fellatio on any of the men who attend as well as permit your brother to have anal intercourse with her. You give her 500 dollars and tell her she will probably pick up a few hundred more in tips. A cop passing by the open door of the motel room where you and the rest of the guys are having fun sees someone with their pants down around their ankles and a cock in the pro’s mouth. He comes in with back up and arrests the group of you. Someone says you arranged the whole thing. While the other guys are considered Johns, you may be considered guilty of pandering as you acted as the go between and facilitator of the prostitutes acts.  This is not a good thing as it can be considered a felony and earn you sex offender status.

I think it might be a tough sell to get a provider to show you an ID once you meet in person unless it was previously discussed.  

This would be one plus to an agency versus an independent as the agency likely HAS verified their age already prior to advertising for them.

DAs often use the pandering laws when and where they can.  Something that happened to a local: he picked up a streetwalker, had sex with her, and was driving her back to where he picked her up in the first place.  

On the way back, he got stopped by a cop.  He wasn't charged with soliciting, but with promoting prostitution (pandering) because he was driving the hooker to meet her next john.

I don't think the case is resolved yet... but the line between solicitation and pandering is so fine, and the penalties so much greater for pandering that if the DA thinks he/she can sell it to a judge, you could be charged with the felony, rather than the misdemeanor.

under this theory the bus driver who brought the pro to the street corner would also be guilty, this is a question of the requisite "mens rea" from the Latin,  or what in English is called malice aforethought, a required element to establish in order to charge with a crime

-- Modified on 5/1/2010 6:09:58 AM

My understanding is that the DA argued that the guy was bringing her back to that location to pick up another john, and the guy knew that was shy she was going there since he picked her up there, thus establishing mens rea.  That's different from the bus driver who is just taking a passenger to a location without knowing what the passenger was going to do there.

I'm waiting to hear the final outcome of this one... I don't think it's gone to court yet.  The impression I had was that this was the DAs position during the pre-trial conference.

  The bus driver seeing a provocative gal on the bus, might well have a good idea what she was doing when she got where she was going. It will be difficult to prove that the guy who gave prostitute a lift was certain she was going back to work rather then to see her friends, have a bite (of food), head home or visit her sickly grandmother with bag of fried chicken....guess he would have to implicate himself...
  This argument would work better if the guy’s friend was waiting at the stop for his return so an additional paid act could take place. Is that what is called sloppy seconds?
  This argument might be also be tried on a driver for an escort but probably fail as well as we all know nothing of what goes on behind closed thighs and escorts are only selling time, well at least a good time.

I don't know... the every time they bust an escort here in NJ with her driver, he gets arrested for pandering... and, as far as I know, they all get convicted (or plead guilty).

From a NJ attorney's website:

"In addition, one may be arrested and charged with the offense of prostitution for promoting the same. Promoting, as defined by the statute, encompasses a wide range of activities. Basically, any activity that promotes prostitution is covered by the statute. This includes TRANSPORTING, procuring, soliciting a person to patronize a prostitute, knowingly leasing property regularly used for prostitution, procuring an inmate for a house of prostitution, running/managing/owning/supervising, etc. a house of prostitution."

The emphasis is mine...

-- Modified on 5/1/2010 12:39:59 PM

Here is the controlling case for CA---
 I think the case of the gentleman John, charged with pandering, as a result of giving a prostitute a gentlemanly lift back to her corner should fail based on People v. Mathis (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 1251 [219 Cal.Rptr. 693] where it was found that pandering implies procurement with required persuasion or assistance, but that assistance does include any type of assistance since it is possible to assist a person in an activity without encouraging the activity.
  Since she was a prostitute before he gave her the ride, since he did not convince her to return to continue prostitution, and since he in no way benefited from her transport I think his assistance was without the element of encouraging her activities.
 Pandering is a specific intent crime but requires a bit more of an act than transport to a corner by a well meaning and well served individual.
  As for Escorts drivers in New Jersey, we need more case facts, but if they were involved in the actual procurement, as agents of the agency, or in a work or support  relationship with the escort, then are far removed in degree than our gentleman John and might be charged with felony.


-- Modified on 5/1/2010 2:16:17 PM

I think the key here is that the transport is for the "promotion" of prostitution and it would have to be proved that the driver was aware that the party was being transported for prostituting, what we might call prostitution transportation as opposed to transporting a prostitute as did our gentleman John and our bus driver--thanks for all you research!

And, I don't have access to ALL of the cases in NJ since I'm not a paying member of sites like Lexis...

But, in any event Rutgers has a good law library, some of which is available on the Internet.  I found the linked case to be relevant for a number of reasons.

Although the decision linked actually has to do with the Pre-Trial Intervention Program, the underlying facts and discussion are interesting.

Nice find, however, the relevant text of the NJ code for our problem is (f)Transporting a person into or within this State with purpose to promote that person's engaging in prostitution, or procuring or paying for transportation with that purpose;
and note that it is  my opinion, and you are certainly entitled to have your own opinion, but I see the key language here as "transport with purpose to promote" or "receiving pay in compensation for" furnishing transport. In your excellent case the DA was suggesting that the driver was linked to organized crime and should not be admitted into a special program that would have mitigated his sentence for procurement, but the judge, aware of payment and purposeful transport, none the less felt defendant entitled to entry into special program not withstanding the DA's allegations... this would infer judge did not want to throw the book at the driver.
There is not great difference here between Jersey and California when a driver is promoting and being paid to transport, but our gentleman John was neither promoting nor being paid for the lift he gave the pro back to her corner. Therefore I still do not see the CA prosecution succeeding, but once the case gets to court you can never be sure of the result! What is right is never for sure.....

-- Modified on 5/1/2010 8:05:53 PM

then yeah he is aware of what goes on "behind closed doors"

he was just behind that closed door with her.

if he's taking her to another streetcorner, then maybe she's going to meet granny for lunch but if he's taking her back to the same corner, then he KNOWS what she is doing on that corner cuz he just did it.

as far as drivers for an escort, they shouldnt plead guilty... however, most of them dont just drive, they perform other functions as well which are much more traceable.

the driving part is nothing unless you can prove the driver knows.... in this case, proving the driver knows is easy because the driver used her services..

using her services was one crime... but then he drove her back to the location that he knew she was using to solicit so that's another crime.

a bus driver doesnt know.. he might know.. you might know.. you might be wrong and she might just have bad taste in clothes or escaped from a loony bin... you both know nothing except what you "think" you know.

possibly they got the charge wrong. i'm not sure it would be pandering... probably the da botched it.... he shouldve charged him with .....  hmmm when you are contributing to the commission of a crime.... its facilitating something ?

and then yeah you have mens rea cuz he knew he was doing that.

i just dont know whats it's called exactly.

neither does the da apparently but he's on to something there. it's another crime... dude shouldve dropped her at next corner. not the same one

Quote: ... but once the case gets to court you can never be sure of the result /endquote

Hooboy, is that ever a true statement!    I know very well that many cases are decided based on what the judge had for lunch or if he/she had a fight with their spouse/child before court.

Anyway, one of the reasons I pointed out that case was the little tidbit in there which you may have missed that NJ police are actively scanning a certain review site with which we are familiar.

In the words of Sgt. Esterhaus: Let's be careful out there.