An increasing number of providers ask for your handle from TER or Humaniplex, plus two references, and your email address.  Assuming that they are posing as a provider, can LE use this information to prosecute and apprehend you, and use your TER reviews as evidence?

1.  I'm not a lawyer
2.  Laws are different in every state

But the laws we are dealing with here are mostly misdemeanors.  It would be rare for LE to spend that much effort to make a misdemeanor bust even if they COULD use what is on TER.  

Additionally, to use the reviews you write on TER as evidence, LE would have to prove:
That YOU and you ALONE wrote the reviews
That they were a true documentation of what happened (I don't recall signing any sworn statements whed doing reviews)
And that you gave up your right to not inciminate yourself (iffy maybe?)

The only thing I worry about really would be LE considering answering an online ad and following the instructions (ie leaving the white envelope on the table) as having constructively solicited sex for money.  Again, I doubt that this is plausable nor worth the time involved to LE.  

MVR

I doubt that anything one writes on TER is sufficient grounds to get you in trouble. It may provide hints, but doesn't actually prove anything without further hard evidence. And if you get caught by LE in the room, then you are in trouble anyway. As I see it, if you get in trouble, participation on TER might make it slightly worse, but it won't get you into the trouble in the first place. That is assuming you are careful, see well-reviewed ladies who aren't LE, etc.

And to paraphrase Mr. Fisher:  Not a Lawyer Either

It is an extremely remote possibility as LE issues are generally misdemeanors.  

The real risk is of being in a room with LE.  Well reviewed providers reduces that risk as much as possible.
skb

That LE actually Do NOT arrest someone that shows up in a sting?


2) Is there anything that can be done if you have such bad luck that will prevent one from being taken in?

Even if you refuse to take money or discuss anything sexual. The fact is you still get arrested

...if a provider makes a 'date' for outcall to a hotel room in Vegas, Vice will bust her when she shows up regardless of any in person solicitation.  

The assumption by this non-lawyer is that vice has 'constructed' the solicitation from the provider's ad, the fact that she made the date, and that she showed up at a hotel room to go through with it.  Could this work the other way around with the client showing up for the date with the (LE) provider?  Logic says it would although if LE was posting an ad to entice clients, the 'entrapment' issue could possibly come into play.  Makes me think that printing a hard-copy of any ad I answer and keeping it safe someplace might be a good idea and could strengthen one's claim that either LE stepped over the line with the ad or that you were answering an ad for legal services.  

Its all a nightmare at that point regardless!  Known, reputable providers!!!

MVR

if vice is making arrests on these facts, I would expect he magistrate to toss the arrest, the arresting officers to be sent back for training, and the vice captain to be demoted.

    First, there is nothing illegal about having a website listing services as a sexy private companion. Second, there is nothing illegal about agreeing to meet a client in a hotel room to be his companion for a specified hourly rate. Therefore, any arrest made for solicitation on these bare facts would be illegal bc the officer would not have probable cause to believe a crime had been committed.

      This scenario would permit a lawful arrest only if (1) the lady was so clueless as to offer sex for pay either on her web site or on the phone or by email with the officer and (2) the elements of the crime occurred "in the presence of the arresting officer" so as to permit warrantless misdemeanor arrest.

    And because defense would bitterly contest the second point if there is only an email exchange, no intelligent vice officer would set up a sting this way. The only intelligent way to do it is to require all elements of the crime to occur in the physical presence of the officer, so the state does no have to litigate whether the email communication can be deemed "in the presence" for purposes of the solicitation.

    As to your entrapment point -um no. This is where the reviews kill you but we will save that for another day.

I am not claiming that what you describe is SOP for any LE agency, but to claim that it never happens or that the officers involved would be sent back to training shows a naivity that could only come from an attorney with little or no actual courtroom experience.

Arrests like this happen all the time. You need to turn in your TER decoder ring. I would love to live in the utopian world that you describe, but unfortunately the rest of us live in the real world where abuses of the legal system by law enforcement, while not commonplace, are certainly not unheard of.

that the post does not "claim that it never happens" but states that, if such arrests happen, they should be dismissed by the magistrate for lack of probable cause and that I "expect" officers who engage in such a sting to be retrained as to the requirements for making a legal arrest.

"Arrests like this happen all the time." Great- give us a source of just one and we can track it and see if I'm correct. Oh-you do not actually have a example? Too bad.

    And an attorney could spend 40 a week in court for his entire life and not know whether a sting was conducted in this manner. Unless the atty happened to be either a prosecutor or a defense atty defending this kind of bust, the issue would not be on his radar.

Enough of the personal attacks.  If you have specific examples, feel free to describe them.  The diatribe on this thread adds nothing.

Keep in mind everything you post on TER is purely Entertainment.  MOst of this stuff is Fantasy

But you assume things that may not happen.  First of all, there is no requirement for the officer to 'book' the provider thus triggering a 'hearing before a magistrate' and this 'hearing,' if it does happen, may only deal with issues of bail.

All they have to do is cite them and release them (this can be done at the scene or they can be processed through the jail (prints, photos, cite, release)).  At that point the provider has a pending charge against her that must be answered.  How many providers can afford a decent attorney to actually litigate (as opposed to plea bargain) a case like this?  Few if any.  

Therefore 99% of such cases are disposed of having never been argued before a judge regarding any evidentiary merit or lack thereof.  Sure, on the odd occassion a real defense attorney confronts the prosecutor and advises him that there will be no plea and the case is going to trial, that may possibly get the prosecutor to cut either a favorable plea deal or drop the case if he does not think the officers can make their case (or if he is unwilling to let them lie about it in court).  

Where reality meets the letter of the law is often very ugly.

MVR

but suffice it to say the old saw "once LE is in the room with you it's over" is rooted in truth. I could cite dozens of examples, but those examples would either be anecdotal in nature or would require the revealing of personal information which is not only against TER policies, but would be a violation of trust.

and as to my reading comprehension you should try rereading your own post. You did not say the arrests "should" be dismissed you clearly stated they "would" be dismissed, as usual your relationship with the truth is tenuous at best.

Again in deference to our new mod Yellowfever498 (I share that yellow fever myself), these will be my final words on the subject, except to say that TER is full of other examples of this type of abuse by LE, there have been countless thousands of arrests that come nowhere near the threshold of probable cause you cite, wishing it not to be true does nothing to change the reality of the situation. Myths like "LE cannot lie" or "police can never arrest without probable cause" should not be propagated on a board that lends itself to legal advice. As an attorney you should know better.

very nicely said VON,

I think you are all correct:

I believe Marikod was referring to proper procedure & the law and how it should be done.

Ga & Von are very accurate & realistic on the "abuse".

I see what Von is saying,

There are "plea bargain mills" rather than a "real legal defense".  LE knows the game/racket therefore, LE get away from SOP.  
Hence,  it is almost impossible to fight because the cost and  the going up against the corruption.

do not have anything legally incriminating.

if a provider has the word "greek" in her ad or website and walks into a sting, she's busted as soon as the door is opened for her.

other words
french
gfe

I described does not happen. But what do you mean by "citing" them? Is this some procedure less than an arrest in your state, like getting a speeding ticket?

How can they be taken to jail if they are not arrested?

     I also agree with you that if the arrest gets past the magistrate, and the DA charges the lady, 99% of the cases (or some such number) are disposed of by plea and few can afford to litigate.

    But remember the "check" on LE abuse I was referring to is the requirement that a magistrate review any warrantless arrest within 24-48 hours based on the arresting officer's affidavit to see if probable cause for the arrest existed. This would occur before the lady has to face the consequences you so correctly identify.

then the scenario he described -bust her as soon as the door opens- would be completely legal.

That is exactly how it should be regarding the check system to validate the arrest.

I think that In those very corrupt jurisdictions that "check" is also corrupt.

Marikod would catch them in the corrupt system.

You could have the unlawful arrest thrown out & then nail them with a civil case

In Nevada, many misdemeanors beyond traffic violations may be handled by the officer on the scene with a citatation - exactly like getting a traffic ticket.  

A 'Class II' arrest is taking the suspect to the jail, processing him/her through booking for fingerprints, photograph and then issuing the citation and releasing them on their own recognacanse (sp?).  You are released OR every time you get a traffic ticket btw!  

Whether a magistrate reveiews each misdemeanor arrest report is not the point, its what the officer wrote on the report that matters.  And in this situation, they know what to write.  

MVR

yes the cop's word may be the only evidence.

The cop is trained to embellish, dress up, twist words & lie persuasively when he writes the reports. knowing good and well it will most likely NOT be checked out.

They also give partial truths (letting cat out of bag)

 "As I waited at restaurant I ORDERED a beer"

rather than :

"I guzzled 3 beers waiting and drank 2 more as I enjoyed my prime rib"

"she wore a slutty dress & looked Like an prostitute"

rather "She wore a flowered  floor length dress & was hair was in an up-do"