A lot of guys make reference to "a quick LE check"  

I know what LE means, but I do not understand the check part.    Is this just simply seeing if the customer will lay hands on the provider in a sexual way?

I do not think I have ever had an LE check.

Yea, grab my pussy, grab my tits, or pull down your pants.

Seriously... I only had one provider, many years ago, refer to an LE check. And it did refer to laying hands on her in a sexual way.  

IMO thorough screening is a better LE check than that.

About screening. The problem with screening is even after you've been properly screened, you could still be walking into a trap/LE sting. At least if the provider asks you for an LE check, you should be able to avoid getting busted. As opposed to if the "provider" is undercover LE.

I've actually gone through many LE checks, in MN and elsewhere. It only gets better from there!😄 -- Modified on 12/6/2016 7:24:26 PM

I have had em,  and I like them!

 

END OF MESSAGE

While the may be fun, they do nothing to protect you. You can grab anything you want, if you're in the room with LE you're going to be arrested.  

... or making him touch your tit won't stop you from getting arrested.
But yeah the supposed "LE check" usually refers to some sexual touching or exposure.

Undercover cops are given a lot of leeway about what they can do in the pursuit of getting an arrest.

You mean besides lying...

put her breast up to my mouth. I eagerly kissed and sucked on it until she pulled away. So I must have passed the LE check.  

Man I'd love to see that girl again.

LE checks are for her, though they probably aren't particularly effective.

For the client, if you show up at an LE sting you are going to be arrested no matter what you do or say

They can still be dirty and arrest you!!!

Trust and Believe.....

KNOW THE LAW
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS

...it is very difficult to prove.  And the unfortunate reality is that because of the taboo of the hobby we play in, most defendants will be presumed guilty not innocent by a jury, so it is a big hurdle to overcome.  That's why a vast majority of these cases do not go to trial. They are plea bargained.  

I initially tried posting a link to a local newspaper article, but it is disallowed because it names specific people.  However, you can easily do a search using terms like:   "Mpls police misconduct in prostitution arrests" and get a few results.  Feel free to PM me if you need help.  

Be safe!

-- Modified on 12/7/2016 3:24:13 PM

-- Modified on 12/7/2016 3:35:14 PM

Apparently the link is not working, and I'm not sure why.  The article is from the largest local newspaper.  You can search the web for things like "Minneapolis police misconduct in prostitution arrests" and get a few results.  In lieu of that, here is a copy/paste from that article.  (I removed all names from the article and replaced with letters to prevent identifying any individuals.):

 Close encounters

In the case of a woman charged in March with prostitution and illegal acts at a massage business, a 36-minute audio recording captured the encounter between officer XXX and the woman. She handled his genitals before he signaled for backup officers to enter the room.

In a dismissal order issued in court Tuesday, Hennepin County Judge XYZ said probable cause for a crime could have been established long before the sexual activity began.

A second case involved officer YYY who was doing undercover work at a south Minneapolis parlor in November 2014 when he allowed the woman to start rubbing his genitals and then negotiated with her a price for further action "that would take care of him."  
 
Chief ZZZ will rely on city ordinances to address massage parlor prostitution.  
Hennepin County AAA wrote in her Aug. 7 dismissal that YYY "initiated sexual contact that isn't required for the collection of evidence to establish elements of the offense."

The third case involved the same woman, who was arrested in May after officer BBB asked her to rub his genitals before he negotiated a price for sex. The city attorney dismissed that case Monday.

Improper police behavior erodes trust between trafficking victims and police, said CCC, The Family Partnership's PRIDE program director (From PRostitution to Independence, Dignity & Equality).

The program provides support services to sexually exploited people and their families.
"What happened there is that [the officers] became part of the demand and the demand is what drives sex trafficking," she said Thursday. "It's a contradiction of the message that you are here to serve and protect."

 
-- Modified on 12/7/2016 3:31:40 PM

-- Modified on 12/7/2016 3:43:37 PM

To your sentence #1:  Yes and yes

To your sentence #2:  Yes, you are correct!  So say NOTHING other than, "I want my lawyer before answering any questions."

The LE checks noted elsewhere in this thread are pretty much performed by people who don't know the law and just go through some motions that others not in the know told them.  Sort of like when looking at the BP ads and seeing something like, "No law enforcement allowed."  Or, "By contacting me you agree you are not affiliated with any law enforcement agency."  (The cops must have to wait a few minutes to stop laughing before making those calls.)

Also in all our cases (clients and providers) a claim of entrapment would mostly be a lie -- since most of us know it is technically an illegal activity and we do it anyway.  Just because an LE agent impersonates one or the other doesn't make it entrapment.

(Not really disagreeing)

It's only a lie if one knowingly makes false allegations.  That aside, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, so make them prove it.  Unfortunately, most of these stings are recorded, so it's pretty hard to deny what's on tape (although we know denials happen all the time).  Doesn't mean LE doesn't go outside their boundaries to get a conviction because they know no one wants the publicity of fighting such a charge.  And calling it a justice system is almost a misnomer since it is really all about process and procedure and not about right and wrong.  It's about if "they" (LE and prosecutors (and defense)) did things according to the MN Rule of Criminal Procedure (The Bible).  That's why if ever arrested.... SAY NOTHING.  Just demand your lawyer.

You're right about LE impersonating a provider or client.  They can do it and do do it.  Nothing illegal about that.  No entrapment unless they do certain things...  But those are a number of law school lectures and case law.  Boring...  snoring.....

Yes

because both sides already know what they are doing is illegal there is no entrapment going on. Entrapment happens when LEO makes you do something illegal that you didn't know or would have never done without them suggesting you do it.

So entrapment as a defense in MN will never hold water.