As a hobbyist who has seen the provider who supposedly got in trouble this week...
The whole thing seemed kind of fishy and looked as if it were a set-up.
The LE who made the appointment had all of the proper "false" identification and gave her a gift. (False Name on a picture Driver's License with the Same Name on his false proof of Profession.  Does the word “Entrapment” enter your mind???
By the way, he took all of his clothes off, sat naked on the bed and asked her to dance for him while he was touching her all over.  Does the word “Entrapment” enter your mind again and LE taking advantage of a situation???
They searched her room and personal items saying they were looking for drugs - and found nothing.
In the end - this provider was not charged at all and let go.

Ok you have some things inaccurate here.  Cops do have false work badges and can be butt naked, touching themselves whatever.  I think that clients need to get together with an attorney and get the REAL DEAL on the laws here in MN.  IF you need a name of a lawyer, email me.  I will be more than happy to help you out.  I think with so many people posting who are not up to date on laws make things more confusing!!  Cops are allowed to lie!!!!!!

Cops are allowed to lie?  No, please tell me this isn't so.

After reading the reply, I see that there are a few things that are inaccurate.
1.  LE was touching the provider "all over".  Not himself.
2.  He was Butt Naked, but the provider was clothed.
2.  For a fact - it is Entrapment for LE to have a false identification 'and' work ID in the state of MN.

In the end - she was able to go about her business.

The test for entrapment is very difficult. Essentially the defendant claiming entrapment must prove that they would not under ordinary circumstances have committed the crime for which they have been charged. Advertising escort services pretty much throws entrapment out the window.

Also, not only are police allowed to lie, touch, consummate an act of sexual congress, take drugs, assault, steal, etc., prosecutors very often lie to obtain information, confessions, and the like.

Well, I am mortified!  If the LE can do that, then what do we need criminals for?

Cops have part time jobs
Cops have drivers lisence's
Cops drive mini vans
cops have wife and kids
cops can be fat skinny ugly or pretty young or old
cops have gone to college
Cops get naked
Cops have big penis's and small ones too and yes they will show it too u(and if its soft you know its LE)
Its not about did they exchange money its about what sexual things were talked about in person or on the phone.
I too  had mentioned about the lawyer thing in an earlier posting so if you guys care to stop being ignorant about laws and rights dos and donts so you can be more secure in your play please contact a provider to get the name of this lawyer you can educate you.  
Lets turn this around and beat them in their game

I think this whole thing really illustrates a point I made in a previous post some time ago.  The "consequence" that makes cops behave is that the system will reject evidence that doesn't live up to some pretty tough tests.  But that assumes that a conviction is the only desirable outcome.

There are other "objectives" that can be met without following the rules of evidence and probable cause.  For instance, if they use unapproved methods to gather evidence to arrest her, the case probably falls apart prior to trial.  But if the unapproved methods are used to scare her into "outing" her agency, the ability of the agency to get that "voluntary" confession thrown out get a little tougher.  The farther away from the ill-gotten evidence you can get, the harder probable cause is to defeat.

They may want to simply gather "data points" to help build a case against the agency.  They may simply want to take a peek and make sure girls aren't being used to transport drugs, or are under age.  They may simply want to run the provider out of town.  Again, many objectives that can be met without having to follow the rules.

St. Paul is a good example--they take pride in "outing" clients to their families and community, and aren't as concerned about getting convictions.

PS...  It bums me out when I hear from several providers that local reference checking doesn't seem to be working well.  This is why.  The driver's license&business card system travelers use is just silliness, and that's what we're left with if we "can't all get along"

-- Modified on 2/20/2003 6:29:32 PM

(For a fact - it is Entrapment for LE to have a false identification 'and' work ID in the state of MN.)

I would like to know where this "fact" came from. Every bit of discussion I have had with criminal attorneys about this subject makes it very clear that LE can absolutely have false identification and use it as necessary for their investigations.

Entrapment has nothing to do with an agent lying or falsely providing ID. Entrapment is essentially coercion. If the LE agent causes the subject to commit a crime where the subject would not have otherwise committed that crime, it's entrapment. It also requires positive proof as a defense, meaning that if you choose to use entrapment as a defense, you must prove that you would not have committed the crime but for the actions (i.e. coercion) of the agent.

If you have questions, contact an attorney. Don't wing it based on advice from the boards.

Many of us (myself included) have only minimal interaction with LE (e.g., a speeding ticket), and our "knowledge" of LE is based on years of watching TV cop shows.  No T.V. cops drive minivans, and except for Dennis Frantz, they are all buff and good looking.  I'm grateful for the information shared on this board, and prefer an open exchange of information as compared to "ladies beware - e-mail me if you want to know why."