Since I think it is important for sexworkers to consider I have posted my long article on the jury win in a New York case where there was no prostitution where you paid for time with a companion even if sex was intended or implied. Intended or implied is not in the prostitution law only paying for sex acts.

For those that have seen it before on my other places, I have revised and amended it slightly

I posted it in the Legal Corner to be as hopefully helpful to as many as possible at
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=11066&boardID=25&page=1

I believe escorts and massage providers should take a more aggressive legal defense if they can get attorney's to make the arguments.  Sadly many do not have the funds for a strong defense and possible appeals.   We need a funding project to counter the war against private sex in Phoenix and around the U.S. to help fund the right good case in the Courts. In my view both a money for time not sex as well as a Lawrence vs Texas defense is far easier to defend against the laws vs trying to change the laws which is almost impossible politically.

-- Modified on 3/29/2009 9:59:13 PM

the smarter attorney will almost always win a case regardless of guilt or innocence. if you're facing a charge, regardless of what it is, make sure you hire an attorney that has won a trial for someone with the same charge. court docs are public so the attorney will happily show you that he's won a similar case.

public defenders will just try to convince you that you're guilty to get you to agree to a plea deal so if you can't afford an attorney, start reading the law books and court transcripts of similar cases and demand to go to trial cuz he wont want a loss on his belt and being a HUGE pain in their ass to prosecute your case, you're already winning.

i'm obviously not an attorney, but if your attorney is pushing you to take a plea deal that will send you to jail anyway, you might as well take the chance at trial if the extra charges are only going to result in a few more weeks in jail or an increased fine.  a professional can determine a guy's wiener's size even when dressed and if a guy is talking about sex and his pants are still on and it's obvious, in your expert opinion that he's got a very tiny weiner, (point to the prosecutor's crotch, or whatever crotch would be applicable, as a live visual aid to demonstrate your ability) then any reasonable person is going to assume that he's all bluster when it's that obvious he has no muster, and he just wants to pretend and it's your job to go along with the fantasy.  not only would it be illegal, which makes it not even an option to you (if you're a law abiding citizen) but you know, as a professional, if a guy actually wants to have sex, he normally has his pants off.  

maybe he'll whip it out and prove you wrong.   LOL.  but you might as well have some fun with them if they are going to insist upon these silly prosecutions that use the threat of a publicly embarrassing trial to coerce escorts to plead guilty and send themselves to jail. if escorts are too embarrassed to PUBLICLY defend themselves, then it's only fair to make the prosecution PUBLICLY too embarrassing.

when you're in an industry that is fantasy based, it's just dumb to have a law against making an agreement when it could be argued that the agreement is just a part of the fantasy.

regardless, if they want to put people in jail without giving them the criminal justice they're entitled to, it's time for people to start getting it themselves.

Its not an appellate decision and not precedent.  The appellate division will likely reverse and then you will be left with a precedent.  Interesting result, but not that big a deal until you have an appellate court rule on it.

if you pay for sex, but premature ejaculate... is your sentenced reduced?

if you cant get it up.....do you then get off?...  oh, the irony!!!

Actually the Appellate Court has already upheld the dismissal of the case years ago, it was tried twice in lower courts, Spitzer appealed, denied and than once more in 2006 than Attorney General Spitzer re charged it.  The DA in both cities where the owners lived both did not want to prosecute it again but were forced to by legal actions of Spitzer

In February 2009 they won for the third time in the lower court, strictly on the issue of whether or not there was prostitution involved under NY law.   The jury said no, since paid for time not sex.

Much more is discussed in the Legal Corner and off course I've been following this case on my site since about 2004.

The old history of the case is shown at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Apple_Oriental_Tours

But it does not include the 3rd refiling of the case in 2006 which resulted in the current trial and not guilty jury verdict in 2/2009

Anti-prostitution laws are unconstitutional - but of course, they've never been successfully challenged as such.  You either have a right to privacy, or you don't.

The underlying "action," is perfectly LEGAL, virtually everywhere -- consensual sex.

Man goes to bar, picks up chick.  Never seen her before in his life. They go back to his hotel and fuck like ducks.  Never see each other again.

What's illegal there?

Absolutely nothing.

Throw the issue of compensation in there and suddenly it's illegal?

It's really more of an issue of failure to hold a valid business license.

but remember:

cops are stupid
judges are stupid
juries can be even stupider
(depends on the jurisdiction)

and most importantly . . . .

people are very close-minded
(ok a pseudonym for stupid)

dont pawn this off on the cops...most of them are just doing their job.

when they lax the laws, the cops won't be a problem.

Its the general public that likes to think they are socially liberal but either dont vote or vote with the masses like the rest of us american sheep.



baaaaaaaa