There was a lady busted yesterday in Scottsdale at her home. She wanted everyone to be aware of this, I am sure you will all find out who it is soon enough- Who however is not relevant right now. Here the facts

1) the lady in question was not charged and is just under investigation and was released shortly later.

2) they did confiscate her computer and phones

3)she had previously been out of town for the two weeks prior to this incident and has been traveling extensively and has not had any "guests" over for days.


4) this accusation appears to stem from a pair of 80 year old nosey neighbors  who declared to police that she was either selling drugs or prostituting out of her home.

5) there were at least two if not three other ladies in custody in Scottsdale at the same time

6) other ladies name were brought up- several of TER favorites were mentioned.


Ladies be extremely cautious - check references at least 2 if not more- watch for suspicious activity on e-mails and clean up your computers.

By who, the police or the ladies in custody?  If it was brought up by ladies in custody that is so not cool and only bad karma will result for them.

I think she should be named so gentelman,and ladies know to stay away from her!

-- Modified on 4/6/2006 11:54:28 AM

What type of email activity.....  An increase in entrapment type emails?  

Who are the ladies that we should not take references from?  Will that information be distributed to providers and if so, how do we obtain that?

Thanks,
Jazz

Isn't this the kind of stuff that the 'Provider Only' board was created for. Seems like a valuable tool for you guys to exchange information that you don't want public. I guess that board could be infiltrated by LE too, but, most of the girls that post on these boards are widely recognized.

NSF

Thanks for informing us, and making us aware, I'll definatly never, never bring my laptop, or PC of any kind to my place of incall, also I've always cleaned my harddrive reguardless at home so rest easy men, I'm knocking on wood now, but "I've never had problems with LE, and if I ever, ever did in the future, I would keep my mouth shut, and contact a lawyer ASAP!

In the words of the sports experts, “Sometimes the best offense is a good defense”.  For us who see local providers regularly, without knowing who was involved, we’re unable to establish a proper “defense”.  While the brief profile of the primary detainee may help some in determining her identity, points #5 and #6 are of no use in identifying those involved whatsoever.  Point #5 indicates a minimum of three providers were placed in custody.  For the good of the community, would those in the know please identify who was involved.  Thank you for your consideration.

I'll share what I received from a very well-known source as I think we should all be made aware of what is going on and the person who has sent the information is a very reliable source. So, if you were not privy to the information, please just send me an email and I shall forward what I have and what I will perhaps receive.

Stay safe, stay sane, and screen your asses off, Ladies. No taking chances with meeting in parking lots or coffee shops. Be careful who you take references from.

Respectfully,

Megan

[email protected]

As a UTR hobbyist, I’ve compared notes “offline” with other less stealthy participants in the Valley escort scene, many of whom have visited with Ms. Amore.  According to them, at incall, she is frequently accompanied by her laptop, ostensibly to provide better customer service.  As a customer, I certainly endorse this concept; and, the presence of a laptop, in and of itself, is not an indictable offense.  More unsettling however is the story from one hobbyist who, while attempting to schedule an appointment many months following a previously failed attempt, was reminded of the contents of his earlier emails, the veracity of Ms. Amore’s contention being reinforced by her statement, “I know I’m right because I saved your emails”.  This is definitely an indictable offense.  No need to get caught up in the “geek speak” of how operating systems “delete” files, if the provider retains data in its native “undeleted” form.  I suspect many other providers are following Ms. Amore’s practices.  Providers’ databases of saved emails, phone numbers (on phones, PDAs, and PCs), and other incriminating evidence make for rich “data mining” should these items so essential to scheduling appointments fall into the hands of law enforcement.  Providers – for your own safety and that of your clients, maintain a minimum of data in raw, readable form.  When you delete files, use one of the “total erase/overwrite” programs.  Clients – quiz your providers regarding what personal data they maintain and ask that they keep it to a minimum.  Let’s all be safe out there.

than it is an agency. I don't have a little black book, I don't have an electronic database and I don't keep emails after the client has booked. They're erased immediately upon meeting the client. I've said it many times before and I'll say it again, "Many people here toss around the words privacy and discretion, few actually live by it." I believe that the largest part of my job is to preserve my clients privacy and to act in a responsible and discreet manner regarding personal and even less than personal information. To me, this is more important than even providing good service. Afterall, good service ends after the scheduled block of time, but privacy and the respect of my customer's information being deleted and not shared lasts forever.

Now, if you want to be concerned about your information getting out, be concerned with agencies. Most indies don't keep records. We remember email addresses and specific information about the session which is why I recommend a client contact his provider reference to remind her who he is as opposed to letting me just email her and give a name, an email address and possibly a phone number if he's given me the all clear. Whereas every agency I've ever dealt with for references both here in Phoenix and everywhere else keeps databases of client information as well as hard paper copies of client information. And the way agencies are operating in this area with flat rates and the words, "All inclusive" being used, if an agency girl gets busted, it's going to be a whole big mess for a lot of ladies and gentlemen unfortunately.

This is a good reminder of why agencies and independent providers must screen. Meeting in a parking lot or for coffee and showing a driver's license or vehicle registration is not enough. Ladies and agencies MUST screen and screen well and gentlemen, you must look for reviews on ladies and make sure they look legitimate. In many cities, decoys are used to nab "Johns" on Eros, Cityvibe, Craig's List and many other advertising sites. Taking on for the team is lovely, but it may land you in jail for solicitation and 8 hours of "John class" where you're talked at by a former street walker and blamed for her plight in life. It's utter bullshit, the cops know it's utter bullshit, but it's mandatory in the state of Arizona. So, do your research, read reviews, PM other hobbyists who've reviewed the lady, and do everything you can to be safe. There is no reason to be scared, just be and stay vigilant in your screening/research and see ladies whom you know for certain are legitimate and we'll all be just fine!

Love always,

Megan

PS This is not a post attacking agencies, Jack and the rest who for some reason seem to think I'm attacking all agencies. It's simply accurate information to which I can speak because I've called agencies and indies for references and the agencies reference their databases and the indies usually need to be contacted by the gent so he can remind her of who he is.

So if I'm reading your post correctly, you've never met Isabella - excuse me, Ms. Amore - yet you've 'heard' certain things, certain terrible things, about her filthy PC practices, in part from a guy that's been trying for months to see her?  And this unsettles you?  Do you think that maybe there's a reason it's taking months to see her?  

The last few sentences of your post make sense, but for the most part - and no offense meant, I'd put a smiley face here if I could - it sounds to me like somebody (maybe one of the 'less stealthy participants'?) has his panties in a bit of a twist!

to see Isabella more than once.  No laptop was EVER present.  She never has kept my data,sigh...
I'd love her to call me and tell me she wants me!
I have no qualms about Isa's  security, besides  she rocks!  

Never put anything of "detail" in an e mail for m security and respect!   Even if there is some cyber trace someplace all that transpired was  setting up to share time with a lady. That is all that you are dealing with anyways.

Have I in the past "Yes", after hearing of others getting caught up in the Valley and everywhere when touring etc.., and their experiances with LE, decided against it long ago!
So if you decide to ever visit me at my place of incall, you can see for yourself personally their will be none!

-- Modified on 4/7/2006 7:09:02 PM

any other communication device? Get real, your phone records are enough. Do yourself and every other provider a favor and drop this nonsence

Those that doubt you, well, they don't know you.

BTW, thanks for recognizing that the unfortunate events the ladies are going thru - could have an impact on some guys out there. To me, that just shows (again) how considerate of we gent's you are.

-- Modified on 4/7/2006 12:44:33 PM

The provider detained was banned from TER some time ago, so she isn't even somebody with whom most of you would have contact.  I have questioned the operator of the rumor mill who got this all started, and have learned that NOTHING is known first-hand from the lady herself.  No one has been able to verify that anybody else was "in custody" and by now we would have heard about it if it were true.  As far as I can tell, "TER FAVORITES" WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER IN ANY WAY!  In any case, see my other posts today.  There's nothing wrong with communicating with a provider, or even meeting one for some pleasant socialization.  Really...relax!

You claim you live under and no longer post on TER. You're clearly here stirring up shit as usual, which you tend to only do with people whom you don't like and frankly, I don't understand what I ever did to you besides not see you.

In any event, speaking on the telephone is not illegal. Sending emails back and forth is not illegal, planning to meet someone is not illegal. Prostitution is illegal, meeting to exchange money for sex is illegal, implying in any way, shape or form to meet for sex for money is illegal. Escorting is not illegal. So, this renders your point fairly moot.

Now, keeping records of which ladies have seen which clients with their numbers and email addresses as well as full names and credit card information and provider comments about the client is mainly on the line of illegal which most agencies do. That's all I was saying. Didn't say Danny and Jack's agency, didn't say AZ Ebony Exotics, didn't say Mystique USA, didn't say TLC, didn't say ANY SPECIFIC NAME OF ANY AGENCY yet here you are AGAIN calling yourself out.

Let me tell you once and for all Danny, many people on this board appreciate what I say and I receive many, many compliments from both ladies and the secure gentleman pertaining to my posts. Your constant battling with me any friggan time I mention what agencies ALL do vs. what some or no Indies do is proving to everyone with a brain cell and deductive reasoning on this board that you are guilty of whatever it is I post that MOST ALL AGENCIES do. The person who'd be doing himself a favor to shut up is you. Notice none of the other agency owners are on hear screaming. Just you and on one occasion Jack. Shhhhhhhhhh. Don't worry about what I say, I've never said a negative thing about you, Jack, AZ Eb. Ex. or Mystique. So, unwad your friggan panties and quit attacking my posts. It's a big eyeroll every time you do, Danny.

edited by moderator

-- Modified on 4/8/2006 7:53:39 PM

-- Modified on 4/7/2006 8:47:02 PM

edited by moderator

Do you know this as a FACT? Sad you would post rumors as you should know better. I would hope the moderator would see your post for what it is and take it down. Good luck Megan and may inner peace find you.

Danny


-- Modified on 4/7/2006 9:38:36 PM

-- Modified on 4/8/2006 7:56:26 PM

As do all the other women who've ever called either of your agencies for references know. Whether it's electronic (it is, I know from working for you briefly) or hard copy, yes, you have a database. I don't post rumors, I don't spread rumors, that's more up your alley, isn't it, Danny?

The moderator sees all of my posts for what they are. The truth as well as my opinions (not one in the same) posted freely and honestly on this board. Everyone knows that, Danny. They read and post here too.

Inner peace is mine. May you grow a set and work on your own confidence and quit taking my general posts personally. Or go ahead and take them personally, the person who cries foul the loudest is usually the one the post applies the most to, Danny. Everyone knows that.

libel 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages." "Libel per se" involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune for actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U. S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement. (See: defamation, slander, libel per se, public figure)

Modify your post Megan.

have you been going to night school to become a lawyer?  A good reply to the previous post....  So is there any new....factual info about what this thread was started about?

edited

-- Modified on 4/8/2006 8:02:47 PM