I will say ole' chap that you did one hell of a job posting my point across and I can read that further discussion with you is pointless.
Tally-Ho!
I don't understand why busts take place at a private residence when the provider is not standing on the street corner or phoning up anyone to solicit? It seems as though cops are infringing on my right to privacy from my own ad which I purchased. If I don't make any offers over the phone, then they should not be able to come to my home or call to harass me. I've gone as far as telling a person I am recording our conversation(which I don't), but they don't know that. This way, they place the noose around their own neck. What are your thoughts?
Never talk about $$$$ for activity preformed.
IANAL (new acronym for this message board) but apply the same logic to drugs (pardon the association but offering escort services and illegal drug sales can both be felony offenses). If the law is written to make it illegal to offer marijuana for sale regardless of location, then LE can arrest someone on the street or in a house. Or on feet or with a louse... (forgive me, Dr. Suess, but I couldn't resist).
From now on.... Screen, Screen, Screen.
Get as much info as you can.
For some reason, the Police are not going to stop what they are doing.
Is it right?? No, its not, but THEY can.
What you need to do is start educating yourself on the rights you have from your state.
Believe me, I am with you, it sucks that those donut eating mother f**ckers have nothing better to do.
But, when we advertise on the web, we need to expect the worst.
Good luck sweetie!
Shaye
ps. Don't think you are the only lady who has ever been contacted my the police.
until you really need one...then you'll be buying them a dozen.
I say, my dear...everyone deserves a fair shake, so be careful when your writing generalities.This is coming from the "some of my friends are" category.
I might add that the other day when that officer spoke of that beautiful missing Florida girl in the past tense, my heart began to break.
Tally-Ho!
-- Modified on 2/8/2004 9:14:27 AM
Dirk wrote
until you really need one...then you'll be buying them a dozen. (about cops)
Baloney. Cops have never prevented a crime. Laws can't prevent crime. All they can do is punish. It isn't called the oldest profession because laws and cops have been able to stop or even reduce it.
Cops can shoot and kill you if they "feel" threatened. they don't actually have to be threatened. And Testilying is common is not required behind the Blue Wal.
The ladies here will have hundreds if not thousands of stories of the rancid cops who partake of their time.
AND BTW. Did the cops prevent that poor little 11 year old from being kidnapped and killed in Florida?
As Serpico said when he found corruption in the NYC.. And no not from the movie but from REAL testimony. 10% of cops are crooks, 80% know they are crooks and don't enforce the law...the 10% of the rest of the cops are not crooked.
TET
PS. Are you grateful when a cop knocks on your door? or grateful when a fireman knocks on your door?
That would be a sorry state...indeed!
Btw,what percentage of crooks are crooks?
Based on some of your asinine generalities, your answer
would have to be no greater than zero.
Tally-Ho!
Yes, LE is needed in a modern urban society. But they need to be held to a much higher standard than the rest of society.
It is a sorry state in the police state we call the USA with respect to law enforcement and the justice system. Laws are meant to provide an avenue for punishment after a crime is committed, not prevent it. LE should be catching people who committ crimes that harm people, like robbery, theft, assault, manslaugter, and murder. Laws and LE should not be involved in victimless crimes like prostitution and drug use.
Cops were created after the Industrial Revolution moved huge numbers of the rural population into urban areas and industry created poverty along with wealth and people started to steal and assault others because of overcrowding and hunger. Thus, people needed others to help punish them. In an agrarian society the community at large normally did this, but rarely because everyone worked and there was no huge class structure. this discounts a monarchy situation.
and I stand firm that your posts on this matter are full of asinine generalities.
You first state that LE can not prevent crime but now you have them catching people who commit crimes that harm people.
The proof is in the prisons and they are loaded with scoundrals
put there by LE that have done more dastardly deeds than just harm people.They take away lives and sadly the lives of the victims family.
My view is that these "low life"criminals should be held to a much higher standard than the rest of society and let's face it, crime occurs without regard to race,color,class,geography,or creed.
As for the police,We all know there are bad apples in every bunch.And yes, they were not able to prevent that horror in Florida but I vividly recall 9/11 when people were "escaping" the towers, they were on their way in.They were not preventing crimes that day but saving lives.Heroes! Every one of them!
Finally, this "police" state we call the USA, far exceeds all others.There is no better country anywhere and none with any greater freedoms.
Tally-Ho!
-- Modified on 2/8/2004 8:31:49 PM
-- Modified on 2/8/2004 8:37:14 PM
The worst criminals are the cops. Just ask any provider who has been shaken down by one.
Or look at the recent case in Tacoma WA where the Chief of Police, Blame, shot his wife then killed himself because he got found out he was beating his wife! And the Asst Police Chief was covering up for him at the same time! And the Asst Chief was a woman!
This dialogue is devolving and I felt like flaming you. But I won't because I don't want to get banned.
So I will let it go at this point.
And agree to disagree.
TET
I will say ole' chap that you did one hell of a job posting my point across and I can read that further discussion with you is pointless.
Tally-Ho!
You haven't traveled the world much.
"cops have never prevented a crime"....how in the world would know if they did???? A "prevented" crime is one which does not occur so there is no way of knowing what crimes LE may or may not have prevented. There must be certain cases where the criminal perhaps contemplating a robbery or burglary sees a blue and white drive by and gets cold feet...crime prevented, at least for the time being. Laws are to keep order, and they work on the vast majority of the populace. There is always a small percentage of the criminal element who do not care what laws say; they will ply their trade anyway. The reward outweighs the risk.
BTW there is US Customs officer who on 9/11 detained and denied the potential 20th hijacker from boarding in Orlando. You gonna tell me he didn't prevent a crime????
One of the ways society can tell if laws or law enforcement can prevent crimes is by examining crime RATES.
Fact: crime RATES in the US have not significantly increased or decreased in over 90 years. That's when stats were first gathered.
Yes, small changes in crime rates occur.
But my point is somewhat the same as yours. When cops or legislators claim they are out there preventing crime, or enacting new laws to prevent crime, there is really no way to prove the laws or enforcement work in preventing crime.
Ask yourself this question:
Do you not wrongfully kill another person because you are afraid of being caught and jailed, or because you believe deep inside it is simply wrong?
TET
perhaps you'd like to see my post on the SD board titled "Kudos to LE".
Kudos to you!
BTW, my posts above do not mean that I condone ruthless LE activities for so called "victimless" crimes. I agree in many ways that their time could be greater spent elsewhere.
I just abhor general asinine statements that bash them as MF DONUT EATERS and that they don't prevent crime or save lives.
Tally-Ho!
The phrase "in the privacy of my own home" plays only a small part in criminal law. Your home raises the bar on searches--a judge has to oversee an evidentiary expedition into your home, for instance. But as far as being the location of the crime being committed, your home is not much different than the street corner. The whole notion of "home" being legally different than being in public is primarily a civil law concept.
Also, if you conduct business--any business--from your home and invite people--any people--to your home using an ad--any kind of ad--then you are eroding whatever layer of privacy the home would have provided because you have established your home as a place of business, "putting out the shingle" so to speak.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd encourage two groups of people in particular--providers that travel, and anyone who hobbies/provides from their home--to have an honest, candid discussion with an experienced criminal lawyer. The layperson's notion of entrapment, privacy, miranda, search and seizure--are all rooted in TV shows and are way, way off. And making matters worse, those notions vary greatly from state to state and circuit to cicuit.
If Omega gets a flat tire, it will undoubtedly due to GWB
Conspiracy Theorists ... gotta love 'em
-- Modified on 2/8/2004 3:38:09 PM
"If Omega gets a flat tire..."
Huh? I think you have me confused with someone else... I'm hardly a conspiracy theorist. What exactly did I say in my post that implied that there was some kind of trilateral commission thinking behind it?
The Dems are no better than the Republicans on cowtowing to easy public opinion on persecuting the activity that this board is about.
So there, I've established that I'm not a knee-jerk left wing Liberal. And Bush, frankly, hasn't the mental capacity to have thought this through enough to actually have a program of persecution of the escort trade. (Ashcroft, OTOH, is another story, but he got sidetracked going after the REST of our civil liberties post 9/11 to get truly in gear going against escorting).
I think you may have confused Omega with someone else. Nothing in Omega's post was about conspiracy theories.
TET
... don't waste your time getting legal advice from the television shows. They do not depict acuracy, they depict whatever drama will get them ratings.
I wouldn't rely too much on defense lawyers either. While you would think they would know the law, they will be bias to their own opinions. If you can consult with judges in your area, you're much better off. After all, its the judge who decides your fate... not a cop, prosecutor or defense attorney.
Don't think getting a judge for a client is dream... you'd be surprised how many judges out there who fly under the radar themselves.
Your argument won't get you anywhere if you get into legal trouble.
Screen, be careful, and learn what you should not say in email and in meetings -- read the legal board.
Good luck!
When you post an ad in a forum available to the general public, there is no more privacy. The cop calls you, you invite him over for the appointment and he snares you in conversation which thus gives him probable cause for the arrest.
The entrapment defense can only be used when a cop solicits someone to do something they normally wouldn't do under normal circumstances. For instance, an undercover cop approaches a lady in a grocery store and offers her money for sex. She says no, so he keeps increasing the money until she finally gives in and says yes. She may have a defense of entrapment claiming that the amount of money offered was so great, she was too tempted to turn down this one time opportunity.
In your case however, the prosecutor shows the jury your advertisement in the paper offering companionship for money, so he shows you already have a predisposition to offer some type of physical actions for money even before the cop contacted you. The prosecution shows this was not a "one time, too much money tempting situation" because you were already asking for clients to contact you to receive such a service.
Heck, Prosecutors can even show disposition by printing out the reviews on this site and linking you to them by showing the phone number listed in the review is the same number you answered when the cop called you.
You may not agree with it... but that's the law sweetheart.
-- Modified on 2/8/2004 8:55:16 PM