I recall a report about a year ago in which a prosecutor even pointed to the disclaimer on a gal's ad as proof that she knew her activites were illegal because who else ever puts such a thing on their sites?

It's certainly Alice through the Lookingglass logic, but there you are.

If the disclaimer makes you feel better however, then by all means look for it.

It has become a knee-jerk reaction on the discussion boards to declare that disclaimers in a provider ad are meaningless and a waste of screen space. I'm referring to statements like "This is not an offer of prostitution, blah, blah, blah." I have a slightly different view about these epistles. I like to see them in an ad I'm going to answer.

I agree that no disclaimer, however worded, will be effective to protect a provider who is singled out for a bust.  

As a client, though, my perspective is a bit different. There is still a viable defense of entrapment in this country. LE is not permitted to lure and entice you into a criminal act that you would not have committed if left alone. If you can show that they did, it is grounds to have the charge against you dismissed. If I answer an ad that has been properly drafted to offer a "sensuous" and "fabulous" experience and a good massage, and if the disclaimer is present, and if I am properly circumspect once I am in the room, then at some point before the undercover cop actually does something illegal the cops are going to have to come busting in. If I don't lose my cool, if I remember to keep my mouth shut, they are going to have to charge based solely on the basis that I answered an ad and dropped an envelope for an experience that was explicitly stated to NOT be an offer of prostitution. At the end of the day, I really don't think a prosecuting attorney is going to be very excited about spending time and money to proceed with that case.

Now, that's a lot of ifs, and I freely concede it's a crap shoot whether I can manage to do everything right in a stressful situation, but it remains the case that a disclaimer in the ad gives a suspect something to talk about that he would not otherwise have.

For that reason, I opine it is very unlikely LE will include disclaimer language in an ad placed for the purpose of running a sting. Why spend time and money to set up a sting and then throw in a get-out-of-jail card for the perp to use? A prosecuting attorney is going to review the ad before it is placed in any well run police department. I'd bet the prosecutor will insist disclaimer language not be included.

It is certainly true that the safest bet is to stick with well reviewed and reputable ladies. I usually do. But every once in a while someone's just gotta kick out the jams and take a chance. How else would a new lady ever get her first review? On the occasion that I am considering TOFTT, I look for the disclaimer. If it's not present, I'm gonna pass.

And that's why I like disclaimers. Am I just wrong? Can anyone point to a sting ad that included a disclaimer? I'd really like to know.

I like the ads with the disclaimer and the girl is totally naked in her pictures.   I think disclaimers are a false sense of security.  

I offer my time, my company and my relaxation services, thats it.  

I like to touch, lick, kiss and so forth.  If a guy relaxes having his toes sucked, then so be it.   I'm willing to pretty much work my way up and down his entire body if thats what he wants.   I charge the same wether its his toes, his elbows or his entire body being licked and sucked on.  The "off limits" areas are free with the purchase of the other areas (the ones that won't get me in trouble).

if you go buy drugs and the seller write in the package it was Sugar you will get off because you thought you were buying Sugar... where you guys live on the Moon??
Disclaimer for illegal activities/products are USELESS.

have disclaimers then they list the services:BBBJ, CIM, etc, etc...hey I thought I was paying for companionship only..LMAO

I needed a complement!

is at least enough to prevent LE from getting warrants for "fishing expeditions" *on the basis of the website alone*.  It may in many cases - again, along with a discreet website (ie one that does not list "services") be enough to deter LE from making it a priority to go after the lady in question.

In the urban areas with which I am familiar, it is a well known but largely unspoken fact that "indoor prostitution" thrives and is largely ignored by LE. As long as a provider does not get mixed up with attention getting drama - drugs, violence, family drama being the most typical - and does not list specific services - she is putting herself in the best position to be passed by in favor of lower hanging fruit.

Whether the disclaimer would do any good for a gent who walks into a room and drops an envelope while under LE surveillance I seriously doubt.  That being said, making yourself too much trouble for the (usually) misdemeanor charge by STFU and getting a lawyer will often if not usually suffice....

I fear that chick more than any cop. lol. That's why new providers should leave the disclaimer off of their website until they get their first review.

Actually, I think you make a good point. The rare guy who really does seek a non-sexual date with an escort can honestly point to the disclaimer and say he took it seriously. You can't prove intent to have sex based solely on showing up with an envelope. The disclaimer helps him. The rest of us are toast when we start unzipping our pants.