Are my browsers messed up or am I missing a plug in? I can't see the comments everyone is referring to on CBS's page? Originally Posted by Glenn QuagmireScroll to the very bottom of the article page. The comments are posted down there, Yahoo style.
IANAL but this looks like civil law not criminal law, and my uneducated reading is that it seems to enable the escort to sue her client and/or the site to recover damages. Is that the way it looks to anyone else? How is that gonna work, anyway? Where is Shyster Jon when we need him? Originally Posted by billw1032It is a civil statute that provides a civil cause of action to a "victim" for violations of certain penal code provisions (which appears to effectively take the prosecution of those penal code sections away from the State's DAs and put them in the hands of the "victim"; it also lowers the burden of proof from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a "preponderance if the evidence standard" - i.e., "more probable than not"). However, I can't reconcile the use of the elements contained in the penal code with the language contained in the new civil statute; not now anyway - too damn late and I'm beat; I'll take a fresh look at it again - gonna be interesting nonetheless
Looks like Drudge picked it up this afternoon.
Also on Drudge is info on a new reality show to be called "Top Hooker" (http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/04/30/to...-show-ordered/). Let the games begin! Originally Posted by Mister Tudball
It was linked on Drudge today. But about the other story, you should read the description of the show "Top Hooker" -- it's not what you think. Originally Posted by billw1032from the drudge report linked ...