Can someone Dispel or confirm this Disclaimer

Nah. The simple legal math for prostitution is (1) agree to have sex (2) for an agreed upon compensation (even if it's "roses") (3) at an agreed upon time and place.

If money changes hands (or is promised) and sex ensues, you're busted.

Prosecutors, judges and juries are not idiots. "He only paid for my time then we, as consenting adults, just decided to fuck," ain't gonna cut it. If I were a judge I'd up the sentence just for insulting my intelligence. Originally Posted by jfred

so what actually is entrapment?
Let's say I am minding my business at a casino and a lady amkes small talk and approaches me- she then says let's go to my room and have some privacy- when I get to room and she says i can rock your world for a 100 bucks and i say ok- and then she informs me that she's a cop- would there be no way I could be that charge? Someone told me that in the above scenario you could be that case because you were "set up(entraped)" by the police officer because the person wasn't trying to commit a crime until he was entrapped by the UC.

There are specific things theat the police can or cannot do. Not a lawyer so I am not 100% sure of the specifics but, my understanding is an UC cannot ask for money or the specific act. She will try to get you to ask for a sexual act for money. As long as you are the one to suggest the illeagel act, you are on the hook. See below

ENTRAPMENT

A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.

On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.

In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty.

Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.

A disclaimer saying something to the effect that money is for companionship only might come in handy at the provider’s trial. It may further an “I’m only an escort” defense. Originally Posted by sky_wire

Hopefully her website does not mention fees for additional services.

so what actually is entrapment?... Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

My opinion is that what you described would be entrapment.

She initiated the contact, suggested the location, offered sex and named a price.

Haven't you ever watched "COPS"? The LE hooker stands around looking seductive, a guy wanders up and she says, "What are you looking for?" (Which could mean anything.)

And he says, "Duh, I'd like a blowjob." (Which is the name of a popular sex act.)

And she says, "How much ya got?" (Which is ambiguous.)

And he says, "Twenty bucks." (Which is not.)

And she says, "Man, are you tellin' me you want me to give you a blow job for $20?" (Which sums it all up very nicely.)

And he says, "Uh huh." And the next time you see him is on Fox at 4.

Nah. The simple legal math for prostitution is (1) agree to have sex (2) for an agreed upon compensation (even if it's "roses") (3) at an agreed upon time and place.

If money changes hands (or is promised) and sex ensues, you're busted.

Prosecutors, judges and juries are not idiots. "He only paid for my time then we, as consenting adults, just decided to fuck," ain't gonna cut it. If I were a judge I'd up the sentence just for insulting my intelligence. Originally Posted by jfred

Maybe so, but police are sometimes bigger idiots. Dallas vice never records anything. They'll take pictures of the scene, but they never record an audio of the bust. They say that DPD can't afford a tape recorder. At least that's what vice cops say under oath. When people hear that BS, they get pissed off. Juries don't like being lied to.

DA's hate trying prostitution cases because it's hard to get convictions. Recall Craig Watkins likes to brag about his 99.4% conviction rate. Fortunately for them, most people just want to plead to time served and get out of jail.

All things being equal, I'd rather have a disclaimer saying time is for companionship only instead of nothing.

To raise entrapment as a defense in Texas, the defendant must establish both of the following elements:

1. A law enforcement officer induced the defendant to commit the crime.

2. The means of inducement used were likely to cause other persons to commit the crime.

I love it when the show up and ask me if I am a cop. What they don't understand is at that point if there was trouble, it's too late anyway.

I love it when the guys says will you grab me down there so I know your not a cop. Are they ask if they can touch me down there. I mean seriously come on people.

I love it when the guys says will you grab me down there so I know your not a cop. Are they ask if they can touch me down there. I mean seriously come on people. Originally Posted by Tara Evans

Surely you have a disclaimer tatooed to your cooter just for that situation.

The touching cracks me up. The law allows an officer to engage in sex before making the arrest. It is departmental policies not the law that prevents it. There was a sheriff that allowed his single employees who worked vice to engage in the actual sex act before arresting the provider.

...There was a sheriff that allowed his single employees who worked vice to engage in the actual sex act before arresting the provider. Originally Posted by st929

My kinda guy!

I love it when the show up and ask me if I am a cop. What they don't understand is at that point if there was trouble, it's too late anyway. Originally Posted by Shelby Lynn

No doubt at this point in the game...........

The police can pretty much do what they want to. By the time you get a chance to prove your innocence the damage is already done. Bail money, attorney, embarrassment, etc

just sayin.....