Info in reviews....

I really don't understand why people are tripping because their rates are posted. If you have links in your reviews that lead to you website, or p411 with info about your rates and offered activities how is that any different? Will the lawyer and prosecution be like"oh......beause her rate was linked on a different website....which includes links to her reviews, less not take this in to account, besides your honor its not on the same website"

How is this any different if you ladies have rates posted in other places than here? How is that any different legally?

I think that what they are concerned about is that a review directly links the rate with sex...

I think that what they are concerned about is that a review directly links the rate with sex... Originally Posted by Eccie Addict

P411 profiles and ladies webpages do this as well. If they won't post it, I'm damn sure not to bashful to ask. Do they really need every potential client inquiry to ask them. .....or is it easier to just post it.

We will stop posting rates on the sights soon I'm sure.....then activities......then ros will be obsolete and deleted.

Escorts.com reincarnated......

Thanks for your input, Shayla.

No offense, but a recommendation without a review is worthless.

It is knowing what level of service a particular lady provides and how she performs that give value to the review and that is the criteria of how someone who has not seen her will decide if he should invest his money and his time in seeing her for that fleeting pleasure.

Well, I know here in Canada it doesn't matter what you say in your reviews really. There is vice all over the boards in Canada but they don't do much. They're just after common bawty houses mostly which is why "incall" should be very discreet.
I think your safest bet is to keep your review discreet and talk around what you did if you want to be on the safe side. Or simply give a recommendation without a review. Originally Posted by Shayla

I think that what they are concerned about is that a review directly links the rate with sex... Originally Posted by Eccie Addict

+1, Id rather all the acronyms be used on in ROS , at least get it out of public view that anyone can access, ie; see ROS.

+1, Id rather all the acronyms be used on in ROS , at least get it out of public view that anyone can access, ie; see ROS. Originally Posted by Sweet N Little

One girl had me start doing that and I have been doing it ever since.

I've enjoyed reading this thread and hearing the responses from some of the ladies. Based on what I've read, I will make some changes to my future reviews.

I don't have a problem using acronyms in ROS only.

P411 profiles and ladies webpages do this as well. If they won't post it, I'm damn sure not to bashful to ask. Do they really need every potential client inquiry to ask them. .....or is it easier to just post it.

We will stop posting rates on the sights soon I'm sure.....then activities......then ros will be obsolete and deleted.

Escorts.com reincarnated...... Originally Posted by gimme_that

I gave another reason for the rate issue. My main reason. Correct rates will be on my site and P411. I even have rates posted in my BP ads.

My site only has rates listed, not detailed services for rates like some ladies. Very non specific on my site, you pay for time. My site is clean, simple, and to the point. My P411 has my rate listed and I have that acronym thing disabled there. I also have no problems with gents asking for my site to see rates, Thats why I built it. Or even asking, being an escort is not illegal nothing wrong with asking what I charge. Asking for specific service for money, thats another story.

Id really rather they ask so there is no miss-communication on what to bring. I'll deal with all the inquires not to be shorted money. I personally do like to know who is looking as well.. (Marketing, Im a geek about it)



We cant even post rates in our ad but you can in a review here?? I dont see the difference nor do I get it. In our ads we dont talk sex for money.. but attaching a list of acronyms to the rates.. well gee..

ROS or open LE just has to pay for PA and see ii, know difference in all reality..

When I stop running ads here, I'll stop the reviews. Cant place ads and have a no review policy here so.. I want a couple more on TER and then Im done with reviews period. Soon enough I wont run ads here as well.

So can a guy stop writing reviews and posting on here and still have no problems seeing ladies?

So can a guy stop writing reviews and posting on here and still have no problems seeing ladies? Originally Posted by Eccie Addict

I see many men that have no clue about hooker boards. lol Also may lurkers, they dont post here ever. As long as you give the info needed to be screened.. for me anyways.

I see many men that have no clue about hooker boards. lolSo they say... Also may lurkers, they dont post here ever. As far as you know anyway... As long as you give the info needed to be screened.. for me anyways. Originally Posted by LynnT

I've heard that...

I've heard through the grapevine that someone with a legal background has stated that we put ourselves at some risk when mentioning a donation amount in our reviews. This risk is both to the guys as well as the providers. The theory is that it is "proof" of some sort of quid pro quo for services. What does everyone else think? Should reviews even mention the donation? I'm just curious to see what others think. Originally Posted by Cpalmson

I think there are two questions here, and these are my short answers:

Question No. 1. CAN information in a review be used against the hobbyist who provides it, or the provider who's the subject of the review?
Answer: Yes.

Question No. 2. IS information in reviews used against hobbyists and providers?
Answer: Generally, no.

Nearly all my criminal law practice is in north Texas, so I can speak to Texas law and the practices of police, judges, and prosecutors in north Texas only. Criminal laws vary state-by-state, and criminal justice practices vary city-by-city and county-by-county. So the following analysis may not apply to other states or other areas of Texas.

Question No. 1. CAN information in a review be used against the hobbyist who provides it, or the provider who's the subject of the review?

Under Texas law, a person can commit the offense of prostitution by:
(1) making an offer,
(2) accepting an offer, or
(3) soliciting a person in a public place
to engage in sexual conduct for a fee, or
(4) engaging in sexual conduct for a fee.

See Texas Penal Code § 43.02.

Assuming the state can prove the review is authentic, and that the defendant wrote the review, the defendant stating that he paid a fee of a certain amount is proof of the fourth way the state can prove the crime of prostitution -- i.e., "engaging in sexual conduct for a fee" -- because the defendant/reviewer stated a fee. Of course, the state would also need to prove sexual conduct occurred. If the defendant/reviewer described sexual activity in his review, the fee plus the description COULD meet the elements of the offense. This same analysis woulds apply if the state was prosecuting a provider for prostitution.

As an aside, I'll note something I've written about before. In my opinion, using terms for money in ads or reviews such as "roses," "hearts," "$$," "an Airwick Solid," or whatever, doesn't lessen the chance of being held criminally liable for prostitution. If the finder of fact, be it a judge or jury, believes that whatever euphemism was used was money, then the elements of the offense can be met. If anything, a lawyer making a ludicrous argument that a rose was really a rose will just piss everybody off and make it harder to defend his or her client. The same is true for using euphemisms, acronyms, or abbreviations such as "K9," "AMP," or "BBBJ." If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, the finder of fact will probably conclude it's a duck.

Question No. 2. IS information in reviews used against hobbyists and providers?

I've practiced criminal law in Texas for more than 26 years. I've handled hundreds of prostitution cases. Lawyers like to talk and hang out with other lawyers. I share stories with colleagues nearly every day and I belong to a number of groups for criminal defense lawyers.

I all my experience, I have NEVER handled a prostitution case, representing either a hobbyist or a provider, in which the state attempted to use a review as evidence -- NOT ONCE. Nor has a colleague ever told me about such a case, nor have I attended a professional function and heard of such a case, nor have I ever read about such a case in a legal opinion or in an article or book. -- NEVER.

Of course, this doesn't mean it's never happened. I'm sure in some city in some state an eager-beaver cop used a online review to bust a provider or hobbyist. But what I'm saying is, in my opinion, a review being used as proof in a criminal trial is about as likely as Prez O starting to shit solid gold bricks for the Treasury Department to sell to cure the federal budget deficit.

From a practical standpoint, I can say that more than 90% of prostitution busts that I've learned of involved undercover sting operations, either undercover fake SWs busting johns, undercover fake johns busting SWs, or, by far the most prevalent within our little community, undercover fake johns answering ads, the provider is sloppy, lazy, or desperate for cash and doesn't screen properly or maybe not at all, and The Laws haul her ass to jail.

But what about reviews being used in a civil case, such as in a hobbyist's a divorce case? That's another matter. I don't practice family law, but I am personally aware that reviews here or posted on other sites have been used in divorce trials. Of course, no hobbyist who ever posted a review expected that his words would come back to haunt him in a divorce trial. But life is full of surprises, isn't it? So if you're a risk-averse hobbyist, don't write reviews. It just wouldn't be worth the risk, especially when premium access can be purchased here so cheaply.

I am also personally aware of reviews (and ads and provider web sites) being used by baby daddys of providers to try to gain an advantage in child custody cases. So if you're a provider with a kid and a crazy baby daddy (a description which may fit 90% of providers -- haha, j/k), then don't run ads, have web sites, or allow reviews. It's that simple. But if you want to earn a living as a provider (which is illegal, in case you haven't heard), you may want to be less risk-averse and allow reviews, have a web site, and post ads.

A Final Thought

I just wanted to get the take from both guys and gals about certain info that goes into reviews. Maybe even get a lawyer or a few lawyer wannabes to chime in as well. Originally Posted by Cpalmson

I wouldn't suggest asking "lawyer wannabes" to offer legal advice. The most potentially harmful information I read on ECCIE is from amateur lawyers giving uniformed opinions on the legal risks of certain conduct. Oftentimes, words in statutes have a very specific meaning to lawyers that isn't evident to non-lawyers.

For example, I once read a thread here about a judge reviewing photos in camera. All the posters wondered why the judge wouldn't just print the photos to look at rather than looking at small images on a camera's LCD screen. I laughed when I read the thread, knowing that an in camera inspection means a judge reviews something in his or her chambers (i.e., their office). "In camera" is Latin for "in chambers," and any shutterbug knows old cameras had chambers.

You wouldn't read Gray's Anatomy and think you're qualified to perform surgery, right? Well, don't read an article on Wikipedia on a legal topic and think you're qualified to render legal advice, either.

Thank you Jon, we all appreciate your advice and information.

I've heard that... Originally Posted by Eccie Addict

Either way they gave enough info for me to see them.

It doesn't really matter what I put in a review because it's just for amusement and fantasy. None of it's real. I even disclaim that on all my posts. Gosh people actually believe this stuff is real. lol Originally Posted by burkalini

Me too...it's all in my imagination... I always wanted to write Harlequin Romances... but kept getting those darned rejection slips!

I just spend the appointment time playing patty cake (Roger Rabbit fans) and enjoying the company of lovely people.

Huck