Can a review be used as evidence in a prostitution case?

Here's an example. Provider has an ECCIE showcase (and/or website) that shows her face so there is no question as to her identity. There is a less-than-favorable review of her. She posts a reply in the Co-ed section that says "IRISHPUSSYLOVER'S REVIEW IS BS!!! He put the fee envelope on my bathroom counter but I didn't count it. We seemed to get along well -- I gave him a BBBJ, we had sex in various positions, etc. He then tried to take off the condom and get BBFS. I said no because I NEVER WOULD EVEN EVER POSSIBLY CONSIDER THAT!!, he got mad and said he'd write a bad review if I didn't, and I threw him out of my incall. After he left, I checked the envelope and found out that I had been shorted on the fee -- he left $150 in the envelope when my rate is $200."

So, is that post admissible evidence if a prostitution charge was filed against the provider? The example is loosely based on some real threads.

The same situation could arise in a provider's warning/alert to other providers. Originally Posted by notdeadyet

Hypothetical no. 3: LE wait's at said provider's incall for IRISHPUSSYLOVER to leave, then confiscate her cell, harddrive, and DNA ....... IRISHPUSSYLOVER is unaware of this and writes a review that same night. thus, linking all parties and revealing all true identies. lol i know i'm reaching but hey, it could happen.

Can a review be used as evidence in a prostitution case?

CG

discussions of which provider has the biggest tits, whether licking a person's A-hole is a worthwhile activity, and if VickieVagina should be drawn and quartered for no-showing JerryGiantCock Originally Posted by ShysterJon

have we answered any of these questions yet?

Maybe I should start putting more provider orgasms in my reviews. Mine, fiction though they are, are way too believable.

ANYTHING can be submitted as evidence in court, although that doesn't mean it will be accepted. But once Jack has popped out of the box, you can't put him back in without effort. Attorneys often introduce arguments or items that they know will get kicked, but despite instructions to a jury to ignore or a judge's oath of impartiality, some will consider it anyway. However, statistically I don't think many prostitution cases ever go to trial. They get plead out, fines paid, go on your happy way and supposedly sin no more.

Btw, who is this Irishpussylover? I'd like to meet him. Will you introduce me?

Maybe I should start putting more provider orgasms in my reviews. Mine, fiction though they are, are way too believable. Originally Posted by eccl3

Now that is funny!

I'd be very careful saying I was an attorney on an escort website (assuming people who claim to be attornies on this site are really attornies). I had a friend who was an attorney in Texas. The police had to do an unrelated search on his computer. They inadvertently found he was a registered member of an escort website. His name and escort website postings were turned over to the state bar. He was ultimately disbarred as a result of an over zealous detective.

+100 to what Fancyinheels wrote

I personally know a lady that got busted and reviews were thrown in as supporting evidence. She has been retired for a while now otherwise she would probably be making comments to this. Even so in her case she had services listed along with "donation" and reviews were thrown in as evidentiary support. They will throw anything and everything that they want in because it doesn't hurt them any if they put in too much and only some is accepted.

Also, here is a local attorney that even mentions this site.(Click on the Dallas solicitations tab) http://www.pevetolaw.com/texas-BWI-d...ostitution.php If reviews were so likely to not get thrown in the mix in attempt to get a conviction then this site would be irrelevant to a criminal defense attorney I would think. I mean I could be wrong, but which is worse slightly paranoid or complacent?

In my opinion the original post is a very hobbyist friendly perspective and accurately applies for the most part, but for providers it is much more likely they will try to use them.

I'd be very careful saying I was an attorney on an escort website (assuming people who claim to be attornies on this site are really attornies). I had a friend who was an attorney in Texas. The police had to do an unrelated search on his computer. They inadvertently found he was a registered member of an escort website. His name and escort website postings were turned over to the state bar. He was ultimately disbarred as a result of an over zealous detective. Originally Posted by CM

I suspect your friend was involved in some pretty serious stuff for the police to search his computer. They'd have to get a warrant to do that (unless your friend consented in which case he should be disbarred for incompetence). I also call BS on the notion that simply membership and postings on an escort review website got him disbarred. I bet that ain't the whole story. Your story does not add up. Based on your posting history, it looks like you may just be trolling.

Hypothetical no. 3: LE wait's at said provider's incall for IRISHPUSSYLOVER to leave, then confiscate her cell, harddrive, and DNA ....... IRISHPUSSYLOVER is unaware of this and writes a review that same night. thus, linking all parties and revealing all true identies. lol i know i'm reaching but hey, it could happen. Originally Posted by Copierguy0

I'm not convinced your hypo is really distinct from the others already presented. Even if the cops somehow linked the man leaving the incall to the handle 'IrishPussyLover' (what, was he wearing a T-shirt with his handle?), the prosecutor would still have to lay the predicate of authenticity. I think this is true even if IrishPussyLover "revealed true identities" in his review, as you state (I take that to mean he wrote something in his review like, "My real name is Paddy Guinness O'Leary, I was born on March 14, 1972, and I live at 6969 Scrotum Street in Frisco, Texas"). An authenticity foundation must still be laid because Paddy, me, or a million fucking Swedes in Minnesota could have written the statement "revealing true identities."

Btw, who is this Irishpussylover? I'd like to meet him. Will you introduce me? Originally Posted by Fancyinheels

IrishPussyLover is a mere figment of my imagination. btw, as a Scot, I feel affinity for the Irish, also among the six Celtic tribes. Scots are like the Irish, although we have jobs and we're usually sober.

Well, if "they" REALLY wanted to get IrishPussyLover, they could track his IP address when writing the review and establish that IrishPussyLover happens to live at 123 Main Street in Fort Worth. If it turns out that the only person who lives at that address is John Smith, then perhaps John Smith is in fact IrishPussyLover. The IP address could be tracked at many points before the connection to ECCIE. Everybody on the internet can be tracked, even someone in the "fucking black hole of calcutta"

Now would they expend this energy and money? Probably not but it probably depends on who the hobbyist is I would guess.

The real defence, of course, is that these reviews are just fantasy.

Well, if "they" REALLY wanted to get IrishPussyLover, they could track his IP address when writing the review and establish that IrishPussyLover happens to live at 123 Main Street in Fort Worth. If it turns out that the only person who lives at that address is John Smith, then perhaps John Smith is in fact IrishPussyLover. The IP address could be tracked at many points before the connection to ECCIE. Everybody on the internet can be tracked, even someone in the "fucking black hole of calcutta"

Now would they expend this energy and money? Probably not but it probably depends on who the hobbyist is I would guess.

The real defence, of course, is that these reviews are just fantasy. Originally Posted by phineas

I'm not a tech-nerd, but tech-nerd expert witnesses say that an IP can be hijacked. I still think having the IP isn't enough to lay the predicate of authenticity, even with everything else I've mentioned. But I'm a criminal defense attorney, not a prosecutor or a judge.

Take federal prosecutions for possessing child pornography. The SOP is a federal agent interacts with someone online, receives child pornography from the person on a file-transfer site, then traces the person's IP. The feds don't file a case based only on the IP. They go to the person's house with a search warrant and find child pornography on his computer. Because of the nature of federal crimes, the person will usually find it in their best interest to confess and otherwise cooperate with the authorities. Now compare that emphasis with a state prosecution for doing a little flippy-floppy with a sporting girl and Barney Fife only having the reviewer's IP. There really is no comparison.

I'm not a tech-nerd, but tech-nerd expert witnesses say that an IP can be hijacked. ... Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Correct. And if I'm not mistaken, an internet service provider will not release a location-specific IP assignment without a supoena. This makes the process even more labor-intensive.

IrishPussyLover is a mere figment of my imagination. btw, as a Scot, I feel affinity for the Irish, also among the six Celtic tribes. Scots are like the Irish, although we have jobs and we're usually sober. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

That was one of the funniest things I've read in a while. Well done good sir.

I'm not a tech-nerd, but tech-nerd expert witnesses say that an IP can be hijacked. I still think having the IP isn't enough to lay the predicate of authenticity, even with everything else I've mentioned. But I'm a criminal defense attorney, not a prosecutor or a judge. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

As a tech-nerd I vouch for that statement. An IP address can be hijacked, spoofed, or manipulated.

Correct. And if I'm not mistaken, an internet service provider will not release a location-specific IP assignment without a supoena. This makes the process even more labor-intensive. Originally Posted by JDNorthface

For the most part that also is correct. But while LE is at it they'll throw the IP's "internet history" into the supoena. The ISP will then turn over all DNS requests, as well as location info for the IP in question. The DNS requests would show the webpages visited from the IP address which would be used to further attempt proving their case.

I'm not a tech-nerd, but tech-nerd expert witnesses say that an IP can be hijacked. I still think having the IP isn't enough to lay the predicate of authenticity, even with everything else I've mentioned. But I'm a criminal defense attorney, not a prosecutor or a judge.

Take federal prosecutions for possessing child pornography. The SOP is a federal agent interacts with someone online, receives child pornography from the person on a file-transfer site, then traces the person's IP. The feds don't file a case based only on the IP. They go to the person's house with a search warrant and find child pornography on his computer. Because of the nature of federal crimes, the person will usually find it in their best interest to confess and otherwise cooperate with the authorities. Now compare that emphasis with a state prosecution for doing a little flippy-floppy with a sporting girl and Barney Fife only having the reviewer's IP. There really is no comparison. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Which begs the question, is it worth the police and DAs efforts to expend the time, $$$ and resources to prosecute a low-level misdemeanor where in reality no time will be served and a small fine incurred? I realize the law doesn't recognize this as a victimless crime, but in reality the hobby truly is victimless when practiced correctly.

Also, SJ could you please expand on your last sentence in the OP. What is you advice on being discreet with reviews and using common sense?

Thanks SJ. As a matter of practice rather than theoretical law, have you ever seen or heard of a review being used against the defendant in a prostitution case? Originally Posted by Waldo P. Emerson-Jones

It happened in Virginia in the Hampton Roads area. The Virginia Beach Commonwealth's Attorney used some providers' posts to prove intent a few years back (you might be able to find a reference to it at www.avenuex.com).

In those cases, I don't remember them going after hobbyists, but they might have and I didn't hear about it.