Will this work?

Well, I don't know about the laws of "most or all states" since I haven't spent the time reading the penal codes of all 50 states as you infer you have, Trees. But from what you assert I think you are just bullshitting. I do know the laws regarding prostitution in Texas, since I have practiced criminal law here for more than 28 years, and I've handled hundreds of prostitution cases. The Texas law can't be accurately characterized as a "quid pro quo" law; rather, the law regards offer OR acceptance ONLY -- no agreement need be formed.

Well, while you were reading up on the prostitution laws of all 50 states, how many appellate opinions did you come across in which a conviction was reversed based on the "money for time only" defense? Please give me the cites. If you say you didn't find one, I think we can conclude that no such opinion exists. btw, you seem to have a misunderstanding about the cases reported in casebooks. They're APPELLATE OPINIONS, not opinions issued by trial courts.



I completely call bullshit on this. Give the cite.

Reasons unstated? HUH? Have you read any of my postings here and on ASPD for the past 15 years? Many times I've explained that jurors don't leave their common sense at the jury room door when they begin deliberations on a case. Juries tend to figure things out pretty quick. Here, you're talking about a FALSE, FABRICATED DEFENSE that belies common sense. A real-world courtroom isn't like one of the TV courtrooms where you received all your legal knowledge. I won't assert any nonsensical defense because the jury might thump my client because they were annoyed by my lack of respect for their intelligence. I also think you must be from Pluto in thinking that some idiot would purposefully allow themselves to be arrested just to test the "money for time only" defense unless, of course, YOU are the idiot. In that case, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Whoa. Remind me not to piss off Shyster. ;p

you might well seriously lower your chances if arrest if you sit and chat with a fellow for an hour, charge him for that time. Then screw him for another hour for free. I say this because most cops are going to go for the sure thing and not sit around for an hour waiting to see what happens

LilMynx69,

What u say makes sense. Say Jane posts on BP and does no screening. If guy shows up and spidy senses tingle. Kick his ass out of the room? Or do a sit-down time only session, fully paid at end? Seems smart and even if arrest is not avoided its at least postponed, lol. If during the companionship discussion there is talk about sexual services, provider should say there is terrible misunderstanding, I am not a prostitute and ask Bob Hobby to please leave.

Your point that his patience to sit for an hour might say fuck it and leave is also good point. If its worth his wait... Thanks for your comment.

Shyster Jon

Did not mean to crawl into any of the wormholes in TX criminal law, procedure and practice. Sorry. There is ingrown quality in TX criminal procedure and TX defense bar notorious for feeding clients into the prosecutor-driven shredding machines that produce the highest conviction rates, longest jail sentences and most death penalties in the entire country, higher then many totalitarian nations too. Bombast. While TX is a prosecution machine, significant portion of TX' criminal defense bar are acquiescent in front of clients whilst cheer leading prosecutors behind client's backs.

How does one get hundreds of unique clients all charged with prostitution? Are alternative or 'special' payment arrangements made available to clients? Seems that Shyster stands to benefit most when prostitutes are arrested. When girls do not get arrested Shyster does not make money or the honey given in lieu thereof?

--------------

Providers: a legitimate arrest avoidance (or at worst, postponement) technique has been presented in this thread, thanks Trina and LilMynx69. It may not be a silver bullet, but it certainly can't hurt and might just work.

19Trees

Trees, the more you speak the more you're convincing me that you're a complete jackass, moron, and clueless windbag. By ignoring my call-outs regarding your previous post, you've also proven that you're a fucking liar who completely fabricates information to prove a point. You obviously know nothing about Texas criminal law, the way the Texas courts operate, and the ethical obligations of attorneys. Yet that does not deter you from spewing your ignorant views out of your flaccid ass. I just hope no one takes them seriously, and I expect no one does.

I don't mind a man quietly being a fool on his own. But you have become the village idiot of the legal forum and I want you to STFU.

[Let's stay on point lest get pointed. Lets respect forum rules. Personally directed rudeness, name calling and flaming not welcomed here or anywhere. Using thread to telegraph hubris, arrogance that turns into anger when challenged - - that might be OK (?, little help from mods?) but never when personally directed.]

Shysters post 18, effectively hijacked Trina's thread by taking the substantive discussion about meetings that involve NO SEX to make personal attacks.

Back to the TOPIC: Can a provider be arrested for sitting, fully clothed with a law enforcement officer, then take payment for "companionship"?

Notwithstanding the blow-hardy angry rants of Shyster (who has benefited from 'hundreds of prostitute-clients') it should be fair to say this:

If you are concerned that Bob Hobby is LE, as an alternative to refusing to see him is just sitting with him (do not discuss sexual services, if he brings sexual services end meeting immed) and charge him a fee for time/companionship for the (non sexual) session.

By handing it this way you may: 1) frustrate the cop or make him lose patience; 2) may get paid for time and not provide any sexual services; 3) avoid arrest.

This may not work (some cops lie, cheat, rape, embezzle, etc). Assuming the cop legit and not 'dirty' the paid-for-time only strategy might work.

So if you think you might have a cop in your room, keep your cool and, remember that prostitution is a crime of WORDS in connection with action (sex) and money (fee). Quid pro quo. This for that. If none of the magic words are uttered and there is no sex, arrest will be avoided.

Things might work differently in TX than every other place, but not probably not really. TX differs from most other states in this combination: 1) legal, cultural and political environment that is tough on crime; and 2) an acquiescent and ill-effective defense bar.

These are all GOOD reasons to avoid arrest - - repeat AVOID arrest - - in TX. If you avoid arrest you will avoid expenses, probation, plea deals and a outstanding retainer payment obligation (or other personal services, see links below) to a [shyster?] lawyer who gets rich from repeated and repeated arrests for prostitution. Or not.

Avoid arrest. Avoid arrest. Avoid arrest. Especially in Texas!

19Trees


Some links:

http://www.freep.com/article/20130823/NEWS03/308230087/

http://www.jaapl.org/content/20/4/365.full.pdf

http://www.twincities.com/ci_2237304...ime-having-sex

http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/vie...53&context=flr

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stor...r-at-risk.html

http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...he_admits_oral

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/18...nt-having-sex/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2505028.html

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/27-old...135700750.html

Trees, you steaming sack of shit, what makes you qualified to render opinions about the quality of the defense bar in the entire state of Texas? For once in your sorry, pathetic life, be specific.

The statistics speak for themselves.

+ The Texas criminal defense bar loses 84% of the time, far higher than any other State. Compare another "tough state" Florida at 59%.

+ TX has highest percentage of prisoners to the "free populace" anywhere. A sign of a thriving and effective criminal defense bar? Hardly.

+ Texas' conviction rates (relative to aggregate reported crime and arrest and conviction data in ALL other States) show that TX convicts more people (as percentage of the population) than any other State.

+ Texas easily hit the 500 number of prisoners executed. The Innocence Project published report that more than 50% of people executed had ineffective use of counsel in Texas (failure to investigate, failure to provide timely motions, lowest use of motions in limine nationwide, in one case counsel's failure to present rock-solid alibi (his client was in prison at time of alleged theft and assault outside a shopping plaza).

Is there a law review article that comprehensively analyzes why TX defense counsel is the worst in the country? Maybe. Obviously not ALL TX attorneys are inane, incompetent, maintaining untenable conflicts of interest, etc. Defendants should assume and expect this and consider themselves lucky to find a competent one.

Question for Shyster: You mention you have seen hundreds of providers. You also mention in this thread that you represented hundreds of accused prostitutes (criminal defense services?). Is there any relationship between these?

Hope this does not veer too far from the OP's desire to avoid arrest. These are further reasons why avoidance is the best strategy.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...iron-clad_ali/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate

http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.co...p-despite.html

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=460447

http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OP...PINIONID=24935

http://www.austinchronicle.com/daily...-appeal-heard/

19Trees

As an "academic," I've been told many time I should embrace statistics. But I don't. I know that there are many ways to skew facts and even well meaning researchers can come to results that apparently have one cause, but actually have another. I am going to pick apart your statistics because it would be too time consuming. If I did take the time, I'd have to bill you for it...

I don't practice Criminal Law in Texas, but I have a great amount of knowledge of the justice system here in Houston and knowledge firsthand in Louisiana.

The historical lack of a formal Public Defender office HAS been a detriment in my experience. That does not in any way mean that those individuals choosing to practice Crimianl Law are any thing but zealous advocates for their clients.

I don't have statistics to back it up, but I'll tell you why I think the most trials end in a conviction. It's called a Plea Bargain. Most cases end this way. Many times a competent attorney will negotiate a deal to avoid stiff jail time, fines, expense, etc. You can also make the argument that prosecutors also dismiss any cases they can't win. That is not an acquittal, but I guarantee that the client is even happier.

Additionally, you claim that SJ is making personal attacks on you. Well, you make horribly unfair statements about ethics that insult and demean every lawyer in Texas. Thanks.

I'm in patent law, not criminal law, but I would think we can all agree creating a paper trail for such activities is not a good idea.

Even if you explicitly list some other activity as the purpose of the invoice (i.e., a red herring), good luck selling a detective, prosecutor, or jury on that. Originally Posted by sketchball82

Wow, I can't believe there's a patent lawyer out there who isn't obsessed with creating a voluminous paper trail. LOL.

While I agree in theory and was mostly jesting, I do often wonder why more ladies don't run the "legal" part of their business following more traditional practices. A consulting type practice. I get why this doesn't work for some providers, but there are many others who could do this.

My opinion has always been that the "I'm only charging for my time" defense doesn't usually work because it is usually a LIE. If it were the actual case and indeed, sex may or may not happen naturalły between consenting adults, then I think the defense becomes more credible.

But the fact is chicks want get paid up front and guys don't want to pay without a guarantee.

SJ had it in his first post. And I'll say it with less words: No way.
And I'll add: Good screening is simply more cost effective than getting involved with the court system

SJ had it in his first post. And I'll say it with less words: No way.
And I'll add: Good screening is simply more cost effective than getting involved with the court system Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

On a rare occurrence, I'm going to disagree with UC. No amount of screening will help if you break the law and LE is set on arresting you for whatever reason.

It was unfair for Trees to use conviction rates and statistics to paint the entire TX defense bar - - incompetent under under zealous/acquiescent. Apologies for that!

For a combination of reasons (that may or may not include effective counsel), TX is the WRONG place to get arrested and charged.

19Trees

It was unfair for Trees to use conviction rates and statistics to paint the entire TX defense bar - - incompetent under under zealous/acquiescent. Apologies for that!

For a combination of reasons (that may or may not include effective counsel), TX is the WRONG place to get arrested and charged.

19Trees Originally Posted by 19Trees

Thank you. And I will agree that Texas is not a place to get into legal trouble. Harris County/Houston probably being the worst.

On a rare occurrence, I'm going to disagree with UC. No amount of screening will help if you break the law and LE is set on arresting you for whatever reason. Originally Posted by LilMynx69

I'll accept your conclusion, if you accept that LE already has the person targeted. With this hypothesis, it also stands to reason that either prior screening failed, or that a person has otherwise come to LE’s attention through some security breach (ie. client rolled, upset hotel clerk, and the list goes on). Thus, various discussions on hobby safety are worth re-reading from time to time. And as Mynx has mentioned elsewhere, SJ's comments throughout the board posts really are a must read. For the safety aspects grounded in reality, not fantasy, as well as his presentation, which I find frequently entertaining (examples above).

Trina,

Your question and the instincts behind it, are good ones.

Most or all State laws define prostitution as quid pro quo, this (money) for that (sexual services defined in the code).

Only the very tiniest percentage of prostitution arrests go to trial and fewer still are resolved with an written opinion by the court. Not sure if there is even one reported case where an accused is on trial for prostitution.

If there were (or will be) such a case, the "TIME ONLY" argument (sex was two mutually consenting adults not for money) may be a winning legal argument. Or not.

A meeting of State Prosecutors occasioned by Craigslist's "voluntary" agreement to remove adult ads on CL a prosecutor from PA made argument that plea deals are highly favored/recommended since States prosecutors actually fear that they will lose in a well presented "TIME ONLY" defense by the provider.

Trees disagrees with Shyster's proposition that the question is laughable. To the contrary, evidence that there was a paid session of companionship no sex, followed by legal private conduct would HELP the provider avoid arrest.

Someone somewhere someday will TEST this. Will purposely and purposefully try to get themselves arrested to make a point and take this defensive strategy (which Shyster Jon thinks silly and laughable for reasons unstated?) to trial.

Madame: Did you receive payment for sex? NO
Sir: Did you pay for sex? NO
Madame: You expect jury to believe that you charge for time only? YES
Sir: You expect jury to believe you were not paying for sex? YES

Will someone laugh? Maybe. Will a highly skilled trial attorney who attempts not only to get you off but also to establish "time only" as future defense? S/he too will not be laughing. May actually be a winning argument. If not, then the million "time only" disclaimers in adult ads are also worthless and laughable.

19Trees Originally Posted by 19Trees

Thank you, I didn't think it was silly in Florida where they get popped for selling SEX

Either way, the courts, government, whatever the hell you want to call it, feels they have the right to tell me that being immoral is illegal, but it's only illegal if I ask for money. If I'm just having sex with a married man for free, then my immorality is legal. It makes a ton of sense Originally Posted by KierstanStarr

If you are having sex with a married man for FREE - you are doing it wrong. Trust me.

We'll at least buy presents. And dinner!