Recorded Sessions?

No i do not have to go find it.... Originally Posted by WTF

That says it all right there. You "don't have to find it" because it's not there.

That's the kind of loud mouth you are .... and you expect people to take "your word."

Not my preferred three some - Usually my mix is one dog, two kittens.

or enjoying three kittens play together. Originally Posted by cr76

Haha....I'm sure you have been in the company of a few of them. Purrr!!

Why would she come to you with an audio tape??

Sure she could dig up that stuff, but once again it comes down to a he she said part.

She could claim i was there, but that could be a flat out lie.

And AUDIO recording puts the gent at the location and time the girl claims.

I thought you were done discussing this and didn't want to be unappreciated anymore. Originally Posted by cr76

God damn....with an audio tape and no other information on you ...she can't even claim you were there to a soul because she does not know who you are.


But say you are married with personal information. ..she can claim you were somewhere YOU ACTUALLY WERE. How the fuck are going to prove you were at home when you weren't or at work when you weren't.. so how is it a flat out lie. ..or how are you going to explain to your wife how a hooker knows what size your dick is or if you shave your ass or not. God damn man think.

Personal information is way more dangerous in a hookers hands than a random audio recording . You jave said nothong to bolster your case.

Tell ya what...go fuck a hooker...have then have her call your house and tell your wife where you were and you audio record you explaining to your wife that is a flat out lie and let me hear her reaction. You make it sound so simple....honey that is a flat out lie. Well then where were you? ...and how does she know your dick size?

Come on man a audio recording without any personal information is harmless to you.

First you come on this thread saying that audio recordings are not legal in a private setting such as the hobby. Originally Posted by WTF

Until you produce a link to a post in this thread in which made this statement:

"audio recordings are not legal in a private setting such as the hobby" ....

.. you are a liar.

Im not married.

it's easier to dispute some crazy girl calling then the girl having a AUDIO recording. But that all depends on your credibility.

So you want to see girls and you say the should record you, but your not going to give them any personal info??

Do you only see SW or something?? Only call BP girls??

Do you see girls off here??

if the handle is something dangerous to give out??

Do you make up names to conceal your identity??

Haha....I'm sure you have been in the company of a few of them. Purrr!! Originally Posted by Luvs2Purrr

why yes i have,

and it's especially better when a Kitten are into other kittens just as much as i am ;-)

Until you produce a link to a post in this thread in which made this statement:

"audio recordings are not legal in a private setting such as the hobby" ....

.. you are a liar. Originally Posted by LexusLover

No OJ ...I need no more evidence. You led Dorthy Moron to believe that audio recordings were illegal. I gave you the opportunity both then and now to tell Dorthy that she was incorrect.You did not have the integrity to tell Dorthy then or now that she was wrong.

Are you now saying that audio recordings are legal? Tell Dorthy, not me. I knew this long ago.

Im not married.

it's easier to dispute some crazy girl calling then the girl having a AUDIO recording.
? Originally Posted by cr76

Damn are you really not getting the point?

Without a provider having your personal information. .. she can not contact your wife with a audio recording . ....do you not understand that ? If you never give a provider any personal information, you will never have to worry about that provider contacting you with a audio recording or with out a audio recording.

But if a provider has no personal information on you....her having an audio recording of you looking for your dick is harmless.

And you "KNOW" this based on a posting on a hooker board by a hooker?

Thanks for posting a reference to an unsubstantiated claim that will encourage hookers to record sessions believing that the DA will drop criminal charges if a recording is produced. I "assume" you're ok with being recorded, if you happen one day to have a session, just so the hooker will feel "safe" from you.

Were you also the one who advised them to put a disclaimer in their ads? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Sorry, you read it in a newpaper account. I "always" base my knowledge about LE activities and screw ups" in the media to get the straight "poop"!

Back to the "issue"

"Thanks for posting a reference to an unsubstantiated claim that will encourage hookers to record sessions believing that the DA will drop criminal charges if a recording is produced. I "assume" you're ok with being recorded, if you happen one day to have a session, just so the hooker will feel "safe" from you."

Did you also read in the media that BBBJ's are just as risky as BBFS?

You're on a roll.

If you can justify a "provider" recording a session for safety, then a "hobbyist" should be able to justify recording a session for safety. My vote is NEITHER RECORD UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES without specific permission to do so .... at the beginning of the recording with a date and time check in the permission segment. Originally Posted by LexusLover

More legal analysis from the guy who predicted Zimmerman would be convicted of "something" in his prosecution for the death of Martin.

Guess who provides "the as long as one of the parties give consent" ...

.... the "party" (according to your analysis) doing the recording...... and are you "confusing" phone taps?

Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 21.15. IMPROPER PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL RECORDING. (a) In this section, "promote" has the meaning assigned by Section 43.21.

(b) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is not a bathroom or private dressing room:

(A) without the other person's consent; and

(B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

(2) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is a bathroom or private dressing room:

(A) without the other person's consent; and

(B) with intent to:

(i) invade the privacy of the other person; or

(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or

(3) knowing the character and content of the photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission, promotes a photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission described by Subdivision (1) or (2).

(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.

(e) For purposes of Subsection (b)(2), a sign or signs posted indicating that the person is being photographed or that a visual image of the person is being recorded, broadcast, or transmitted is not sufficient to establish the person's consent under that subdivision."

The "problem" with the analysis is you, and others, confuse the "remedy" if an "unauthorized" video/audio is taken ... the "exclusionary rule" is the remedy in a criminal prosecution, but there are procedural and evidentiary exceptions to the rule.

The internet is full of video taken without "consent" of the part taped. That does not mean the video was taken "lawfully."

And perhaps more closely on point ....

18 U.S. Code § 1801 - Video voyeurism
(a) Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, has the intent to capture an image of a private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly does so under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(b) In this section—
(1) the term “capture”, with respect to an image, means to videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, or broadcast;

(2) the term “broadcast” means to electronically transmit a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons;

(3) the term “a private area of the individual” means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast of that individual;

(4) the term “female breast” means any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola; and

(5) the term “under circumstances in which that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means—
(A) circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image of a private area of the individual was being captured; or

(B) circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the individual would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place.

(c) This section does not prohibit any lawful law enforcement, correctional, or intelligence activity.

(Added Pub. L. 108–495, § 2(a), Dec. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 3999.)

Take it up with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Quit giving legal advice. And you need to get your "facts straight" ....

.. since you want to be a lawyer on here ... my suggestion is you not change the scenario facts to fit your "legal argument" ...

This thread is about hobbyists and providers VIDEO TAPING sex sessions!

Mr. Martin-Zimmerman expert!!!!

Apparently your "sex sessions" do not involve the exposure of sex organs!

.. and of course in your normal amateur style you "cherry pick" your extraction from "the law" ... to suit your desire to be correct even though by doing so you put others at risk, because you don't know shit about "the law"

"or other electronic means" ... how do you audio record?

Give it up before you really get someone in trouble with your "legal advice"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

I do read ...and you should take your own advice about reading ..

"A grand jury today declined to indict a Houston Police Department vice officer arrested earlier this year on two charges of tampering with a government record in connection with an October prostitution arrest.
The action clears XXXXXXXXXXX, 57, of any wrongdoing after he was accused of filing a false police record about what an accused prostitute said in her bedroom, said XXXXXXXX's attorney, XXXXXXXX.



Actually you are.

And also I'm giving no one any "advice" on here.

Actually you are.

Now, I suggested this before to you ... if you want to get involved with a running pissing contest .... go get married, if your not, otherwise get a divorce and marry one that will. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I invite all hobbyists and providers who desire to videotape sessions to the ...

...."WTF-I-Know-it-all Criminal Defense Fund" .... for PrePaid Legal Services!!!!

PM WTF for details.

Federal misdemeanor cases are about the same price as State felony cases.*
*The Feds have a "nasty" habit of multiple counts in indictments + using "unindicted" criminal activity for sentencing purposes. But I'm sure WTF will explain all that to you! Originally Posted by LexusLover

..... as long as the client keeps paying .... keep talking.

WTF is a lawyer's wet dream, if he could afford the tab.

Here's a question for you:

If WTF is using his phone to "audio record" how do you know its not on "video"?

Oh, BTW: since this is about "audio" recording aka "oral" recording ...

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 18.20
Tex. Penal Code § 16.02
Tex. Rules of Evidence Rule 901(b).

Since everyone is speculating it is highly likely that the officer in WTF"s scenario out of the Houston Chronicle to support his legal advice for all the providers to audio record their "clients" ... was NO BILLED by the Grand Jury because the crafty little prostitute was unable to get her "recording" admitted into evidence. These anecdotal examples form no basis for "legal advice."

But it is nice to know that WTF is ADVOCATING recording hobby sessions! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Dear Little Boy .... #1 ... the mention of video/spy cams was brought up before I began posting about "recording" sessions. #2 ... Fortunately the World (this one and the real one) doesn't revolve around YOU! #3 ... YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT FROM SHINOLA ABOUT PRACTICING CRIMINAL LAW. #4 .. Your LAMEASS attempt to paint me as "LE" with your slimy, ignorant innuendos shows the depths of your classlessness and ugliness, when anybody on this board who knows me or knows of me recognizes I am not LE.

You are the one who has advocated (and still are) providers recording sessions "for their own protection" ... and you give a news report in the Houston Chronicle as the basis for your LEGAL ADVICE for providers to do so.

From that it can easily be PRESUMED that you advocate HOBBYISTS recording their sessions with PROVIDERS .... and therefore you support what PAPPI was doing, since he asserts he was doing so "for his own protection."

When the authors of the Bill of Rights got finished with the Fourth Amendment they crafted the Fifth Amendment just for Little Boys like you. Then they crafted the Sixth Amendment to assure that Little Boys like you that can't keep their ignorant mouths shut would be guarantied a lawyer.

You are obviously not a lawyer. You should not be practicing law by giving legal advice. In Texas practicing law without a license is a serious matter, not only for the unwary consumers of the advice, but also the community as a whole. Contrary to YOUR CHARACTERIZATION of what you are doing it is "practicing law" when you give someone advice concerning their "legal rights"!

You've made your posts about you. Your over-inflated responses reflect your lack of self-esteem and desire to appear intellectually superior to others in an effort, apparently, to overcome your own deficiencies as a person.

Unless you want to put your money where your mouth is ... with either professional liability insurance for legal malpractice or a slush defense fund for the providers who are actually dumb enough to take your advice, then you should probably go sit on the bench and keep quiet. 5th Amendment. But you won't.

My RECOMMENDATION to providers and hobbyists alike is they spend a few bucks (about the cost of one session) on a lawyer referred by the Houston Bar Association referral service (not some other similarly situated person) as having special knowledge in the area of surreptitious video/audio recordings as it relates to criminal law and civil liability and meet with that "expert" and discuss the matter in depth. The conversation will be privileged and therefore remain private and protected. General suggestion: Request a fee contract with the attorney spelling out the expense and scope of the employment and retain a fully signed copy. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Like I said:

"....you should probably go sit on the bench and keep quiet. 5th Amendment. But you won't."

Like I said:

"....you should probably go sit on the bench and keep quiet. 5th Amendment. But you won't."
Originally Posted by LexusLover

LL...your post confused Dorthy into believing that audio recording a private encounter was illegal. When given the opportunity to correct that erroneous thought on her part. you chose to not address it, even after i had asked you to. Your post was confusing to folks not familiar with the law...when given an opportunity to clarify you have chosen not to both then and now. Please show me a post where you acknowledge in laymen terms that it is indeed legal to audio record private intimate encounters. ...those that Dorthy were confused over. Ypu can not because you still have not.

"or other electronic means" ... how do you audio record?

Give it up before you really get someone in trouble with your "legal advice"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Why did you ask this question LL? Was it because you confused audio recording up with video recording? Or were you trying to confuse others?

Nobody was going to get in trouble with my advice bevause my advice was in fact correct. Your advice however confused Dorthy. She still thinks it is illegal to audio record her encounters...because of your advice she may contact the police if she were to catch someone legally audio recording her session and get herself into trouble under your counsel.

This is starting to sound like a debate war.
I really hate politics. But, oh well. I'll just sit back and watch LL / WTF go at it.
I say we need to charge admission now.

Folks - Why don't you get together and fight lma

Yea, yea... EXCEPT I do NOT do any of that. I do NOT collect anybody's RW personal info, in any manner, shape or form. That's just another stupid bs lie you pulled out of your ass, in a desperate attempt to defend your case. Since you do NOT have any actual facts or truthful arguments to do so. Why you think that making that up was gonna help your twisted views is beyond me...

I'm happy for you that this "debating" thing is just a hobby for you and not what you do for a living or source of income. Because if that was the case you would certainly starve yourself. You cannot go past 3 posts back and forth with anybody before you start breaking down, getting personal, throwing insults left and right and even Racial Slurs. I do not believe that's how a debates work, you should do some research in the subject and you'll see how WRONG you are again...

On Topic: Yes I did say it before and I'll say it again regardless of the law recording someone without their consent is disrespectful, far from ethical and is something that I personally will never consider in being part of my sessions.

Instead of insulting the guys that are just telling you how pathetic you look as a "man" you should try and take some of their advice.

Anyway like always you ruined another thread with your negativity and psychotic ways... I'm pretty much done here. I'm sure you're not your next posts full of insults and physical threats are going to be proof of that...

Oh here's a new one just for you...

https://instagram.com/p/9u3PqYw88H/ Originally Posted by Natalia Mori

but but but i have been told that you save RW info from P411 handle & share it with your close friends...is that true ???

This is starting to sound like a debate war. Originally Posted by Luvs2Purrr

It's a good debate. I'm enjoying it.