Did you know Texas law allows providers immunity if they give evidence against a hobbyist?

Hello. Happy Thanksgiving, boys and girls!

I'm sorry to interrupt your regular programming here in Coed Discussions with something so factsy and frowny as the law governing prostitution in Texas. But I think you should learn something new today. Take a few minutes to read this, then you can get back to discussions regarding guys who don't wash their ass crack and girls whose hoochie smells like Charlie the Tuna died inside.

Did you know that, under Texas law, immunity may be granted to a party who engaged in prostitution and who gives evidence against the other party who engaged in prostitution? Well, it's true.

TEXAS PENAL CODE
Sec. 43.06. ACCOMPLICE WITNESS; TESTIMONY AND IMMUNITY.
(a) A party to an offense under this subchapter (that is, chapter 43, "Public Indecency," subchapter A, "Prostitution") may be required to furnish evidence or testify about the offense.
(b) A party to an offense under this subchapter may not be prosecuted for any offense about which he is required to furnish evidence or testify, and the evidence and testimony may not be used against the party in any adjudicatory proceeding except a prosecution for aggravated perjury.
(c) For purposes of this section, "adjudicatory proceeding" means a proceeding before a court or any other agency of government in which the legal rights, powers, duties, or privileges of specified parties are determined.
(d) A conviction under this subchapter may be had upon the uncorroborated testimony of a party to the offense.

See Texas Penal Code section 43.06.

The effect of section 43.06 is that a provider (or a hobbyist, for that matter) who commits the offense of prostitution may be forced to "furnish evidence or testify" regarding her crime. Because the statute lists both "furnish evidence" and "testify," we must assume furnishing evidence means something different from testifying, such as giving a statement to the police, turning over electronic communications to the cops, or handing them the cash the hobbyist gave her, for example. Section 43.06 doesn't abridge the privilege against self-incrimination stated in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because the statute expressly states that the evidence the provider furnishes can't be used against her in a prosecution for having committed the offense of prostitution.

Just something to keep in mind for hobbyists, including those who short, don't pay, or steal from providers, hobbyists who overstay time bought, hobbyists who are physically abusive to providers, hobbyists who covertly attempt BBFS, etc. The provider you fuck then fuck over may drop a dime on you to obtain revenge or as part of a deal to avoid prosecution. I think it is a prudent hobbyist who treats every provider like the princess she is inside, even if her beaver really smells like a beaver.

Now, back to your regular programming. Happy Turkey Day!

thanks for the heads up Jon.... now for the smelly beaver defense ...

Thank you for the heads up. This is perhaps a unique twist on a "credible witness" since she has credibility in this area at least. Either way your point is well taken and we should never mess with a bitch named Karma

Good info...were not aware of that, but a "provider" will only probably will do that if she does not have any future plans to provide....It's not like someone would skip a session to testify and then come back back to "providing"??
In any case, mutual respect and professionalism is important for a healthy hobbying environment.

Maybe one more reason not to provide RW info for screening, as discussed in this thread:
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1896381
Not that the authorities can't track you down through handles and hobby phones, but no need to make it easy for them.

If I may bring us back to the world of common sense, under what conditions would the police want to offer immunity to a provider? Giving immunity to a hobbyist in order to get to a prostitute and in turn to her pimp, I understand. A repeat offender, who perhaps is spreading a disease around and endangering the public, I understand. A girl who is also connected to a drug ring, I understand.

Hobbyists, unless they are wanted for more serious crimes, are usually not the ones the police want. Under what circumstances would the police turn this situation around and go after a hobbyist?

I have known a large number of Dallas County ADA's and they are pretty much unanimous in not wanting to prosecute this kind of case at all. They have too many other, more serious criminals to worry about.

U deserve a medal

shyster,
always appreciate the legal tidbits you and others post and discuss.
makes for stimulating reading while drinking beer in the backyard as the turkey is prepped.

i believe the critical point, other than being forced to testify, is
"d) A conviction under this subchapter may be had upon the uncorroborated testimony of a party to the offense."

so all it takes to convict john or jane is the testimony of jane or john.

as far as villainous behavior on our playground:
I do not believe anyone, client or lady, will change their behavior simply due to possible legal implications.
in my opinion, the dastardly behavior by horndogs exampled by your citations, is bred of lack of conscious and lack respect for working girls in particular, probably lack of respect for women in general.
the dishonest behavior on the ladies part, i believe, is also due to lack of conscious and lack of respect towards johns, and probably men in general.

i suppose in large part the actual acting out of the behavior is fueled by the notion that being engaged in an illegal activity, it is more likely the injured party will not seek assistance from the justice system.

These things do not usually end up going to trial. It's a misdemeanor and we take a slap on the wrist deal. We like to stay out of court rooms as much as possible. Nobody is snitching on anybody to get out of misdemeanor offenses. This literally never happens so guys don't worry your pretty little heads about it.