The recent Secret Service and Military advance team debacle in Columbia has raised a lot of discussion about prostitution. In another discussion, I reminded a member that escorting is legal, and shared that I don't pay for sex. I pay for a professional's time and good counsel...just as I do when dealing with my attorneys. I can hear the comments already: were there expectations of having sex? (Perhaps, perhaps not...and why would anyone divulge that info to LE).
If I pull up to a SW and offer her $40 for any type of sexual service - that's solicitation and it against the law...in most places.
If I meet an escort at her place or mine, paying her in advance for an agreed upon amount of time - let's say two hours, and at some point during that two hours we engage in sex...Is this prostitution? (I'll even sweeten this one and say we discussed nothing but sex prior to our triste...and suggest it changes nothing)
I was at a swing party a long time ago. I was in the kitchen when a long time friend came up to me and said, "you can fuck my wife, if you give me a beer." I gave him a beer, then later fucked his wife. Was this guy "pimping" his wife?
Where do you see the line being drawn?
- Bigh1955
- 04-25-2012, 11:43 AM
- ShysterJon
- 04-25-2012, 12:24 PM
I think your question can't be answered coherently.
Let's assume that conduct constituting 'prostitution' is determined by a defendant either pleading guilty to that offense in a plea bargain or being found guilty of the offense after a trial. One could look at the facts of a group of cases retrospectively to isolate common facts to define what is 'prostitution.' But such a retrospective model would ignore many factors which led to the determination of guilt. Perhaps a better model is prospective.
What is or isn't 'prostitution' is partially determined by the language of a statute. But statutes aren't always clear and reasonable people may differ as to the meaning of words. Our appellate courts interpret statutes and write opinions, but those opinions don't always agree and sometimes the opinions themselves are unclear. Moreover, how laws are enforced is influenced by how trial judges, the police, DAs, defense attorneys, and defendants act. In Texas, state court judges and DAs are elected. During campaign time, judges and DAs might interpret what is 'prostitution' more broadly than normal so they can pat themselves on the back at candidate forums and say that they're 'tough on crime.' Police chiefs are political animals, too. They may run stings and bust street hookers and johns because they're bucking for a raise from the city council. Jails may be at capacity, so DAs may be willing to dismiss cases because the defense attorneys know jail time isn't a possibility so we can set cases for trial and fuck up the system by causing delay. To avoid the system breaking down, DAs may dismiss petty offenses like prostitution. If jails are overcrowded, DAs may at least be willing to recharacterize a prostitution case as something else, like disorderly conduct.
So if you're looking for bright lines as to what is and is not 'prostitution,' I'm afraid you're not going to receive satisfactory answers. Too many factors are at play to draw bright lines.
Now with that being said, I'll add that under Texas law the conduct you describe in your hypothetical could still be 'prostitution.' In addition to solicitation, making an offer of money for sex, or accepting an offer of money for sex, 'prostitution' in Texas includes having sex in exchange for money with no express agreement or spoken language regarding the transaction. (Lawyers call this an 'implied-in-fact' contract where the agreement is proven by the performance of each party.)
The following is the Texas statute making unaggravated prostitution a crime:
Texas Penal Code Sec. 43.02. PROSTITUTION.
(a) A person commits an offense if he knowingly:
(1) offers to engage, agrees to engage, or engages in sexual conduct for a fee; or
(2) solicits another in a public place to engage with him in sexual conduct for hire.
To summarize: 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.
As with types of conduct (1) (2), and (3), whether type (4) is 'prostitution' would be determined by the trier of fact. But I wouldn't suggest pitching your story to a judge or jury because if they see a duck in front of them, they're probably going to say it's a duck, although you may say it's an abacus.
Let's assume that conduct constituting 'prostitution' is determined by a defendant either pleading guilty to that offense in a plea bargain or being found guilty of the offense after a trial. One could look at the facts of a group of cases retrospectively to isolate common facts to define what is 'prostitution.' But such a retrospective model would ignore many factors which led to the determination of guilt. Perhaps a better model is prospective.
What is or isn't 'prostitution' is partially determined by the language of a statute. But statutes aren't always clear and reasonable people may differ as to the meaning of words. Our appellate courts interpret statutes and write opinions, but those opinions don't always agree and sometimes the opinions themselves are unclear. Moreover, how laws are enforced is influenced by how trial judges, the police, DAs, defense attorneys, and defendants act. In Texas, state court judges and DAs are elected. During campaign time, judges and DAs might interpret what is 'prostitution' more broadly than normal so they can pat themselves on the back at candidate forums and say that they're 'tough on crime.' Police chiefs are political animals, too. They may run stings and bust street hookers and johns because they're bucking for a raise from the city council. Jails may be at capacity, so DAs may be willing to dismiss cases because the defense attorneys know jail time isn't a possibility so we can set cases for trial and fuck up the system by causing delay. To avoid the system breaking down, DAs may dismiss petty offenses like prostitution. If jails are overcrowded, DAs may at least be willing to recharacterize a prostitution case as something else, like disorderly conduct.
So if you're looking for bright lines as to what is and is not 'prostitution,' I'm afraid you're not going to receive satisfactory answers. Too many factors are at play to draw bright lines.
Now with that being said, I'll add that under Texas law the conduct you describe in your hypothetical could still be 'prostitution.' In addition to solicitation, making an offer of money for sex, or accepting an offer of money for sex, 'prostitution' in Texas includes having sex in exchange for money with no express agreement or spoken language regarding the transaction. (Lawyers call this an 'implied-in-fact' contract where the agreement is proven by the performance of each party.)
The following is the Texas statute making unaggravated prostitution a crime:
Texas Penal Code Sec. 43.02. PROSTITUTION.
(a) A person commits an offense if he knowingly:
(1) offers to engage, agrees to engage, or engages in sexual conduct for a fee; or
(2) solicits another in a public place to engage with him in sexual conduct for hire.
To summarize: 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.
As with types of conduct (1) (2), and (3), whether type (4) is 'prostitution' would be determined by the trier of fact. But I wouldn't suggest pitching your story to a judge or jury because if they see a duck in front of them, they're probably going to say it's a duck, although you may say it's an abacus.
- Waldo P. Emerson-Jones
- 04-25-2012, 02:23 PM
If I meet an escort at her place or mine, paying her in advance for an agreed upon amount of time - let's say two hours, and at some point during that two hours we engage in sex...Is this prostitution? Originally Posted by Bigh1955I think non-lawyers sometimes get way too hung up on form when it comes to their interpretation of laws. There's this idea that you and the escort can both say your agreement was for time only and not for sex and that therefore you're safe from prosecution. NO! The prosecutor, judge, and jury are not necessarily required to believe what you tell them. They can look to all the circumstances and use their common sense.
To answer your question directly, if in fact your agreement with the escort was for her time only and there was no agreement for sex and sex just happened, then you're not guilty of prostitution. However, I don't believe that's what happens in fact in this world of ours and I bet a cop, prosecutor, judge, and jury would also conclude that this was in fact an agreement of money for sex and therefore you'd be found guilty of prostitution.
- soldierboy44
- 04-25-2012, 06:37 PM
while I am fine with what we adults do with our own time........in most cases outside the NorthAm.....these women are sex slaves......kidnapped from there homes sometimes at ages as young as 12 and used to make money for the kidnappers and drug runners......and this is just plain wrong and illegal.....that is why the members of the ss and the military are in trouble. I fully support this hobby becoming legal here in the USA, but if these women where sex slaves.....then that is just wrong!