What an undercover can and cannot do when seeing a provider

Hello! I am posting this question for a dear friend of mine who is a provider. Does anybody know what an undercover can and cannot do while visiting a provider? She seems to believe an undercover will not go to the extend of actually taking off their clothes or receiving any sexual services, however I think she may be misinformed. She IS aware though that any potential clients that call or text her regarding a massage who include any talk regarding sexual services is a red flag. Any comments are greatly appreciated!

Which state? Which municipality?

Which state? Which municipality? Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

Kansas, in the metro area

In JoCo (nickname for Kc metro on KS side for other readers), if someone goes to the UC's sting location, as soon as in the room, the silver bracelets will be awarded with at least a misdemeanor charge. If someone falls into a discussion trap, additional charges. Yes they will, and they let the local prosecutor deal with it, even if the bracelets should not have been awarded.

If a UC goes to a massage place that might have extras, I would hope the gal realizes that yes UC has heard rumors. Thus, if from an ad from a certain section of a certain publisher, there's a strong risk of instant bracelets if the least little bit of conversation gets interesting. And that's before any clothes come off.
The best idea for specific detailed response, to vaguely similar situations, is to post a query in KC's In search of thread, and I'm sure one of our local KC attys can advise offline, as its not a good idea to help teach the doughnut squad their job by posting that in the open. And yes KC folks believe that this board is entertaining for the pastry boys.

Wait for one of the experienced attorney's on this one. There is a lot of misinformation on this issue, such that even as an attorney with 10 years experience I'm uncomfortable answering this because its outside of my practice area.

its outside of my practice area. Originally Posted by sketchball82

Exactly, and there are a couple on the board in the KC area.

Assume they can do anything they want up to and including having sex. Better to assume the worse than not. And no matter where you are, you may beat the charge, but you cannot avoid the ride.

Hello! I am posting this question for a dear friend of mine who is a provider. Does anybody know what an undercover can and cannot do while visiting a provider? She seems to believe an undercover will not go to the extend of actually taking off their clothes or receiving any sexual services, however I think she may be misinformed. She IS aware though that any potential clients that call or text her regarding a massage who include any talk regarding sexual services is a red flag. Any comments are greatly appreciated! Originally Posted by bonita88

Why do we have all these hobbyists posting for providers? We seem to have more hobbyists posting for providers than hobbyists posting themselves. Do you guys do PR for providers? I don't think it's a good idea for a hobbyist to get involved in a provider's shit. I think a hobbyist should limit his involvement with providers to giving them money and having sex with them.

Now to the question: Does anybody know what an undercover can and cannot do while visiting a provider? Of course, the answer to this question is, Whatever the UC wants to do.

The real question is: If an UC has sexual contact with a provider, does that preclude a conviction for the offense of prostitution? My answer to that question is, No.

As I've written many times before, cops can lie. The very nature of being an UC involves lying.

Moreover, UCs can commit crimes to obtain convictions. For example, an UC working narcotics can buy drugs (or even use them). Buying drugs is a crime. But an UC who buys drugs in pursuit of arresting the drug dealer won't be prosecuted. If an UC working a prostitution sting has sexual contact with the provider or hobbyist, it's a crime, but the UC won't be prosecuted because the UC committed the crime to obtain evidence to use in a prosecution of the provider or hobbyist.

Would it be 'entrapment' if an UC had sexual contact with a provider or hobbyist? No. Here's a legal definition of 'entrapment':

"In criminal law, the act of law enforcement officers or government agents inducing or encouraging a person to commit a crime when the potential criminal expresses a desire not to go ahead. The key to entrapment is whether the idea for the commission or encouragement of the criminal act originated with the police or government agents instead of with the 'criminal.' Entrapment, if proved, is a defense to a criminal prosecution. The accused often claims entrapment in so-called 'stings' in which undercover agents buy or sell narcotics, prostitutes' services or arrange to purchase goods believed to be stolen. The factual question is: Would Johnny Begood have purchased the drugs if not pressed by the narc?"

See http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=637.

In a typical UC bust, a cop contacts a provider through an ad. Obviously, if a provider posts an ad that she'll do this or that for a fee, the provider is not being induced or encouraged to do something she doesn't want to do.

Why do some UCs engage in sexual contact? Under Texas law, for example, sexual contact isn't a required element of the offense of prostitution, so why do it? I think a reasonable answer is a jury may see sexual contact as "sealing the deal" as proof of the offense. Discussion of offer and acceptance can be a bit esoteric. Receiving or paying money, then having sex -- that would clearly be prostitution to Jack or Jan Juror. (btw, one of the four ways to prove the crime of prostitution under Texas law is to prove that money was paid and sex occurred, even if the parties never discussed money or sex. A contract was formed based on performance.)

I don't often talk about my cases here, but I will mention that I just took on a prostitution case in which the provider collected $100 from a heavily-tattooed Dallas cop, gave him a handjob to completion and, remarkably, the UC wanted a second round but couldn't get it up. Only at that point did he alert his compadres to enter the room. I believe the provider's account. For one thing, she had no reason to lie to me. For another thing, I've known her for 5 years. It will be interesting to see whether the UC admits getting a handjob in the offense report. Of course, it's possible Mr. Yankme wasn't an UC at all, but a civilian operative. This isn't common, but it happens. (If you're interested, apply to your local police department. Haha.)

If what I've written has raised questions, or even if it hasn't, I suggest that all members read this thread:

'How to not get arrested if happened to meet undercover'

Regarding Kansas state law, or local ordinances in Kansas City, Kansas, I have no knowledge of same or interest in learning.

Last year I saw a girl who said she got busted in joco where the cop got fully nude. Her screening process was terrible on top of that though.

I have represented providers as well as clients that have been caught up in sting operations. The thing is, if a provider or client find themselves face-to-face with LE, they are already busted. There are no "magic words" or acts that will avoid arrest at that point. They have aleady documented what brought you to where you were busted and that is usually sufficient to affect an arrest. After that, you do not want to find yourself arguing the technicalities of evidence in Court for obvious reasons. Don't try to talk your way out of it. Shut up. Take the bust. Go home and lick your wonds, call your lawyer and learn from your experience.

I have represented providers as well as clients that have been caught up in sting operations. The thing is, if a provider or client find themselves face-to-face with LE, they are already busted. There are no "magic words" or acts that will avoid arrest at that point. They have aleady documented what brought you to where you were busted and that is usually sufficient to affect an arrest. After that, you do not want to find yourself arguing the technicalities of evidence in Court for obvious reasons. Don't try to talk your way out of it. Shut up. Take the bust. Go home and lick your wonds, call your lawyer and learn from your experience. Originally Posted by lawyerinjeans

I don't know what the law is where you practice, but in Texas, merely responding to an ad, making an appointment, and showing up doesn't prove up any of the elements of the offense of prostitution.

I don't know what the law is where you practice, but in Texas, merely responding to an ad, making an appointment, and showing up doesn't prove up any of the elements of the offense of prostitution. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Jon,
You are 100% correct.
But here in the KC metro area (lij's practice area) the traveling doughnut squads commonly operate an assembly line operation. And once in the door, regardless of conversation, it's book, release, and let the prosecutor deal with it.

Jon,
You are 100% correct.
But here in the KC metro area (lij's practice area) the traveling doughnut squads commonly operate an assembly line operation. And once in the door, regardless of conversation, it's book, release, and let the prosecutor deal with it. Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

That sounds like a 'You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride' type situation. We had that in Texas years ago, when cops would make mass arrests in parks where some people were smoking a certain herb. When a case emerged where the defendant actually possessed something, the defendant would get a stiff prison sentence. The defense bar's response was to set every case for trial, and the courts basically stopped processing cases. Eventually, police practices were reformed and the U.S. Supreme Court declared Texas herb laws unconstitutional. Maybe the defense bar in Kansas City can protest police practices by setting all the crappy prostitution cases for trial.

Jon,
Your analysis is correct.
Ignoring that the setting a case for trial thing is somewhat scary for clients:
That topic has come up. But one of the logistics things my drinking friends have with that is we have literally dozens of small munis on both sides of the state line. Although KCMO muni did get buried, as you suggested, when they tried to limit traffic pleadowns to defective equip.

Jon,
Your analysis is correct.
Ignoring that the setting a case for trial thing is somewhat scary for clients:
That topic has come up. But one of the issues my drinking friends have with that we have literally dozens of small munis on both sides of the state line. Although KCMO muni did get buried, as you suggested, when they tried to limit traffic pleadowns to defective equip.