Can a cop legally pay to masturbate on camera?

I am always discouraged by how many potential clients I have to turn away due to lack of references. I was wondering if I were to charge a small "screening fee", then ask the client to video chat and masturbate for me, would that be enough to prove a client is not le? Of course, there would be other screening as well, but from a legal standpoint would this be sufficient? Also, does the fact that I live and work mostly in Texas have an effect?

I'll be absolutely fascinated to hear a legal opinion on this question.

Well, here you go: that little scheme will not do you one bit of good.

Several points:

First, under Texas law, commission by a law enforcement officer of an act that would otherwise constitute an offense is not an offense if committed solely for the purpose of detecting commission of an offense by another. (I didn't look it up, but that a pretty close paraphrase.) For example, a narc can buy drugs from a dealer - and even USE drugs with the dealer - if his intention is to catch and bust the dealer. Undercovers do this type of thing all the time.

For some reason, there is this pervasive fallacy in the hobby world that a cop cannot break the law. That is simply not true. Technically, a cop could fuck you and then bust you. And, believe me, that happens more than you would imagine. One of my very good friends was busted by a vice cop on her FOURTH session with him. No bullshit. Now, that can make it hard on the DA's case, but the cops are more focused on arrests that they are on convictions.

Second, what you propose could be construed as a crime BY YOU in and of itself. It sounds like (or could be presented as) you're asking him to pay a fee to engage in a sex act, albeit one with himself (but some folks are into that sort of thing).

Having said all that, you're probably not going to get many cops to go along with jacking-off on camera. Of course, you're not going to get too many prospective customers to go along with it, either. As an example, I'd be much more inclined to tell you my real name and where I work* than I would be to jack off on camera, which will be preserved for posterity. Lots of people know my name and work info. Surprisingly few have video of me masturbating.

Screen. Get P411. Don't ever mention an act and a price. And keep your fingers crossed.

*I've never understood the great reluctance to give this publicly-available and easily-obtainable information for screening. It is available to literally anyone at any time, and it's not relevant or material to any issue in a prostitution case.. Unfortunately, I have not fucked every woman that knows my name and place of employment. I cannot see how having that information even suggests anything, much less constitutes evidence of anything.

During the video chat screening, what would prevent the cop from directing his camera to a screen showing another man jacking off?

But to answer your question, if a man jacks off on camera, that doesn't prove he's not a cop. Cops have penises, even the ones with tits. They're usually tiny, but they can jack off with an electron microscope, a pair of surgical tweezers, and a photo of Barbara Bush.

A police department might have a policy prohibiting such conduct, but then again it might not. There can be proof problems when an undercover cop engages in sexual conduct to make a prostitution case. But the more important concern for the police is political. The citizenry by and large doesn't want its police jacking off on camera. They'd prefer that cops jack around at the local Dunkin Donuts.

The real question is: If a cop masturbated on camera as part of a provider's screening process, then later the cop busted the provider for prostitution when they met (and assuming the provider's conduct proved up the offense of prostitution), could the provider successfully use an entrapment defense?

I'd say no. The entrapment defense is set forth in section 8.06 of the Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 8.06. ENTRAPMENT.
(a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor engaged in the conduct charged because he was induced to do so by a law enforcement agent using persuasion or other means likely to cause persons to commit the offense. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.
(b) In this section "law enforcement agent" includes personnel of the state and local law enforcement agencies as well as of the United States and any person acting in accordance with instructions from such agents.

See Texas Penal Code § 8.06.

In my opinion, a provider could not use an entrapment defense against a charge of prostitution under these circumstances because the cop masturbating didn't induce the provider to commit prostitution -- the expectation of receiving a consideration, probably greenbacks, induced the provider to commit prostitution. The DA would probably argue masturbating during the screening process merely "afford[ed the provider] an opportunity to commit an offense."

I guess a provider could argue the image of a wang being stroked made her batshit horny and that's why she met with the UC. But in my view it would be unlikely Judge Justice, or Mary Missionary or Peter Popsquick on the jury, would buy that. That sticky thing called common sense would probably get in the way.

Thank you both those were both informative

Don't know if this will help but I can share with you what a friend of mine told me who's a attorney.

He said that if you meet with someone that your not 100% sure of do this. When they get there dick out and you either have it in your hand or mouth, say something to the effect of; oh your dick feels so good in my hand/mouth or ect... He told me that if it is being recorded, a judge wont touch it.

Don't know if this will help but I can share with you what a friend of mine told me who's a attorney.

He said that if you meet with someone that your not 100% sure of do this. When they get there dick out and you either have it in your hand or mouth, say something to the effect of; oh your dick feels so good in my hand/mouth or ect... He told me that if it is being recorded, a judge wont touch it. Originally Posted by KimHoney

Well, MOST judges probably wouldn't touch the UC's dick. Some judges I know probably would, though.

My experience regarding sting cases in North Texas is that the police rarely audio- and/or video-record the bust. Why? So the UC can make up a conversation that's more damaging to the suspect than the actual conversation.

Yes they can do just about anything they want to. In some states cops can have sex with the escort and then arrest her.

You should screen enough that you don't get to that point. I have some unconventional methods if you want my opinion but nothing is fool proof. Cops used to be lazy and go for the "easy targets" that don't screen at all.

Don't know if this will help but I can share with you what a friend of mine told me who's a attorney.

He said that if you meet with someone that your not 100% sure of do this. When they get there dick out and you either have it in your hand or mouth, say something to the effect of; oh your dick feels so good in my hand/mouth or ect... He told me that if it is being recorded, a judge wont touch it. Originally Posted by KimHoney